Pro Democracy Riot Bristol

[Anna B 1,409]

5 minutes ago, 1980girl said:

apelike, the bill, in its current form, will also make peaceful protest demonstrations unlawful. 

Exactly.

[apelike 10]

6 minutes ago, 1980girl said:

apelike, the bill, in its current form, will also make peaceful protest demonstrations unlawful. 

No, it does not. It just introduces more control on them and also where they can be held. It does not outlaw peaceful protests at all. Maybe read what the bill says instead of what the media or the paranoid say.

Edited March 22, 2021 by apelike

[RollingJ 2,017]

26 minutes ago, apelike said:

No, it does not. It just introduces more control on them and also where they can be held. It does not outlaw peaceful protests at all. Maybe read what the bill says instead of what the media or the paranoid say.

Exactly @apelike- but you are asking the impossible, because such as some contributors on here, the unlawful individuals who caused the trouble are working to a totally different agenda.

[The Joker 10]

6 hours ago, West 77 said:

The Army should also be brought in to remove the streets of mass gatherings. The media and certain politicians including Tory MPs are not helping matters. Zero tolerance and tough punishments is the only way to restore law and order.

That's what this country needs; our army attacking its own people on the streets.

 

That should solve society's problems overnight.

 

In fact, I can't remember a single instance in history that armies attacking their own people in the street has ever led to an escalation in violence on both sides.

 

Nope, quite the opposite.

 

Armies attacking their own people is the only way to restore peace and deomcracy to society.

 

I mean, you only have look at those nations that are practicing such actions today.

 

China, Syria, Russia, and Myanmar.

 

All of them are nice, civilised democracies that people are just queueing up to visit, aren't they?

 

 

 

 

[1980girl 10]

I have read parts of the bill. It's not easy reading and it's made no easier by having to flick between the bill and the existing law. Then there is the need to criticaly consider how the proposed laws will be given effect in practice if passed. Peaceful (by which I mean non violent) protest will in some forms certainly be unlawful. I think that the majority of people, including those who are well educated, would find it difficult to fully understand the bill and it's potential impact by reading it alone. I think that most people will rely on reports from the mainstream media, who will have run those reports by their lawyers. Some people will have also read the government fact sheet- which seeks to create a different impression.

[apelike 10]

1 hour ago, 1980girl said:

I have read parts of the bill. It's not easy reading and it's made no easier by having to flick between the bill and the existing law. Then there is the need to criticaly consider how the proposed laws will be given effect in practice if passed. Peaceful (by which I mean non violent) protest will in some forms certainly be unlawful.

No they won't as explained as the police already have most of those powers anyway and this just changes and updates some aspect of them in law. The actual right to peacefully protest is still guaranteed to some extent under the ECHR and can only be changed temporarily. That can only be done under the rule of Derogation which means the UK would specifically have to notify the Convention in advance and then can only be used for bypassing certain obligations. The UK have used that Derogation power twice and that was to do with Northern Ireland.

 

Quote

I think that the majority of people, including those who are well educated, would find it difficult to fully understand the bill and it's potential impact by reading it alone. I think that most people will rely on reports from the mainstream media, who will have run those reports by their lawyers. Some people will have also read the government fact sheet- which seeks to create a different impression.

This is that simple factsheet:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-crime-sentencing-and-courts-bill-2021-factsheets/police-crime-sentencing-and-courts-bill-2021-protest-powers-factsheet

 

BTW The media are not known for running their reports by lawyers first, maybe if they did we would have some better quality and more accurate media reporting.

Edited March 22, 2021 by apelike

[AKAMD 0]

Memories of the troubles in Northern Island remind us that the State cannot resolve disputes by physical force, it only escalates the problem.  Such a move now would have the same effect.  We repealed the Riot Act in 1967, something of the same ilk, although in different times.  A number of Sheffielders lost their lives following its numerous readings during its time on the statute book; something else worth remembering.

[Delbow 698]

4 hours ago, apelike said:

The rioting in Bristol is the very reason the government are wanting to curb demo's to peaceful protests only and those rioting have not got the intelligence to understand that. Doing what they have done just makes more people support those measures and does not help their cause.

To state once that the proposed bill only targets non-peaceful protests is excusable, if you genuinely don't know. To repeat it after it's been pointed out to you already that it's not true is incredibly dishonest. 

[apelike 10]

1 hour ago, Delbow said:

To state once that the proposed bill only targets non-peaceful protests is excusable, if you genuinely don't know. To repeat it after it's been pointed out to you already that it's not true is incredibly dishonest. 

So far no one has proved that what I have linked to or stated is not true though so it's basically just hearsay. I also didn't state the bill only targets non peaceful protests.

 

1980girl stated; "Peaceful (by which I mean non violent) protest will in some forms certainly be unlawful" and I am challenging that.

 

As seen in Bristol recently and in the past elsewhere some seem to go out of their way to cause problems so we are left with having laws to try and stop that sort of behaviour. The right of peaceful protests is fine but just like any right, acting responsibility is also part of it. Maybe someone can show details of just how how the right to peaceful protests has suddenly been stopped and which ones will be unlawful as repeating it doesn't make it true either. So far no one has done that and not doing so is even more dishonest as it should easily be proven.

 

Maybe you could have a go.

Edited March 22, 2021 by apelike

[Anna B 1,409]

10 hours ago, AKAMD said:

Be careful what you wish for!  No right-minded person would support the rioting seen at Bristol but neither would they want an authoritarian regime like China, Russia, etc.  The bill that the protest was about is exactly about that issue.  The government are introducing Draconian policies on the back of other issues that we all support.  Need to look at the small print before signing up for it.  Do you really want water cannons on the streets?  Armed police or soldiers on every street corner?  Ten years for being involved in a legitimate protest?  Not I!

I agree.

[banjodeano 31]

correct me if i am wrong, and i may well be, but didnt i read a snippet somewhere that if any protest adversely effects the wealth of our country then it can be deemed illegal? so i assume that if there are peaceful demonstrations' week in week out, the government can declare it illegal because of the cost of policing

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by banjodeano

[L00b 441]

2 hours ago, banjodeano said:

correct me if i am wrong, and i may well be, but didnt i read a snippet somewhere that if any protest adversely effects the wealth of our country then it can be deemed illegal? so i assume that if there are peaceful demonstrations' week in week out, the government can declare it illegal because of the cost of policing

 

You will eventually find out, rest assured.
 

Johnson’s government of authoritarian kleptocrats is clearly emulating a working and proven precedent and you have 4 more years of it coming.
 

(the averred ties between both regimes must be purely coincidental, of course)