Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

[plague311]

The fact is the people that want to be able to protest there are specifically doing it to harass women. They are free to stand out there shouting whatever they want at whoever they want, starting at 7 p.m. or before 7 a.m., barring any other laws. The abortion clinics CAN BE protested at, just not during a specific time. If this is a suppression of free speech it is easily the loosest method of doing it.

Even if the aforementioned silent prayer walked through the area, stopped for *shrug* a minute, did his praying and then went on his way then no one would be the wiser. He made people aware he was going to do it, he made a big scene out of doing it, and he got fined for it. Nothing egregious happened here. Hell, I bet ton of people walk through that zone having conversation. It's not a "no speech" zone.

 

[Hercules56]

The fact is the people that want to be able to protest there are specifically doing it to harass women. They are free to stand out there shouting whatever they want at whoever they want, starting at 7 p.m. or before 7 a.m., barring any other laws. The abortion clinics CAN BE protested at, just not during a specific time. If this is a suppression of free speech it is easily the loosest method of doing it.

Even if the aforementioned silent prayer walked through the area, stopped for *shrug* a minute, did his praying and then went on his way then no one would be the wiser. He made people aware he was going to do it, he made a big scene out of doing it, and he got fined for it. Nothing egregious happened here. Hell, I bet ton of people walk through that zone having conversation. It's not a "no speech" zone.

A free society does not infract people for silently praying on the sidewalk.

 

[catsmate]

If you truly believe in Freedom of Speech, everyone

You mean your USAian version of "Free Speech". Other countries manage just fine

 

[Thermal]

A free society does not infract people for silently praying on the sidewalk.

Correct, and since that is not remotely the issue, we're done here?

 

[Helen]

Your definition is unreasonable.

Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man. As a wise man once said.

 

[SteveAitch]

Not if you get to define harassment, in your inimitable way, no.

If I define it? Yes, you most definitely do.

Such as, say, a strange man standing silently and watching who goes it or comes out, for an extended period? Strikes me as creepy enough to be called harrassment.

 

[Hercules56]

You mean your USAian version of "Free Speech". Other countries manage just fine

Yes, the AMERICAN version of free speech, which is pretty damn good.

 

[Thermal]

Such as, say, a strange man standing silently and watching who goes it or comes out, for an extended period? Strikes me as creepy enough to be called harrassment.

I was once charged with simple assault in NJ USA, for doing nothing but standing quietly in a place I had permission to be. The judge said the charge was meritorious because the claimants said I 'projected menace', whatever the hell that means (they failed on proofs but the judge did allow the charge).

 

[Hercules56]

Government loses bid to block appeal against Palestine Action ban

Palestine Action's co-founder said the government's attempt to avoid judicial scrutiny had 'backfired spectacularly'.

www.bbc.com

Well this is interesting.

The British government didn't lose an appeal against their proscription of Palestine Action, their attempt to simply prevent an appeal husband ruled against.

What kind of country allows the government to try to prevent a group from simply appeal a criminal conviction or charge??

Seems like a massive violation of free speech.

Anytime the government convicts someone or some group of anything, or declares them a terrorist group or whatever, the person or group should have the automatic right to appeal.

I can't imagine a free society not allowing such a thing. Maybe Great Britain is really not that free. Especially when it comes to freedom of speech, judicial appeal, freedom of the press.

 

[Hercules56]

I was once charged with simple assault in NJ USA, for doing nothing but standing quietly in a place I had permission to be. The judge said the charge was meritorious because the claimants said I 'projected menace', whatever the hell that means (they failed on proofs but the judge did allow the charge).

This thread is about freedom of speech in the United Kingdom not AMERICA.

 

[Steve]

That's not a law.

What were the previous laws before the exclusion zone?

You think it's relevant, do some research.

 

[Steve]

Lies.

I do not support harrassing of women.

You support allowing it to happen before anything happens about it. The difference is marginal.

 

[Helen]

Yes, the AMERICAN version of free speech, which is pretty damn good.

This thread is about freedom of speech in the United Kingdom not AMERICA.

There's something about these two quotes from this thread that strike me as strange. Can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe it's my imagination?

 

[Hercules56]

You think it's relevant, do some research.

Whatever.

 

[Hercules56]

You support allowing it to happen before anything happens about it. The difference is marginal.

Just because I do not support certain laws regarding Prior Restraint, does not mean I support allowing harassment to happen. Your logic is terribly flawed.

Your country has many crimes with no prior restraint laws designed to prevent such crimes, does that mean your country supports robbery, burglary, rape, kidnapping, child abuse, assault???

Your logic is ridiculously flawed. Almost laughable.

 

[jeremyp]

I dont want to hear honking horns, but sometimes I just have to deal with it.

Here in the UK we have an exclusion zone for honking horns. You can't use a horn in a built up area between 11.30pm and 7am.

They are annoying and offensive but sometimes you just put on your big girl pants, your big girl hat, act like a woman and deal.

The kinds of things anti-abortion protestors do go beyond annoying and offensive.

 

[Steve]

A free society does not infract people for silently praying on the sidewalk.

And no society did that. You simply refuse to, or quite possibly can't, understand what was infracted in this case, and substitute your own dubious reality instead.

And you definitely have no concept of a society that attempts to balance the rights of all its members based on present day realities and does not defer to the outdated ideas of a few old men 250 years ago.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

This thread is about freedom of speech in the United Kingdom not AMERICA.

So stop talking about "prior restraint" then, as it isn't a legal concept over here: it's one of yours, with yer First Amendment'n'that.

 

[catsmate]

So arrest the guy tossing his projectile.

Or, and this might be a revolutionary concept for you, prevent they from potentially killing someone in advance.

 

[catsmate]

My point is very ◊◊◊◊ ing valid.

No, it's not.

You guys are demanding 500' of prior restraint so as to avoid needing a truckload of cops to enforce protection for every single abortion clinic in the country, but who will and how will they enforce this 500' prior restraint area?????????

Hmmm????? With drones? Iron Man robots?

No. With police.

Strawmannery.