Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:38:45 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 12:38:45 GMT
The protestors had no need to hold up traffic . They could of made their point in another way. The protesters became an anti social rabble at the point where they broke the law and stopped traffic. What other way would you suggest? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:41:10 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 12:41:10 GMT
What am I doing but defending the rights of people to demonstrate peacefully without getting assaulted for their efforts. Were do you think this will end, when protesting is banned, strikes are banned.........? How many times must this be repeated? It is against the law to obstruct free passage along the highway. Section 137 of the Road Traffic Act states: (1) If a person in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or a fine or both. There is no grey area. It is against the law to block free passage along the public highway. The police are incompetent. How many times must this be repeated, if protesters are holding up traffic the police have a case for arresting them and moving them off the road. The public do not have a right to assault them. Blame the police for not using their powers not the protesters who are being assaulted. |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:41:22 GMT
jonksy likes this
Post by Bentley on May 24, 2023 12:41:22 GMT
It was a quite useless example . There was nothing like an orderly queue in the incident . There were people illegally holding up traffic . My example of people blocking the door to the supermarket was far better. Possibly, but that does not excuse violence as you suggest. Sometimes criminals have to be forced to stop their criminal activities . |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:42:04 GMT
Post by Bentley on May 24, 2023 12:42:04 GMT
The protestors had no need to hold up traffic . They could of made their point in another way. The protesters became an anti social rabble at the point where they broke the law and stopped traffic. What other way would you suggest? Protest by the side of the road . |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:44:56 GMT
jonksy likes this
Post by Fairsociety on May 24, 2023 12:44:56 GMT
No one, including myself is denying the right to protest, it's our democratic right to do so, but I strongly object to protesters committing criminal offenses in the process.
They are peacefully committing a crime, they can protest till their hearts content as long as is it classed within the realms of legal.
Protests always cause inconvenience to someone, that is the whole idea to 'get a point noticed', without the inconvenience nobody would listen. But you are advocating assault as a way of dealing with it and that incitement is illegal. It is not illegal to stop criminals in the act, just like if you were outside that supermarket with the old lady at the cash machine who was causing a big queue, and someone robbed her, as a citizen we would be able to use reasonable force to apprehend the culprit in his/her act of crime, and that's what road uses are doing, stopping criminals.
|
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:46:11 GMT
Post by Red Rackham on May 24, 2023 12:46:11 GMT
How many times must this be repeated? It is against the law to obstruct free passage along the highway. Section 137 of the Road Traffic Act states: (1) If a person in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or a fine or both. There is no grey area. It is against the law to block free passage along the public highway. The police are incompetent. How many times must this be repeated, if protesters are holding up traffic the police have a case for arresting them and moving them off the road. The public do not have a right to assault them. Blame the police for not using their powers not the protesters who are being assaulted. |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 12:57:45 GMT
jonksy likes this
Post by Toreador on May 24, 2023 12:57:45 GMT
No one, including myself is denying the right to protest, it's our democratic right to do so, but I strongly object to protesters committing criminal offenses in the process.
They are peacefully committing a crime, they can protest till their hearts content as long as is it classed within the realms of legal.
Protests always cause inconvenience to someone, that is the whole idea to 'get a point noticed', without the inconvenience nobody would listen. But you are advocating assault as a way of dealing with it and that incitement is illegal. What did you want, that the guy who took matters into his own hands should politely ask the accompanying police to disperse them to allow traffic to pass. It's a fucking good job your ilk has little influence of right thinking people. What next, blocking railway lines and airports. |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 13:05:52 GMT
Post by Fairsociety on May 24, 2023 13:05:52 GMT
Protests always cause inconvenience to someone, that is the whole idea to 'get a point noticed', without the inconvenience nobody would listen. But you are advocating assault as a way of dealing with it and that incitement is illegal. What did you want, that the guy who took matters into his own hands should politely ask the accompanying police to disperse them to allow traffic to pass. It's a fucking good job your ilk has little influence of right thinking people. What next, blocking railway lines and airports. He agrees with anything that upsets the running, and makes people unhappy and miserable, the lefty mob hate to see people enjoying themselves, having a good time and going about their daily lives normally, he's not alone, it's a lefty trait. The lefty Unions will be thinking of ways to cause havoc and misery at airports/railways/ferries when it's the kids school holidays, the baggage handlers, passport control will be all out to make people unhappy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 13:16:04 GMT
jonksy likes this
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 13:16:04 GMT
Protests always cause inconvenience to someone, that is the whole idea to 'get a point noticed', without the inconvenience nobody would listen. But you are advocating assault as a way of dealing with it and that incitement is illegal. What did you want, that the guy who took matters into his own hands should politely ask the accompanying police to disperse them to allow traffic to pass. It's a fucking good job your ilk has little influence of right thinking people. What next, blocking railway lines and airports. It's like talking to a defective drone that is incapable of learning anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 13:59:16 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 13:59:16 GMT
What other way would you suggest? Protest by the side of the road . That's been tried and failed. |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 14:00:03 GMT
Post by Bentley on May 24, 2023 14:00:03 GMT
Protest by the side of the road . That's been tried and failed. And blocking the roads are a success ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 14:01:15 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 14:01:15 GMT
Protests always cause inconvenience to someone, that is the whole idea to 'get a point noticed', without the inconvenience nobody would listen. But you are advocating assault as a way of dealing with it and that incitement is illegal. It is not illegal to stop criminals in the act, just like if you were outside that supermarket with the old lady at the cash machine who was causing a big queue, and someone robbed her, as a citizen we would be able to use reasonable force to apprehend the culprit in his/her act of crime, and that's what road uses are doing, stopping criminals.
Self defence I understand but this is not the case these vigilantes are 'targeting' peaceful protesters, who will be next? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 14:02:48 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 14:02:48 GMT
How many times must this be repeated, if protesters are holding up traffic the police have a case for arresting them and moving them off the road. The public do not have a right to assault them. Blame the police for not using their powers not the protesters who are being assaulted. I do agree that the protesters are using the wrong tactics by 'obstructing' the highway but nobody has the right to assault them in their protest. It is the police who are to blame and one has to wonder why they do not use their powers. Could it be because arresting pensioners would not be a good look and would cause uproar in the general population? Which in turn would give the protesters the 'platform' that they want. |
|
|
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 14:03:35 GMT
Post by Fairsociety on May 24, 2023 14:03:35 GMT
That's been tried and failed. And blocking the roads are a success ? What RedRum means, if what he posts draws attention to himself on this forum in the same way, if he agreed with normal people he'd be ignored, so he's nothing short of a attention seeker, he agrees and supports anything that is controversial because it gets him noticed, when in the 'real' world he's ignored for the insignificant person that he is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
FFS
May 24, 2023 14:06:17 GMT
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2023 14:06:17 GMT
What did you want, that the guy who took matters into his own hands should politely ask the accompanying police to disperse them to allow traffic to pass. It's a fucking good job your ilk has little influence of right thinking people. What next, blocking railway lines and airports. He agrees with anything that upsets the running, and makes people unhappy and miserable, the lefty mob hate to see people enjoying themselves, having a good time and going about their daily lives normally, he's not alone, it's a lefty trait. The lefty Unions will be thinking of ways to cause havoc and misery at airports/railways/ferries when it's the kids school holidays, the baggage handlers, passport control will be all out to make people unhappy. What have protests got to do with the unions? |
|
