The Police deal with Steve Bray
Discussion
Peaceful protest is one thing but I think that this guy has been taking things a bit too far..
https://youtu.be/LqbvQYvEUO0
https://youtu.be/LqbvQYvEUO0
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/28/po...
Been a long time coming...
I support the right to protest but don't see the need for amplification, or the level of disruption he caused.
We even have Speakers Corner for exactly this kind of protest and debate. Maybe we should restore some of the others; maybe one in each city to encourage (non amplified) debate?
Been a long time coming...
I support the right to protest but don't see the need for amplification, or the level of disruption he caused.
We even have Speakers Corner for exactly this kind of protest and debate. Maybe we should restore some of the others; maybe one in each city to encourage (non amplified) debate?
Amazing how many police can be mustered to deal with something like this, isn't it.
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
Two pieces of good news then as this means that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act is now in force which makes the following a criminal offence: “residing on land without consent in or near a vehicle” and you are “likely to cause serious damage or serious disruption”, or if you’re likely to cause “significant distress”
As porkinsider said be careful what you wish for.
Just because posters on here don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to protest and protesting should be noisy and visual. No point otherwise.
He has been targeted almost to the point of harassment with up to 8 police officers following him yesterday.
Pretty disgraceful and I'm sure we all know who gave the order.
This is leading this country down a dangerous path IMO.
Just because posters on here don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to protest and protesting should be noisy and visual. No point otherwise.
He has been targeted almost to the point of harassment with up to 8 police officers following him yesterday.
Pretty disgraceful and I'm sure we all know who gave the order.
This is leading this country down a dangerous path IMO.
PorkInsider said:
Amazing how many police can be mustered to deal with something like this, isn't it.
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
PorkInsider said:
Amazing how many police can be mustered to deal with something like this, isn't it.
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
Obstructing the Highway is included in the bill too.The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
Krupp88 said:
Two pieces of good news then as this means that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act is now in force which makes the following a criminal offence: “residing on land without consent in or near a vehicle” and you are “likely to cause serious damage or serious disruption”, or if you’re likely to cause “significant distress”
It always amazes me how people are quite happy to throw away their rights because they think someone will be on the sharp end of the law. PorkInsider said:
Amazing how many police can be mustered to deal with something like this, isn't it.
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
Policing is all about what agenda the senior officers have now, here in Wiltshire primary school child sis being investigated for a hate crime.The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
Its all we have no resources, trust me they have plenty to suit the current targeted agenda, went to the back of empty police station at 23;00 to speak to someone I know and what looks dead when I went to the rear 6 officers all doing diddly came out to see what was going on.
The MET is joke 'rapey wayne' was known as a perverted creep yet he kept his firearms ticket and its now in special measures is it not! Had been accused of crimes in sussex and in the met area always ; oh he is serving officer nevermind! they have recently quietly charged him with a load of retropective stuff, somes the met up!
sugerbear said:
Krupp88 said:
Two pieces of good news then as this means that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act is now in force which makes the following a criminal offence: “residing on land without consent in or near a vehicle” and you are “likely to cause serious damage or serious disruption”, or if you’re likely to cause “significant distress”
It always amazes me how people are quite happy to throw away their rights because they think someone will be on the sharp end of the law. 14ZA(1) and (2) provides that a senior police officer may impose conditions on a one-person protest where they reasonably believe that the noise generated by that one-person protest may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation in the vicinity, or have a significant, relevant impact on people in the vicinity.
Bray is free to stand there with his placards and say what he wants, just not to the detriment of others around him.
Krupp88 said:
sugerbear said:
Krupp88 said:
Two pieces of good news then as this means that the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act is now in force which makes the following a criminal offence: “residing on land without consent in or near a vehicle” and you are “likely to cause serious damage or serious disruption”, or if you’re likely to cause “significant distress”
It always amazes me how people are quite happy to throw away their rights because they think someone will be on the sharp end of the law. 14ZA(1) and (2) provides that a senior police officer may impose conditions on a one-person protest where they reasonably believe that the noise generated by that one-person protest may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation in the vicinity, or have a significant, relevant impact on people in the vicinity.
Bray is free to stand there with his placards and say what he wants, just not to the detriment of others around him.
No longer a one-person protest?
techguyone said:
Obstructing the Highway is included in the bill too.
Thats the insulate briton lot who don't insulate their own homes not sitting on m ways anymore then!Usual crap a few take the mick and so legislation is rushed through to try and give the police tools to deal with it.
I would guess religious speakers with speakers and mics will not be fair game under the new law depending if they are not from a particular ethnic minority group or a protected religion.
PorkInsider said:
Amazing how many police can be mustered to deal with something like this, isn't it.
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
Exactly hardly a day goes by n don't see glass from broken car windows on road round here, Hampstead,primrose hill,999 wasn't being answered last Saturday...volume of callsThe bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
PorkInsider said:
Amazing how many police can be mustered to deal with something like this, isn't it.
The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
+1The bloke's a tool but he's hardly dangerous.
The bigger problem here is this government's changing of the law to make some kinds of protesting illegal, regardless of whether it's actually causing an issue to anyone else but them.
If they wanted to stop Insulate Britain blocking roads - which was the reasoning they used - they could have criminalised purposely interrupting traffic flow (or something), but instead took the opportunity to crack down on people protesting against the government.
It's a slippery slope...
It's frightening what these psycopaths are doing in the background as they just can't take people disagreeing with them.
Johnson, of course, has form with his broken and illegal water cannon
GreatGranny said:
Just because posters on here don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to protest and protesting should be noisy and visual. No point otherwise.
So he should be able to spoil someone's day, every day, just because he wants to?Don't the other people have a right to a quiet life?
The Mad Monk said:
GreatGranny said:
Just because posters on here don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to protest and protesting should be noisy and visual. No point otherwise.
So he should be able to spoil someone's day, every day, just because he wants to?Don't the other people have a right to a quiet life?
He doesn't need an amplifier and speaker to maintain his right to protest.
vaud said:
The Mad Monk said:
GreatGranny said:
Just because posters on here don't agree with him doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to protest and protesting should be noisy and visual. No point otherwise.
So he should be able to spoil someone's day, every day, just because he wants to?Don't the other people have a right to a quiet life?
He doesn't need an amplifier and speaker to maintain his right to protest.
techguyone said:
It's hard to say he hasn't had a fair crack of the whip, other peoples lives count too, protest shouldn't trump all else, he should really move on and do something else with his life now.
I'm fine with him protesting. I'm fine with him standing on a soapbox and sharing his views. I just don't think protesters need an amplifier and speakers every day. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff