| Free speech is dead in the UK on 09:44 - Sep 17 with 1071 views | bluelagos |
How about how right to protest?
From the Met police today - "You can protest in a place of our choosing and at a time of our choosing"
|  |
|  |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 09:56 - Sep 17 with 1000 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
On suspicion of "malicious communications". Sounds rather like they struggled to find any charge to arrest them for. How is it malicious communication? |  |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 09:57 - Sep 17 with 993 views | Mullet |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 09:56 - Sep 17 by Nthsuffolkblue |
On suspicion of "malicious communications". Sounds rather like they struggled to find any charge to arrest them for. How is it malicious communication? |
20ft Paedos? I admit that sounds like a punk band, but all I can think of as far as the charges go.
Also the airspace one ins interesting. Can light be classed as contravening airspace? |  |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:00 - Sep 17 with 969 views | Swansea_Blue |
|  |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:00 - Sep 17 with 965 views | bsw72 |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 09:44 - Sep 17 by bluelagos |
How about how right to protest?
From the Met police today - "You can protest in a place of our choosing and at a time of our choosing"
|
Surely the same as has been applied to all recent marches - the police have to apply controls and are simply stuck tryoing to find the balance between supporting the Public Order Act 1986, sections 11-14 and the right of protest support by the ECHR / Human RIghts Act.
On Saturday the Unite the Kingdom march was allowed under the control / guidance of the police and an approved set of routes, today's protest is no different. Two different political viewpoints, both treated in a similar way.
Not sure whwat people expect, there is no absolute right to protest “anywhere”; police can place lawful, proportionate conditions on time, place, route, duration or numbers. Without some sort of controls there would be anarchy. |  | | |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:34 - Sep 17 with 817 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:00 - Sep 17 by bsw72 |
Surely the same as has been applied to all recent marches - the police have to apply controls and are simply stuck tryoing to find the balance between supporting the Public Order Act 1986, sections 11-14 and the right of protest support by the ECHR / Human RIghts Act.
On Saturday the Unite the Kingdom march was allowed under the control / guidance of the police and an approved set of routes, today's protest is no different. Two different political viewpoints, both treated in a similar way.
Not sure whwat people expect, there is no absolute right to protest “anywhere”; police can place lawful, proportionate conditions on time, place, route, duration or numbers. Without some sort of controls there would be anarchy. |
Special restrictions were placed on marches and demos in Westminster by Tony Blair's Government.
Allegedly because he was pssed off with Brian Haw and friends.
However the judiciary ruled that protests which had begun prior to the law being enacted couldn't be retrospectively stopped, and as long as they continued, unbroken, they could remain.
So Brian dedicated his life to protesting the UKs involvement in Iraq.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-64582898
Whether you agree with everything he thought or not, he was also the first to stand up and be counted against the authoritarian restrictions imposed under the pretext of "protecting the public" during the "War on Terror". |  | | |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:53 - Sep 17 with 748 views | wkj |
This is definitely not a great look for freedom of expression. |  |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:57 - Sep 17 with 715 views | BlueBadger |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:34 - Sep 17 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Special restrictions were placed on marches and demos in Westminster by Tony Blair's Government.
Allegedly because he was pssed off with Brian Haw and friends.
However the judiciary ruled that protests which had begun prior to the law being enacted couldn't be retrospectively stopped, and as long as they continued, unbroken, they could remain.
So Brian dedicated his life to protesting the UKs involvement in Iraq.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-64582898
Whether you agree with everything he thought or not, he was also the first to stand up and be counted against the authoritarian restrictions imposed under the pretext of "protecting the public" during the "War on Terror". |
Wasn't this already in place under the Criminal Justice Act of 1994? |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:00 - Sep 17 with 659 views | lowhouseblue |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 09:56 - Sep 17 by Nthsuffolkblue |
On suspicion of "malicious communications". Sounds rather like they struggled to find any charge to arrest them for. How is it malicious communication? |
images are definitely communication - think of films. but the chances of anyone being charged for this or ending up in court (unless there is unreported stuff) are zero. it feels a bit like people claiming that musk's nasty remote drivel was incitement. neither instances get anywhere near being criminal. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:03 - Sep 17 with 637 views | DJR |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:57 - Sep 17 by BlueBadger |
Wasn't this already in place under the Criminal Justice Act of 1994? |
Police consent for marches goes back to the Public Order Act 1936 which was passed in response to the activities of Oswald Mosely. [Post edited 17 Sep 11:04]
|  | | |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:08 - Sep 17 with 583 views | bluelagos |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:00 - Sep 17 by bsw72 |
Surely the same as has been applied to all recent marches - the police have to apply controls and are simply stuck tryoing to find the balance between supporting the Public Order Act 1986, sections 11-14 and the right of protest support by the ECHR / Human RIghts Act.
On Saturday the Unite the Kingdom march was allowed under the control / guidance of the police and an approved set of routes, today's protest is no different. Two different political viewpoints, both treated in a similar way.
Not sure whwat people expect, there is no absolute right to protest “anywhere”; police can place lawful, proportionate conditions on time, place, route, duration or numbers. Without some sort of controls there would be anarchy. |
Not sure we share a mutual understanding of anarchy tbh.
We gripe isn't with the police here - it is with the powers they have been given. For the police to be able to dictate where and when protests take place we have removed our powers to protest peacefully where and when we see fit.
That the police largely police protest fairly doesn't detract from the point. | |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:11 - Sep 17 with 560 views | bluelagos |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 10:34 - Sep 17 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Special restrictions were placed on marches and demos in Westminster by Tony Blair's Government.
Allegedly because he was pssed off with Brian Haw and friends.
However the judiciary ruled that protests which had begun prior to the law being enacted couldn't be retrospectively stopped, and as long as they continued, unbroken, they could remain.
So Brian dedicated his life to protesting the UKs involvement in Iraq.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-64582898
Whether you agree with everything he thought or not, he was also the first to stand up and be counted against the authoritarian restrictions imposed under the pretext of "protecting the public" during the "War on Terror". |
Indeed = those seeking to dictate how and where protest takes place are suppressing our rights to protest.
We no longer have the right to protest where and when we choose, rather we have to seek permission. And has been the case for decades. | |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:16 - Sep 17 with 533 views | bluelagos |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:03 - Sep 17 by DJR |
Police consent for marches goes back to the Public Order Act 1936 which was passed in response to the activities of Oswald Mosely. [Post edited 17 Sep 11:04]
|
And I reckon I'd defend his right to march/protest just as I do those who marched at the weekend.
The politics of a protestor, however objectionable, shouldn't mean we curtail our rights. Where does it end? With the police arresting people for shouting "Not my king" or arresting octogenarians for wearing t-shirts they don't like. Cos that is where we at today.
Bad laws are bad laws and the police have plenty of powers to arrest those who are violent and/or hateful.
(Ducking out as am off - early recce for Blackburn) | |
| |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:27 - Sep 17 with 431 views | DJR |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:16 - Sep 17 by bluelagos |
And I reckon I'd defend his right to march/protest just as I do those who marched at the weekend.
The politics of a protestor, however objectionable, shouldn't mean we curtail our rights. Where does it end? With the police arresting people for shouting "Not my king" or arresting octogenarians for wearing t-shirts they don't like. Cos that is where we at today.
Bad laws are bad laws and the police have plenty of powers to arrest those who are violent and/or hateful.
(Ducking out as am off - early recce for Blackburn) |
I don't think my views are any different to yours but I can see the justification for designated routes for marches.
And if nothing else, there are laws about obstructing the highway which otherwise might come into play, and presumably can be enforced in the case of unorganised protests. [Post edited 17 Sep 11:27]
| | | |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 12:22 - Sep 17 with 232 views | bsw72 |
| Free speech is dead in the UK on 11:08 - Sep 17 by bluelagos |
Not sure we share a mutual understanding of anarchy tbh.
We gripe isn't with the police here - it is with the powers they have been given. For the police to be able to dictate where and when protests take place we have removed our powers to protest peacefully where and when we see fit.
That the police largely police protest fairly doesn't detract from the point. |
Yeah - anarchy is an exaggeration, should not have used that term.
However surely there has to be a balance found between powers to control where and when protests can take place in the interest of the wider public impact and safety concerns.
Your statement that "we have removed our powers to protest peacefully where and when we see fit" is only true if you are comparing now to the late 1600s . . .
There has not been the right to peacefully protest whereever and whenever in the UK for over 300 years . . . the Riot Act (1714) and the crackdown after Peterloo (1819) and the Six Acts applied some really authoritarian controls.
Introduction of the Metropolitan Police (1829) and 19th‑century legal changes gradually made mass politics / protests more acceptable, but wider rules stayed in place on processions, trespass and obstruction.
In the 20th century protest law was more formally documeted (Public Order Acts including 1936 and the major 1986 framework). Human rights law (ECHR/HRA 1998) strengthened judicial checks on police limit while in 2022–23 Parliament broadened police powers and created new offences.
I agree the changes made in 2022/23 are backward steps but are a long way short of where the Six Acts left this country in the early 1800s, that suppressed the press, prevented any large gatherings etc etc | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
