Nice one Kat.

I had a feeling you were lining up for that.

This entire thread has centred around a discussion on the relative freedoms in England.

Your #38 makes no sense in this context.

I realise you are feeling a bit agressive today kat. I do understand and would give you a big hug if I could.

Stop presuming to know what I feel. Aggressive is definitely not it. You aren't understanding much in that sense.

I did forget about it being a basically UK thread.

I will try to avoid all threads that mention UK from now on.

Thank you Kat.

I will withdraw my sympathy until you feel a bit better.

Though I'm sure your input into any thread is equally welcome.

After reading the story and viewing the video footage it would seem that the PSCO had an agenda of which to humiliate the street preacher.

Just my thought.

Stardust

Quote from: spacial on May 05, 2010, 03:06:21 AM
Americans toss words like freedom, democracy and liberty around like salt. But I have yet to meet an American who know what any of these means.

One can only conclude the number of Americans you have met is quite small

For balance, in case anyone thinks that this is either some leftist conspiracy to silence the right, or some right-wing conspiracy to smear the left:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/11/david-cameron-poster-police

Of course, we've had this kind of stuff happen in the U.S. notably, during the 2004 election, mostly to anti-Bush protesters at public events where Bush appeared, also to protesters at the Democratic convention both then and in 2008. The difference is that there's no Public Order Act to hide behind. If there were such a law, courts would almost certainly strike it down as being in violation of the First Amendment.

Quote from: Laura Hope on May 17, 2010, 07:48:13 PM
One can only conclude the number of Americans you have met is quite small

I apologise if you took that comment personally. It was made within a context of national generalisations and was meant to be no more than that. Actually, I was trying to be slightly tongue in cheek, as I was when quoting the statement, Liberating the Freedom Loving people of Kuwait.

But here in the UK, we have a lot of newspapers and press outlets. Each tries to grab attention, generally by distorting information.

The facts remain. A PSCO does't have the authority to arrest in these circumstances. No member of the police will ever identify themselves to the point of saying they are gay or otherwise. Action will always be taken on the basis of public order, never personal feelings.

If this PSCO acted in the way that has been reported, then he was behaving entirely unprofessionally. That, sadly happens in any organisation anywhere in the world. It is certainly not representive of the police in general, here or anywhere else.

But public order in this country has always been maintained on the basis of local needs rather than the letter of the law.

What this story boils down to is some guy who's behaviour has landed him is some bother with the police, claiming it was all a fit up. Oi did't do nuffin. Wroight!

The really sad aspect of this is that 99% of people in prison did't do nuffin. They are misunderstood, had a bad childhood, didn't know it wasn't right, thought no-one wanted it, needed it more than they did, she asked for it, she looked 16, honest, .........

---

Post Merge: May 18, 2010, 05:39:20 AM

---

Quote from: Alyssa M. on May 17, 2010, 08:52:29 PM
The difference is that there's no Public Order Act to hide behind. If there were such a law, courts would almost certainly strike it down as being in violation of the First Amendment.

As I've attempted to demonstrate already, our legal system isn't the same as yours.

In America, it seems, the letter of the law is paramount. I read the second Ammendment for example and it doesn't say to me that anyone can wander around with a gun. But for you, or some of you at least, it does. That's your way.

Here, it is the spirit of the law. The principal that is more important. Drugs, for example, are universally banned and illegal. Yet in many areas and instances, the police will ignore clear examples. I recall, when I lived in Edinburgh in the 70s, people smoked canabis quite openly, in adult cafes and such. Yet in other circumstances, possession will lead to a long period of impirsonment.

The job of the police here is to maintain public order. They do it very well.

There were numerous scullerous posters of Cameron circulating before the election. Accusing him of wanting to kill kittens to racism, class hatred and lining the pockets of his friends. None resulted in any action.

I can't comment on this example except to say that the context is everything.

And I appreciate you prefer to live in your country than ours. Please believe me when I say, I do too. 

Getting back to the original topic, has there been a court appearance after all this?

Quote from: justmeinoz on May 18, 2010, 06:53:47 AM
Getting back to the original topic, has there been a court appearance after all this?

No, the charges have been dropped.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/8687395.stm

Originally I thought it must have been a case of obstruction etc, but now it sounds like someone who just can't help themselves when they put on their uniform.

I would think that all those reading this thread, who have been in the Police, would remember working with members who couldn't avoid doing things like this.  The usually end up with nicknames like "Combat Wombat", or "FIGJAM".

From the BBC article:

QuoteVeteran gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell condemned the arrest and urged the home secretary to issue new guidelines to the police.

He said: "Although I disagree with Dale Mcalpine and support protests against his homophobic views, he should not have been arrested and charged. Criminalisation is a step too far."

That's all I'm saying. I don't see why this is so hard. As I said, this kind of BS happens over here too, and we try to deal with it.

As to this:

Quote from: spacial on May 18, 2010, 05:28:35 AMAnd I appreciate you prefer to live in your country than ours. Please believe me when I say, I do too. 

Well, that's neither here nor there. If you believe that freedom of expression is a fundamental human right, then it's an outrage wherever and whenever it's suppressed, whether in some miniscule way as with Mr. McAlpine, or in much more serious ways, as in countless places around the world.

Alyssa.

I'm sure everyone supports free speech. But the point I was making and continue to make is that the only version we have of the events are from the accused man, repeated by sections of the press.

Four police officers saw fit to arrest this man. That the charges have been dropped is nothing significant, certainly in the context of this country. If the man, after his arrest, gave an undertaking not to repeat his offense, then the charges would normally be dropped.

Peter Tatchell is one of our more persistant agitators. In the 70s he was being attacked by the press as part of some conspiracy to hand the country over to Russia. In the 80s he was called the Thinking Man's Fool.

He joined the Green Party and I recently read a piece in some Tory journal claiming he is the finest thing to happen to Britian since the arrival of St George.

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2010/04/in-praise-of-peter-tatchell.html

Yet his information, on this matter, is no more than anyone elses.

We either trust the police to do their job, or we don't. If we choose the latter, then we all lose.

No, I don't trust the police to do their job. Nor do I trust the military or corporations or politicians or any other group that holds power. We have various checks -- civilian control of military, government oversight, checks and balances within government, elections -- to keep the powerful from misbehaving. The news media serve as an important check on police power, whether through trashy tabloids, local evening news, establishment news papers, independent bloggers, or any other source.

I understand your point perfectly well; the point I was making and continue to make is that a number of people thought he should have been arrested even if his account was perfectly accurate. So the (exceedingly doubtful) reliability of his account is simply not germane. Consider his story as a hypothetical scenario. Tatchell simply echoed my opinion rather succinctly.

You mentioned how the context of your national political scene colors your opinion. Please understand the relevance in the American responses of our own political context: There is a great deal of legislation regarding transgender rights being debated right now in America (notably the Employment Non-Discrimination Act), and the fear of restrictions on speech is one of the main tools our opponents use. That applies to gay rights issues as well. So I feel obliged to make it clear that in no way does my support for gay rights and trans rights diminish my support for freedom of speech.