• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wow, UK has lost freedom of speech

smartcooky said:
Thanks for posting confirmation that the arrest was because of the photos, and that the charges were dropped.

The process IS the punishment!
Click to expand...
The hommes plans to sue the police, and will probably net a pretty little payday out of it. Can I get in on some of this "punishment"? I could use $20k for a single day of annoyance by a docile police force.
 
Emily's Cat said:
In the US, the right to protest is specifically the right to protest the government.

I don't think it's acceptable to protest an individual - it makes them a target, and is essentially bullying. As far as entities go, it's just shorthand for companies, charities, sports organizations, etc - any group of people who aren't governmental. I'm sure you can find some exceptions that I'd agree with, but in general I don't think non-governments should be the targets of protests. Boycotts sure - everyone is allowed to withhold their support for an organization. Employee strikes, sure - they're withholding their labor from their employer.

Protests, by their nature, are an attempt to force the target of the protest to do what you want them to do. They are ultimately coercive.
Click to expand...
Finally someone who is against the Woolworth sit ins.
 
Andy_Ross said:
He was arrested for an outstanding warrant for stalking and harassment.

It was nothing to do with the photograph
Click to expand...
Ah, facts.
Andy_Ross said:
You have been lied to by right wing grifters.
Click to expand...
I noted even in the link @smartcooky posted that it was "claimed", not forgetting the unreliability and bias of the Sun.
But some people see what they want to see.....
 
smartcooky said:
Thanks for posting confirmation that
the arrest was because of the photos, and that the charges were dropped.

The process IS the punishment!
Click to expand...
That isn't the case, the timeline seems to be - someone thought they were being stalked/harassed by the bloke, the bloke then posted the photos with guns, the person who thought they were being stalked/harassed was worried by this - an assumption I would make is that he felt the pictures of guns were part of the stalking/harassment. The police then investigated this as a complaint of stalking/harassment. So the photos with the guns wouldn't have been any grounds at all for the police to take any action without the complaint of a serious crime taking place. Sounds as if they were then pretty cack-handed (which sadly seem to be the default state of our police) in investigating the complaint of stalking/harassment. So what was investigated was the complaint of stalking/harassment, and I think the police should have a duty to investigate such reports. Stalking/harassment should be treated as serious crimes. Sadly we have seen the effect of such criminal behaviour on people, it's a crime that has gone all the way to murder.
 
Darat said:
That isn't the case, the timeline seems to be - someone thought they were being stalked/harassed by the bloke, the bloke then posted the photos with guns, the person who thought they were being stalked/harassed was worried by this - an assumption I would make is that he felt the pictures of guns were part of the stalking/harassment. The police then investigated this as a complaint of stalking/harassment. So the photos with the guns wouldn't have been any grounds at all for the police to take any action without the complaint of a serious crime taking place. Sounds as if they were then pretty cack-handed (which sadly seem to be the default state of our police) in investigating the complaint of stalking/harassment. So what was investigated was the complaint of stalking/harassment, and I think the police should have a duty to investigate such reports. Stalking/harassment should be treated as serious crimes. Sadly we have seen the effect of such criminal behaviour on people, it's a crime that has gone all the way to murder.
Click to expand...
But it is only when it has gone all the way to murder that a real crime was committed. No one seriously thinks threats and harassment should be illegal, certainly no one in this thread had such an extremist view.
 
catsmate said:
Indeed, a subtle but important difference that seems to have been omitted by the right-wing media.
Click to expand...

Aside from anything else, if being photographed with a shotgun was an arrestable offence half the county's stag dos would result in t least one of the happy couple missing the wedding. (In the UK owning a shotgun requires a, relatively easy to obtain, license but anyone can use one with permission on private property under the supervision of a license holder. So skeet shooting is avaliable to anyone willing to spend a few quid and grouse/pheasant shooting to anyone willing to spend a lot of quid).
 
P.J. Denyer said:
Aside from anything else, if being photographed with a shotgun was an arrestable offence half the county's stag dos would result in t least one of the happy couple missing the wedding. (In the UK owning a shotgun requires a, relatively easy to obtain, license but anyone can use one with permission on private property under the supervision of a license holder. So skeet shooting is avaliable to anyone willing to spend a few quid and grouse/pheasant shooting to anyone willing to spend a lot of quid).
Click to expand...
This.
 
Carrot Flower King said:
www.snopes.com

UK police reportedly arrested man who posted photo holding gun during US visit: What we know

Jon Richelieu-Booth posted three photos holding or standing near guns from a trip to the U.S. and faced consequences when he returned to the U.K.
www.snopes.com www.snopes.com
Click to expand...

According to its statement, West Yorkshire Police did not investigate Richelieu-Booth because the photo showed him holding a gun but rather because a complainant interpreted his online posts as a threat to their safety.
Click to expand...
Further details:
According to Richelieu-Booth's LinkedIn profile, he made three posts on Aug. [71]11, [72]12 and [73]13, 2025, that showed him standing by or posing with guns.

All three posts featured largely unrelated captions about his work but included sentences about a "delinquent client."

That phrase appeared to be a reference to an ongoing [74]dispute between Richelieu-Booth and Hortor Limited, a British company that had reportedly failed to pay Richelieu-Booth and other clients for their services. Hortor [75]reportedly demanded Richelieu-Booth pay the company £2.3 million (around $3 million) in damages in August 2024 after he allegedly made "multiple LinkedIn posts about the firm's problems in providing payment to his company and others for work they had carried out."
Click to expand...
It seems that the original arrest may have been legitimate.
 
Last edited:
P.J. Denyer said:
Aside from anything else, if being photographed with a shotgun was an arrestable offence half the county's stag dos would result in t least one of the happy couple missing the wedding. (In the UK owning a shotgun requires a, relatively easy to obtain, license but anyone can use one with permission on private property under the supervision of a license holder. So skeet shooting is avaliable to anyone willing to spend a few quid and grouse/pheasant shooting to anyone willing to spend a lot of quid).
Click to expand...
OK I'm not a UKian but I possess, quite legally, shotguns, rifles and even handguns and have fired such weapons in UKia.....
 
Can't help.but notice that one of our fellow forumites has gone suddenly silent. I hope the UK Police didn't arrest him for threatening a skeptics forum with condescension and arrogance.
 
Here you go lefties. I hope you enjoy the dystopian censorship society you voted in...
​
‘Think before you post.’ Those were the words screamed out by government social-media accounts, threatening to lock up people for ‘hate speech’, as riots swept the United Kingdom in the summer of 2024. To those who hadn’t been paying attention, it offered a stark insight into a supposedly liberal, democratic nation that had come to police speech as much as, sometimes even more so, than actual violence. Inciting racial hatred, inciting religious hatred, ‘grossly offensive’ online communications – over the past 60 years or so, Britain has written one new speech crime after another into its statute books. And it has led to a situation in which at least 30 people a day are now arrested in England and Wales for social-media posts. This is a documentary about some of those speech criminals. What we found out was even more chilling than the headlines would have you believe. Featuring: Maxie Allen, Rosalind Levine, Toby Young, Allison Pearson, Luke Gittos and Jamie Michael.​

Watch and listen to EVERYTHING these victims have to say about their harrowing experiences at the hands of the British police - the over the top responses, such as six cops in three cars to arrest a mum for making disparaging remarks about a head teacher in a PRIVATE WhatsApp parents' group. Then decide for yourself whether this is the world you want your children and grandchildren to grow up in...

...or don't watch and remain blissfully ignorant. Bury your head in the sand and pretend its all rubbish because the source is something something right wing something something Nazi adjacent something something whatever.

But if any of you lefties do have the necessary intestinal fortitude to take the time out of your day to watch this (and I doubt any here have) and you STILL think any of this is OK, then you have my sympathies. You will have made you bed, and how you'll have to lay in it!


For anyone who does watch this, if you want to discuss the FACTS and DETAILS of what these people went through, I'll be happy to oblige, but if all you're interested in doing is criticising the source, doing at hatchet job on the narrator/host or calling these victims liars, you'll be talking to a brick wall.
 
Well, it's hardly irrelevant to point out that this channel appears to have an anti-trans, anti-immigrant, anti-BBC, anti-trans, anti-Mamdani, anti-Islam, anti-trans agenda.

So no, I for one will not be engaging with your content.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom