Insulate Britain and Extinction Rebellion, domestic terrorists?
- Thread starter Keltyx
- Start date
Who are they justifying it to?
The bbfc, their local mp, editiors and boards of directors of media ompanies?
No, its to you, are you in a position of power and authority to censor the press?
Probably not, so it's cathartic whinging from people with no power to people with no power.
You may have a point if they decide to protest the reporting on IB by blocking the offices and printing facilities of the national papers though.
But would you then support them as just fulfilling thier right to protest?
Seriously? This is a forum for discussion and they voicing their opinions and I called them out on it. If you don't like it then feel free to use the ignore function.
The Supreme Court seem to have made a ruling on this, though there's no definitive line that can be quoted, it's on a case by case basis.
So I guess people can blockade and protest, but whether it's lawful or not can only be decided after the event.
When you start citing more extreme examples of action, then I would say they would likely fall outside of what would be expected of a 'degree of tolerance' and wouldn't be lawful.
It certainly doesn't give people carte blanche to protest wherever and however they like without the possibility of future prosecution.
Because they are calling for censorship and murder. Stop defending them 'they didn't really mean it'.... why even say it?
I remember using superglue as a kid and accidentally sticking fingers together, certainly didn't rip skin clean off... I guess it might well do a bit more damage in places but meh...
That certainly seems like hyperbole, especially on something like tarmac which isn't exactly a flat surface at the best of times.
Flesh is highly compliant and formative! Rough surfaces aren't a problem!
When you were a kid were you actively trying to attach yourself to something in a way you will maximise harm to yourself if forcibly removed? Or acidiental overspill that mostly air dried?
Think of this more like freezing your self to somethig.
I will attempt to Google for images later but this comes from our safety briefings on structural adhesives at work and the pictures were grim not quite the "hydraulic injection injury" hand photo we all know level of grim but still grim
Notice they're not having a vigil with candles and stuff to a murdered woman so they seem to be safe from our police farce.I must admit I kind of want to see a return to 70s style policing where they would just get a beat down, just give me some Chinese style enforcement please. Seriously it's embarrassing to watch the police fumble about whilst the traffic systems get thwarted by a few crusties wearing tea cosies on their heads and going limp. It's time to crack some skulls!
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 6,663
Seeing the latest today, I'm very surprised nobody has absolutely lost their crap and ran over one of them yet, Only a matter of time i think when they push the wrong person.
Thing that concerns me - in some of their actions there is a high chance for miscalculation resulting in a driver taking avoiding action or someone further back not realising what is going on and they you get maybe a family wiped out in a nasty accident.
Is half a dozen people deliberately blocking busy roads day after day disrupting thousands of people in their daily lives not extreme? a degree of tolerance to me would be if you had a large popular protest spilling out onto roads and even then I'm sure they would have the common decency to make way for an ambulance.
This lot could just as easily stand on the pavement holding signs if their primary goal was to protest, they might even rally more people to their cause that way. Their primary goal is very clearly to be a massive nuisance.
That's why it's a judgement call and tbh, I've not paid that much attention to this story to have an opinion. I'm generally of the attitude that a protest should be able to cause disruption, else no-one pays attention, so I'm happy with the Supreme Courts ruling. But I agree with you, if you're intentionally blocking emergency workers in a critical situation then that would go beyond what I would call reasonable.
That's why the SC said it would be assessed on a case by case basis.
Yes, making life worse for as many people as possible is its aim. More accurately, it's the method they are using to try to reach their goal - power, money and a sense of importance.
Which is not peaceful.
A peaceful protest is a protest that doesnt use violence.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,768
- Location
- Location, Location!
peaceful
/ˈpiːsfʊl,ˈpiːsf(ə)l/
adjective
- 1.
free from disturbance; tranquil.
"his peaceful mood vanished"
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,740
- Location
- Welling, London
And when exactly are these cases assessed?
Would you prefer the term 'nonviolent' protest then?
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,768
- Location
- Location, Location!
Godwin, I'd like people to understand basic words. Anyone who claims these protests are peaceful are fruit loops.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,740
- Location
- Welling, London
No, because a nonviolent protest can still be unpeaceful.
And I’ll tell you something, blocking roads and preventing emergency service vehicles, which could lead to death and injury most definitely falls under the banner of violence to me.