|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 19, 2024 10:04:42 GMT
Firstly, trespass is a civil offence, and you can't retroactively use it for a group who have booked and paid to be in a room, thus they are not trespassing. If the group were not causing trouble, and in a private room, they were entitled to the Landlord ensuring their privacy. To take action to have them removed, merely someone didn't like what they were saying is a breach of contract and they should have informed the security and landlord that they have no legal grounds to remove them, merely because someone not in the room complained about their discussion..........Also, by following them to another pub, and taking action to remove them from that one, the security team are using illegal tactics to harrass this group.......The gradual erosion of free speech on this country if you express certain views which differ from the prevailing orthodoxy is becoming chilling and don't forget that the current government is scrapping a bill designed to protect freedom of speech. What's coming next? Visits from the secret police in the middle of the night or people being encouraged to inform on friends and family?
Moment free speech group are ordered to leave Brighton pub 'after talk saying children should not be taught trans ideology in schools'
A group of 50 campaigners from Free Speech Brighton claim they were kicked out of a pub after members gave a speech about transgender ideology being taught in school (pictured is the moment a security guard in black tells the group to leave)
|
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 19, 2024 10:09:04 GMT
It becomes dangerous when you try to close people down, it ends up on the dark web, as long as there is no violence and people are just expressing their opinion there is no reason to cancel people, it's in breach of free speech, they should take the matter through the courts, these lefties have had a free hand long enough, time to shut them up.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 19, 2024 10:17:20 GMT
It becomes dangerous when you try to close people down, it ends up on the dark web, as long as there is no violence and people are just expressing their opinion there is no reason to cancel people, it's in breach of free speech, they should take the matter through the courts, these lefties have had a free hand long enough, time to shut them up. So one person complains and 50 people have to leave. Why didn’t the one person leave. Probably because some people feel more entitled than others. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 19, 2024 10:22:02 GMT
It becomes dangerous when you try to close people down, it ends up on the dark web, as long as there is no violence and people are just expressing their opinion there is no reason to cancel people, it's in breach of free speech, they should take the matter through the courts, these lefties have had a free hand long enough, time to shut them up. So one person complains and 50 people have to leave. Why didn’t the one person leave. Probably because some people feel more entitled than others. The lefties always have to have the last word, their's is the only speech that matters, I would have kicked the moaner out and told them to go fuck off somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 19, 2024 14:21:48 GMT
It becomes dangerous when you try to close people down, it ends up on the dark web, as long as there is no violence and people are just expressing their opinion there is no reason to cancel people, it's in breach of free speech, they should take the matter through the courts, these lefties have had a free hand long enough, time to shut them up. So one person complains and 50 people have to leave. Why didn’t the one person leave. it was his pub... |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 19, 2024 14:25:28 GMT
W So one person complains and 50 people have to leave. Why didn’t the one person leave. it was his pub... Well there's always a first ...... LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 19, 2024 14:30:20 GMT
TBH I think the group were a bit dumb in the first place to expect that they could get away with criticising the transgender guff in Brighton of all places .. Worthing or Eastbourne might have been more accommodating
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Sept 19, 2024 14:37:11 GMT
Firstly, trespass is a civil offence, and you can't retroactively use it for a group who have booked and paid to be in a room, thus they are not trespassing. If the group were not causing trouble, and in a private room, they were entitled to the Landlord ensuring their privacy. To take action to have them removed, merely someone didn't like what they were saying is a breach of contract and they should have informed the security and landlord that they have no legal grounds to remove them, merely because someone not in the room complained about their discussion..........Also, by following them to another pub, and taking action to remove them from that one, the security team are using illegal tactics to harrass this group.......The gradual erosion of free speech on this country if you express certain views which differ from the prevailing orthodoxy is becoming chilling and don't forget that the current government is scrapping a bill designed to protect freedom of speech. What's coming next? Visits from the secret police in the middle of the night or people being encouraged to inform on friends and family?
Moment free speech group are ordered to leave Brighton pub 'after talk saying children should not be taught trans ideology in schools'
A group of 50 campaigners from Free Speech Brighton claim they were kicked out of a pub after members gave a speech about transgender ideology being taught in school (pictured is the moment a security guard in black tells the group to leave)
When you are in a pub, you are there at the invitation of the landlord. The landlord can withdraw that invitation anytime he wants. You have no "right" to be in the premises. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 19, 2024 14:48:50 GMT
Firstly, trespass is a civil offence, and you can't retroactively use it for a group who have booked and paid to be in a room, thus they are not trespassing. If the group were not causing trouble, and in a private room, they were entitled to the Landlord ensuring their privacy. To take action to have them removed, merely someone didn't like what they were saying is a breach of contract and they should have informed the security and landlord that they have no legal grounds to remove them, merely because someone not in the room complained about their discussion..........Also, by following them to another pub, and taking action to remove them from that one, the security team are using illegal tactics to harrass this group.......The gradual erosion of free speech on this country if you express certain views which differ from the prevailing orthodoxy is becoming chilling and don't forget that the current government is scrapping a bill designed to protect freedom of speech. What's coming next? Visits from the secret police in the middle of the night or people being encouraged to inform on friends and family?
Moment free speech group are ordered to leave Brighton pub 'after talk saying children should not be taught trans ideology in schools'
A group of 50 campaigners from Free Speech Brighton claim they were kicked out of a pub after members gave a speech about transgender ideology being taught in school (pictured is the moment a security guard in black tells the group to leave)
When you are in a pub, you are there at the invitation of the landlord. The landlord can withdraw that invitation anytime he wants. You have no "right" to be in the premises. They had PAID to use the room. Read the article... |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 19, 2024 15:30:45 GMT
So the first pub took a booking from a 'Free speech' group but never bothered to ask what the free speech entailed?
Not happy with kicking them out of their pub they followed them to a second pub and hounded them there.
So what we conclude the first pub knew exactly what the group was there for, and had no intentions of cancelling them before hand, they were lambs to the slaughter, not happy with luring them into a trap, they then followed them to a second pub and security from the first pub hounded them there.
Sorry there's a law such things ..
In all these cases, private citizens have set out to catch offenders in the act without any input or supervision from the police. This sometimes involves inciting someone to commit a crime to gather evidence against them when that person might otherwise not have offended.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 19, 2024 15:34:14 GMT
So the first pub took a booking from a 'Free speech' group but never bothered to ask what the free speech entailed? Not happy with kicking them out of their pub they followed them to a second pub and hounded them there. So what we conclude the first pub knew exactly what the group was there for, and had no intentions of cancelling them before hand, they were lambs to the slaughter, not happy with luring them into a trap, they then followed them to a second pub and security from the first pub hounded them there. Sorry there's a law such things .. In all these cases, private citizens have set out to catch offenders in the act without any input or supervision from the police. This sometimes involves inciting someone to commit a crime to gather evidence against them when that person might otherwise not have offended.Those who were doing the hounding were trespasing and had no right to enter the room unless invited. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 19, 2024 15:44:21 GMT
So the first pub took a booking from a 'Free speech' group but never bothered to ask what the free speech entailed? Not happy with kicking them out of their pub they followed them to a second pub and hounded them there. So what we conclude the first pub knew exactly what the group was there for, and had no intentions of cancelling them before hand, they were lambs to the slaughter, not happy with luring them into a trap, they then followed them to a second pub and security from the first pub hounded them there. Sorry there's a law such things .. In all these cases, private citizens have set out to catch offenders in the act without any input or supervision from the police. This sometimes involves inciting someone to commit a crime to gather evidence against them when that person might otherwise not have offended.Those who were doing the hounding were trespasing and had no right to enter the room unless invited. Exactly, it was a 'private' function. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 19, 2024 16:13:44 GMT
If I ran a boozer that had a private function room the first thing any normal sane landlord would ask it 'what do you want the room for'?
Wedding
Christening
Funeral
business meeting
40th
50th
21st
The logical thing any landlord of a boozer would ask 'what do you require the room for'?
Free speech
The next question
'Do you mind what free speech'?
I wouldn't want to cause any controversy in my pub ... sorry you can't have the room.
What panned out ... fuck you. book the room now I know what you want it for ... and I'll have a posse ready to hound you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Sept 19, 2024 17:03:43 GMT
what makes you think they told the landlord the truth when booking the function room
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 19, 2024 17:09:45 GMT
what makes you think they told the landlord the truth when booking the function room The landlord knew that those who rented the room were advocaters of freespeech....Why did the landlord take money from them if he knew their views could have been controversial. |
|
