Racism ?

[SK425]

Mk3Spitfire said:

If you read carefully what I wrote, youll see that I said they are not the same but are covered by the same legislation. So I'll point you to the Public Order Act 1986, specifically to S17-29 and 29A-29N.

Am I missing something? S17 to 29 of the Public Order Act appear to be about racial hatred and nothing to do with religion?

I might well be missing something. In that link there doesn't seem to be a 29A-29N.

[Mk3Spitfire]

SK425 said:

Am I missing something? S17 to 29 of the Public Order Act appear to be about racial hatred and nothing to do with religion?

I might well be missing something. In that link there doesn't seem to be a 29A-29N.

17-29 relate to racial hatred, 29A-29N (subsections) refer to religious and sexually orientated hatred offences.

[Mk3Spitfire]

TX, what are you on about? I said they are both covered by the same act, I.e the Public order Act. It identified there is a difference hence the different sections and subsections, but both are covered by the POA
They don't "pick" religious aspect. See the same act. Covers sexually orientatd too.
And those people, maybe they were arrested?

[EU_Foreigner]

It is a fashion statement to include racism into everything. Bit like the case of someone calling the Williams sisters (tennis), the Williams brothers. It suddenly was a racial thing which I did not get either.

[Devil2575]

WinstonWolf said:

Devil2575 said:

EU_Foreigner said:

Minority Muslim terrorists I assume?

I was asking for the example from history that has taught us, not the current situation under discussion.

The IRA?

Is that analogous to the situation? Were they a minority that are suffering becuase the provoked the majority?

You could argue that as a result of their actions they gained some political influence/power.

[SK425]

Mk3Spitfire said:

SK425 said:

Am I missing something? S17 to 29 of the Public Order Act appear to be about racial hatred and nothing to do with religion?

I might well be missing something. In that link there doesn't seem to be a 29A-29N.

17-29 relate to racial hatred, 29A-29N (subsections) refer to religious and sexually orientated hatred offences.

Ah. Found a different link that covers 29A - 29N.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/1/schedul...

[WinstonWolf]

Devil2575 said:

WinstonWolf said:

Devil2575 said:

EU_Foreigner said:

Minority Muslim terrorists I assume?

I was asking for the example from history that has taught us, not the current situation under discussion.

The IRA?

Is that analogous to the situation? Were they a minority that are suffering becuase the provoked the majority?

You could argue that as a result of their actions they gained some political influence/power.

You said you wanted a historical example rather than what's actually happening right here and now...

[Terminator X]

Mk3Spitfire said:

TX, what are you on about? I said they are both covered by the same act, I.e the Public order Act. It identified there is a difference hence the different sections and subsections, but both are covered by the POA
They don't "pick" religious aspect. See the same act. Covers sexually orientatd too.
And those people, maybe they were arrested?

I only mentioned it because of the OP eg "Ordeal of OAP who quipped 'I'm not Muslim' at airport security after he was stopped: Man spends six months facing racism charges before case is finally dropped".

TX.

[bobbylondonuk]

The only issue here is that the word 'hatred'as described in the act is not being used to interpret any racism claims. Hence the term 'race card' being more often than not being appropriate.

I genuinely despise anyone playing the race card and I hate it when people get offended on my behalf. I have the law of the land protecting me and if I am stupid enough not to invoke the law to protect myself, then that is just the law of 'survival of the fittest' in action.

Thank you please - nod nod

[Devil2575]

WinstonWolf said:

Devil2575 said:

WinstonWolf said:

Devil2575 said:

EU_Foreigner said:

Minority Muslim terrorists I assume?

I was asking for the example from history that has taught us, not the current situation under discussion.

The IRA?

Is that analogous to the situation? Were they a minority that are suffering becuase the provoked the majority?

You could argue that as a result of their actions they gained some political influence/power.

You said you wanted a historical example rather than what's actually happening right here and now...

What I wanted was an example of this:

9mm said:

You reap what you sow. Not sure it's advisable for a minority to incur the hostility of the majority. History teaches us it doesn't tend to end well.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Terminator X said:

I only mentioned it because of the OP eg "Ordeal of OAP who quipped 'I'm not Muslim' at airport security after he was stopped: Man spends six months facing racism charges before case is finally dropped".

TX.

I imagine that at some level, someone used the word racially aggravated in error or without the proper understanding. I wouldn't bet against it being the paper itself, considering which one it is.

[9mm]

Devil2575 said:

WinstonWolf said:

Devil2575 said:

WinstonWolf said:

Devil2575 said:

EU_Foreigner said:

Minority Muslim terrorists I assume?

I was asking for the example from history that has taught us, not the current situation under discussion.

The IRA?

Is that analogous to the situation? Were they a minority that are suffering becuase the provoked the majority?

You could argue that as a result of their actions they gained some political influence/power.

You said you wanted a historical example rather than what's actually happening right here and now...

What I wanted was an example of this:

9mm said:

You reap what you sow. Not sure it's advisable for a minority to incur the hostility of the majority. History teaches us it doesn't tend to end well.

Off the top of my head, Kurds in Iraq, Chinese Muslims, Native American Indians and Palestinians in Israel. If we move from incur to become the target of, the list gets a lot bigger.