Man of Honour
Actual Police State
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_11_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights
- the prevention of disorder or crime
- the protection of the rights and freedoms of others
Looks like they apply here all right.
Sticking to a legal peaceful protest is too boring.
And that's great, because so long as they comply with that then the protests can continue. Which is not what the Met have said. They've banned all protests associated with the group.
Man of Honour
How come so many of the arrested/charged are ' address unknown ' or even ' no DOB given - address unknown ' ?
They can't all be homeless surely
They can't all be homeless surely
How do you know they apply? Do you have a crystal ball?
Man of Honour
The point is that there's an argument as to whether the restrictions are proportionate to meet the exemptions of the Act. The freedom to assemble is a qualified right.
In my view, I think the Met's order could be successfully challenged in court. It could very well be deemed too broad, especially as there is no end date and it covers the whole of London which may be judged to be disproportionate. That's for barristers to argue in court though.
Man of Honour
How come so many of the arrested/charged are ' address unknown ' or even ' no DOB given - address unknown ' ?
They can't all be homeless surely
Technically, there is no requirement to disclose name and address through the whole process. They could be convicted without those details, although they'd be remanded before court.
Which is my point. Conditions must be met to enact and maintain a ban - that can't be the case where the Met have just installed a blanket ban. Bad Met. BAD!
Man of Honour
That's still for a court to rule on though. They might deem it lawful, I have no idea how that case might end up.
How come so many of the arrested/charged are ' address unknown ' or even ' no DOB given - address unknown ' ?
They can't all be homeless surely
Prob think they’re a “freeman of the land” or something
Man of Honour
How would you enforce the sentence on someone with no name or address ?
Would they have to pay before they are released ?
Extinction Rebellion set to bring chaos to London Underground as they expand protests to target Tube
I'm debating starting a group/petition to agree to "peacefully remove" the protestors and see how many Londoners agree! I can't fathom why they think this is a good idea. Mass transit is demonstrably the best form of transport for the environment and the Tube is among the best and well known in the world. They should be celebrating it, not disrupting it. I wonder what they'll think of all the extra co2 when everyone tries to get cabs, they're a **** ton more traffic than usual etc. Idiots
I think this is jumping the shark, proof they're more a vocal minority intent on causing disruption rather than getting a point across.
I'm debating starting a group/petition to agree to "peacefully remove" the protestors and see how many Londoners agree! I can't fathom why they think this is a good idea. Mass transit is demonstrably the best form of transport for the environment and the Tube is among the best and well known in the world. They should be celebrating it, not disrupting it. I wonder what they'll think of all the extra co2 when everyone tries to get cabs, they're a **** ton more traffic than usual etc. Idiots
I think this is jumping the shark, proof they're more a vocal minority intent on causing disruption rather than getting a point across.
Caporegime
It's not about the environment, there's ADHD Swedish teenagers for that, it's about causing as much financial damage as possible, holding cities to ransom and being a bloody pita for everyone else.
I've said multiple times an actual police state is what is needed to possibly alter climate change through control of the Plebs.
I've said multiple times an actual police state is what is needed to possibly alter climate change through control of the Plebs.
Man of Honour
The practicalities are always harder than the theory. I have known it to happen, essentially it restricts what sentences can be given, often resulting in a custodial sentence even if it's really short.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2019
- Posts
- 747
Following interview and charge they would be remanded and put in front of the first sitting court. If they still refused to give over details then the courts could either remand them until trial or administer a punishment fitting of the offence (one nights imprisonment already served at a police station)
My conspiracy mind wonders why these rules weren't enforced when they were bringing London to a standstill.
They should have been removed from the start.
We have a strange situation in this country that we have to ask permission before we can protest.
They should have been removed from the start.
We have a strange situation in this country that we have to ask permission before we can protest.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2019
- Posts
- 747
You don't need to ask permission before you protest. Standing in the middle of the town square on a soapbox with a few placards wont attract any negative police attention.
Planning a major march or mass event likely to cause disruption or attract counter protest requires registering with local police to ensure that it can be properly managed to reduce likelihood of disorder or violence.
Holding a protest that results in abuse and threat's screamed at employees of a firm, blocking the public highway, criminal damage or widespread violent disorder will get it banned and shut down.
Article 10 & 11 allows you 'peaceful protest' not protest wherever, however and to whoever you see fit.
Planning a major march or mass event likely to cause disruption or attract counter protest requires registering with local police to ensure that it can be properly managed to reduce likelihood of disorder or violence.
Holding a protest that results in abuse and threat's screamed at employees of a firm, blocking the public highway, criminal damage or widespread violent disorder will get it banned and shut down.
Article 10 & 11 allows you 'peaceful protest' not protest wherever, however and to whoever you see fit.
Is this a rhetorical question?
Or do I really have to point out the disruption and criminal activity being caused by protesters that you've already linked to.
It isn't a peaceful protest and when the organisers themselves are into criminal activity you can't say it's some rogue elements, it's from the top.
Yet you also can't say what would happen in the future. Not all of their protests have broken laws.
But it IS an organised protest so when the organisers are clearly advocating behaviour that is excessively disruptive (debatable) or downright illegal (not debatable) there's a decent case to say the whole lot should be told to push off.
You seem to have a view of the uk legal system that is rather divorced from reality. Both criminal and civil laws are not purely reactive to the committing of an act itself.
You are aware of the concept of conspiracy in English law, for example?
https://www.lawtonslaw.co.uk/resources/conspiracy/
Or the granting of injunctions to prevent things happening?