Arrested for posting pictures

jamief said:
I'm not advocating a totalitarian state - I'm simply saying that the correct action was taken in this case. His behaviour would be morally repugnant to the majority of people in this country, and he is in clear breach of the Communications Act 2003.
Click to expand...

This is known as "tyranny of the majority", haven't we evolved past acting like pack animals and punishing those who want to be individuals?
 
MrMoonX said:
The modern day military is a career choice, I don't see why the public should worship it anymore than any other public service. In fact it's the most expensive under used public service, when was the last time the military directly protected UK civilians against a hostile act. I would argue that in the erosion of the state and globalisation will lead to a Europe single military force in 20 years, as with possible governments.
Click to expand...

While I agree that the military is a career choice and deserves no more recognition than any other public service you are categorically wrong in the way you imply that the military doesn't routinely protect the citizens of the UK, either from direct or indirect attack, just because something is not reported or in the public eye doesn't mean that your safety and freedoms are not being protected. I also think you are living in the clouds if you think that a federal Europe will come about in the next two decades or anything resembling a unified European Armed Forces.

As far as the arrest of the kid goes, I didn't join the forces so that kids like that could be arrested for expressing themselves in such a way. Burning a poppy may be disrespectful in the context of the Armistice, but the whole point of remembrance is that these people died to protect that kids right to express himself, so I don't know which I find more offensive, the poppy burning or the arrest itself.
 
fluffmct said:
Funny, oh... wait...

At least they have somewhere to work from, even if it is disregarded at times
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to be funny, they have a constitution and it doesn't help them on iota. And anyway we've already got the EU human rights carp and that doesn't seem to do anything other than protect the guilty.
 
Castiel said:
While I agree that the military is a career choice and deserves no more recognition than any other public service you are categorically wrong in the way you imply that the military doesn't routinely protect the citizens of the UK, either from direct or indirect attack, just because something is not reported or in the public eye doesn't mean that your safety and freedoms are not being protected. I also think you are living in the clouds if you think that a federal Europe will come about in the next two decades or anything resembling a unified European Armed Forces.

As far as the arrest of the kid goes, I didn't join the forces so that kids like that could be arrested for expressing themselves in such a way. Burning a poppy may be disrespectful in the context of the Armistice, but the whole point of remembrance is that these people died to protect that kids right to express himself, so I don't know which I find more offensive, the poppy burning or the arrest itself.
Click to expand...

it is disrespectful and I agree, but its a dangerous precedence and could send us down a slippery slope of being gagged by the police if this guy is charged.

Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost, all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat. We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.

The main reason I dislike remembrance day is that its no longer about remembrance, its about glorifying warfare and soldier worship, its no longer about the young men who died to protect western europe from fascists, because there was no choice. The more recent conflicts have been political tools of western leaders. Even the falklands was about Thatcher proving she had testicles.
 
Last edited:
MrMoonX said:
Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost, all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat. We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.
Click to expand...
you mean like james bond?
 
MrMoonX said:
it is disrespectful and I agree, but its a dangerous precedence and could send us down a slippery slope of being gagged by the police if this guy is charged.
Click to expand...

I have said that he should be allowed to say what he wants.

MrMoonX said:
Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost,
Click to expand...

At what cost if they didn't is more the point.

MrMoonX said:
all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat.
Click to expand...

No disrespect, but are you at all qualified to judge the level or nature of any current or future threat to the interests of the UK and its public and the type of response we would be required to apply to any such threat should it arise, not to mention the very real advantage of simply having a visible and effective deterrent.

MrMoonX said:
We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.
Click to expand...

Again, you have no idea what a future threat would consist of or the nature of the response to such threats, these small states you speak of, such as shall we say Pakistan, or Iran..are on a par with us or larger in size and one of them had demonstrable Nuclear Capability and another is well on it's way if some people are to be believed...the point being that you can dismiss Nuclear Weapons if you want, but then that would leave us reliant upon the United States for a deterrent to rogue states that acquire a nuclear weapon or to current Nuclear States that are foreseeably unstable.

MrMoonX said:
The main reason I dislike remembrance day is that its no longer about remembrance, its about glorifying warfare and soldier worship, its no longer about the young men who died to protect western europe from fascists, because there was no choice. The more recent conflicts have been political tools of western leaders. Even the falklands was about Thatcher proving she had testicles.
Click to expand...

I don't know what services you are attending, but that is completely the opposite experience than I have.
 
My emotions tell me he is a complete an utter disrespectful douche bag that deserves everything he gets, my logical side says he should have the right to express his opinions in this country without the police getting involved.

MrMoonX said:
Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost, all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat. We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.
Click to expand...

I totally disagree. We have by no means the largest army in the world. Having a nuclear deterrent is even more important for a country this small, and you don't know what tomorrow lies. Of course, in the ideal world, there would be no nuclear weapons, no wars etc but that isn't going to happen any time soon.
 
the way i see it is, we dont like the fact that the guy burned poppies as its massivley disrespectful but we also dont like the fact you can get arrested for it.

so what do we do? we dont want people doing things that offend us but when the police do somthing to stop it happening people jump on their back over being too harsh.
 
Jamsames said:
we dont want people doing things that offend us but when the police do somthing to stop it happening people jump on their back over being too harsh.
Click to expand...

Nope i'm fine with people doing things that offend me. I 100% respect their right to do it, and i'd hope they would respect my right to do something they find offensive in return.
I don't think the police should have been involved in this at all, but admittedly i've only skimmed the headlines :p
 
Not completely related but people have been getting all ****y (Including Clarkson) over the Top Gear twitter team posting a message (Supposedly automated) during the 2 minutes silence. Seriously, is getting offended the Nation's newest pass time? Ill-timed maybe but for Christ's sake get over it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom