You'd expect me - against the broken justice and police systems - to support those jailed for riots but I'm totally in favour of locking them up. These crimes (incitement and violence) have progressed ahead of ways of defeating them. Now start jailing those USING THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW - like false accusers and their enablers. Let's see those inciting crimes like the people making fortunes from fake programmes about dead people, inciting band waggoners to leap aboard the money machine, causing misery to the living.

Totally agree I am also no liberal when it comes to sentencing the rioters (real or online or media encouragers). There is far too much for society to lose otherwise. I think Starmer has used authoritarianism in the right way at the right moment. And it seems to have been very effective.

Wyot wrote:
Totally agree I am also no liberal when it comes to sentencing the rioters (real or online or media encouragers). There is far too much for society to lose otherwise. I think Starmer has used authoritarianism in the right way at the right moment. And it seems to have been very effective.

I agree Wyot.

The judge was harsh also. The rioters need to do community service or a least pay a fine.

Starmer wants to make an example out of them which is wrong. BLM rioters got a slap on the wrist. Double standards again.

Very smart young lady.

JK2006 wrote:
You'd expect me - against the broken justice and police systems - to support those jailed for riots but I'm totally in favour of locking them up. These crimes (incitement and violence) have progressed ahead of ways of defeating them. Now start jailing those USING THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW - like false accusers and their enablers. Let's see those inciting crimes like the people making fortunes from fake programmes about dead people, inciting band waggoners to leap aboard the money machine, causing misery to the living.


I cant believe how eager people are to have no free speech or movement, and be governed by a madman.

Honey wrote:
[quote]JK2006 wrote:



I cant believe how eager people are to have no free speech or movement, and be governed by a madman.

Freedom of speech is fine, Freedom to incite violence off the back of those beliefs is not if we wish to retain civilisation. Protests are fine, riots are not. It is the ones who belive they can weaponise their opinions - rather than be content expressing them - who in my opinion need to receive the full force of the law. And are the ones who put "free speech" at risk.

Wyot wrote:
[quote]Honey wrote:
JK2006 wrote:



I cant believe how eager people are to have no free speech or movement, and be governed by a madman.

Freedom of speech is fine, Freedom to incite violence off the back of those beliefs is not if we wish to retain civilisation. Protests are fine, riots are not. It is the ones who belive they can weaponise their opinions - rather than be content expressing them - who in my opinion need to receive the full force of the law. And are the ones who put "free speech" at risk.


Protests normally end up in violence even violent speech. A Labour run council in Kent are fining people for swearing, we are slowly turning in to China. People can swear by simply not thinking about it, like forgetting something in a shop.

I can think of other important things that shop be on top of their list.

Interesting reading but Labour do keep flip flopping like the rest of them.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/rache...F4G2YVBIr2Lvy4le2idw

Green Man wrote:
[quote]Wyot wrote:
[quote]Honey wrote:
[quote]JK2006 wrote:



Protests normally end up in violence even violent speech. A Labour run council in Kent are fining people for swearing

They don't GM, statistically it is significantly the reverse.

I accidentally strolled through an anti-fascist protest in Weymouth at the weekend with the children; everyone looked chilled, even the Police. I doubt I would have felt so relaxed were it the far-right...

Not so sure about the swearing. It isn't just swearing it has to be loud and likely to cause distress/alarm to the public. So aimed at groups of pissed yobs yelling their heads off.

The danger is clearly revenue generating creep...

Wyot wrote:
[quote]Green Man wrote:
[quote]Wyot wrote:
[quote]Honey wrote:
JK2006 wrote:



Protests normally end up in violence even violent speech. A Labour run council in Kent are fining people for swearing

They don't GM, statistically it is significantly the reverse.

I accidentally strolled through an anti-fascist protest in Weymouth at the weekend with the children; everyone looked chilled, even the Police. I doubt I would have felt so relaxed were it the far-right...

Not so sure about the swearing. It isn't just swearing it has to be loud and likely to cause distress/alarm to the public. So aimed at groups of pissed yobs yelling their heads off.

The danger is clearly revenue generating creep...

I am not so sure, the far left were having a go at people because they thought they were far right, when they were just having a pint before seeing a match.

Can they get in their thick heads that EDL are not a thing now?


x.com/Adam_PVFC/status/1822557195134697576

www.spiked-online.com/2024/08/12/why-did...ons/#google_vignette

Wyot wrote:
[quote]Honey wrote:
JK2006 wrote:



I cant believe how eager people are to have no free speech or movement, and be governed by a madman.

Freedom of speech is fine, Freedom to incite violence off the back of those beliefs is not if we wish to retain civilisation. Protests are fine, riots are not. It is the ones who belive they can weaponise their opinions - rather than be content expressing them - who in my opinion need to receive the full force of the law. And are the ones who put "free speech" at risk.

Yes, if you believe that the man who opened the door to the false allegations industry with his instruction to "believe all accusers" is likely to leave it at that!

Honey wrote:
[quote]Wyot wrote:
[quote]Honey wrote:
[quote]JK2006 wrote:



Yes, if you believe that the man who opened the door to the false allegations industry with his instruction to "believe all accusers" is likely to leave it at that!

That was just opportunistic and ill thought through; I am no fan, but see no reason to assume Starmer will start operating like Chairman Mao...

I can't believe you get jailed for saying "Who the the F*** is Allah" you get can jailed for doing silent prayers outside abortion clinics and preaching to the wrong God and King. The West is truly over!

As an Athiest there is no God in my eyes, will that be crime?

What is Labour scared off?