Everyone understands.
Is this what you want the Met Police to be doing with their time?
They weren’t caught though so it’s fine, apparently.I mean you are not wrong ultimately, there is a lot of illegal activity in London, I’m guessing they’ve already dealt with all the other stuff.
I think holding up a sign supporting a group on a terror list is the same.
Bet if the shoe was on the other foot...
but do you think supporting the group you brought up (Isis) is comparable to showing support for PA, listed or not?
but do you think supporting the group you brought up (Isis) is comparable to showing support for PA, listed or not?
Yeah but if you don't agree that drink driving is bad, it's okI don’t know what you are struggling to get here - individual views don’t matter
You could be 10 times over the drink drive limit or just over it. You broke the law. Get over it.
It's irrelevant because they are both listed...
individual views don’t matter
Any organisation that’s known as a terrorist group smart arse.what situation you talking about here? a different organisation being listed? which one(s) you got in mind?
so what's the point in this forum FFS!
Its not that simple in reality because there's case law which applies.It's irrelevant because they are both listed terror groups.
It's really simple.
There's plenty of laws that get broken week in week out. We're repeatedly told there aren't the resources to deal with it. Try getting the police to come out if your car is stolen or someone tries to break in to your house. You are likely to be waiting days, if you ever see anyone at all.Yeah but if you don't agree that drink driving is bad, it's ok
smart arse.
What?so what's relevant about anyone sharing an opinion on immigration, or what rights people do or don't have in law when they arrive here etc.?
doesn't this part of the forum exist for people to talk about what they think about stuff, not just post what the law says and leave it at that?
Its not that simple in reality because there's case law which applies.
That shows, as the Met have been repeatedly warned, that there is a near zero chance of successfully prosecuting someone merely for having a sign. You need to be able to demonstrate active support both for the proscribed group and that the offender is either directly taking part in terrorist activity or encouraging others to do so.
There's then the added complexity that yesterday there was an organised protest against the proscription of PA off the back of the government losing in court and PA being allowed to appeal the decision. You can legally protest against the act of proscription itself.
There's plenty of laws that get broken week in week out. We're repeatedly told there aren't the resources to deal with it. Try getting the police to come out if your car is stolen or someone tries to break in to your house. You are likely to be waiting days, if you ever see anyone at all.
So we know that the police have to take a decision over where to target their resources and the argument that some are making is that there is a disproportionate response being seen here and questions over who has instructed this to be the case around the country.
Yesterday the Met brought in officers from other forces and had to create a temporary holding facility as they don't have the facilities to hold the number of people they were hoping to arrest.
I'm not sure anyone can look at the footage of the protesters and think there was a grave threat if they were just allowed to sit there quietly for a few hours.
Well if you can’t work out what I mean then you need to go back to school, embarrassingYou said if the shoe was on the other foot, people on here wouldn't be saying anything. I'm asking what that means.
You can legally protest about being against genocide without putting their name on the signs.Its not that simple in reality because there's case law which applies.
That shows, as the Met have been repeatedly warned, that there is a near zero chance of successfully prosecuting someone merely for having a sign. You need to be able to demonstrate active support both for the proscribed group and that the offender is either directly taking part in terrorist activity or encouraging others to do so.
There's then the added complexity that yesterday there was an organised protest against the proscription of PA off the back of the government losing in court and PA being allowed to appeal the decision. You can legally protest against the act of proscription itself.
There's plenty of laws that get broken week in week out. We're repeatedly told there aren't the resources to deal with it. Try getting the police to come out if your car is stolen or someone tries to break in to your house. You are likely to be waiting days, if you ever see anyone at all.
So we know that the police have to take a decision over where to target their resources and the argument that some are making is that there is a disproportionate response being seen here and questions over who has instructed this to be the case around the country.
Yesterday the Met brought in officers from other forces and had to create a temporary holding facility as they don't have the facilities to hold the number of people they were hoping to arrest.
I'm not sure anyone can look at the footage of the protesters and think there was a grave threat if they were just allowed to sit there quietly for a few hours.
You edited my post
embarrassing
I did. I just find that idea weird, that having views on a subject don't matter. Immigration and processes around it are talked about endlessly on here but that's all stuff which is based on law.
I did. I just find that idea weird, that having views on a subject don't matter. Immigration and processes around it are talked about endlessly on here but that's all stuff which is based on law.
It's really not hard to understand the point.
So you believe in total free speech regardless if it breaks laws? So no censorship at all on this forum?
Because people are acting surprised they get arrested.No, it's not.
I'm trying to understand why with this issue, some people's stance is "it's the law, no point discussing it, suck it up!"
but folks talk about immigration all the time on here, which is an issue where the way things are is based on laws as well.
No. I've said what I think a few times now... I think.
people are acting surprised they get arrested.
I'm not. Most of them expected to or hoped to get arrested to get press etc.
I asked you a question, you answered it. It still doesn't make sense to me, but
Come off the forum for a bit, it’s unhealthyThis is like the covfefe tweet, on-brand at least.
I'm not. Most of them expected to or hoped to get arrested to get press etc.
I asked you a question, you answered it. It still doesn't make sense to me, but
do you agree?
Careful here I think I read that the Met are available to help with something out there.Its not that simple in reality because there's case law which applies.
That shows, as the Met have been repeatedly warned, that there is a near zero chance of successfully prosecuting someone merely for having a sign. You need to be able to demonstrate active support both for the proscribed group and that the offender is either directly taking part in terrorist activity or encouraging others to do so.
There's then the added complexity that yesterday there was an organised protest against the proscription of PA off the back of the government losing in court and PA being allowed to appeal the decision. You can legally protest against the act of proscription itself.
There's plenty of laws that get broken week in week out. We're repeatedly told there aren't the resources to deal with it. Try getting the police to come out if your car is stolen or someone tries to break in to your house. You are likely to be waiting days, if you ever see anyone at all.
So we know that the police have to take a decision over where to target their resources and the argument that some are making is that there is a disproportionate response being seen here and questions over who has instructed this to be the case around the country.
Yesterday the Met brought in officers from other forces and had to create a temporary holding facility as they don't have the facilities to hold the number of people they were hoping to arrest.
I'm not sure anyone can look at the footage of the protesters and think there was a grave threat if they were just allowed to sit there quietly for a few hours.
Probably relevant to point out that the Met previously said that displaying an ISIS flag is not an arrest-able offence despite them being a proscribed organisationDo you think supporting PA and Isis is comparable?
This was done on the basis that wearing, carrying or displaying an emblem or flag of a proscribed organisation isn't, by itself, an offence.The man was spoken to by officers," the Metropolitan Police said in a statement.
"The decision was taken by officers at the time that the man was acting within the law. He was not arrested."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?