That’s why I said ‘if.’ What is your point if it is not that? I thought that was the whole ‘TwoTier’ thing? And I’m not in charge of Cleveland Plod’s media team. It seems odd not to lead with the tastiest morsel but there you go.
Why would everything have to automatically be about skin colour!? Makes it sound as if you've got a problem..... Yes it does seem odd, doesn't it, that's my point!! I am merely stating what they've tweeted!! My point (absolutely f**k all to do about skin colour), is how on earth someone can be sentenced to over 2 years in prison for 'shouting' and 'gesticulating' and yet far more reprehensible acts receive lighter sentences?! I don't even see where race or skin colour comes into this conversation? Some of the posters on this thread have agreed that the sentencing seems harsh. I don't see you questioning them about having a racist agenda!?!?!
I didn’t say you had a ‘racist agenda.’ That’s cobblers. I’m saying that I thought your concerns came from the POV that is concerned with so-called two-tier policing and that concern is very much about if White and Muslim people are treated equally. But, let’s repeat, this bloke didn’t get sentenced for merely shouting.
Could a person receive a custodial sentence for inserting a firework into his anus and shouting Yorkshire in a public place? Asking for a friend
I have witnessed rhetoric like that on a weekly basis since Oct 7th. But police make no arrests and you take the Mickey but I’ve seen it with my own eyes. On a number of counter protests that I’ve attended you’ve had a minority of people frothing at the mouth with a hatred of anything that opposes their beliefs. They call for murder. They support terrorism. But the police are frightened to make arrests but they aren’t frightened when it’s a different type of protest!
You're gonna go mental when you find out what 5 white people got for meeting to organise a peaceful protest.
Needs to be aimed at a specific person/people and threat of violence has to be immediate. So if there were EDL there and he was saying that to them then yes, but if he's not threatening anyone present then I don't think it would apply (footage looks like he's surrounded by like minded people). Logically it feels like there must be an offence but struggling to think of one that fits the exact behaviour and words used... Section 5 maybe if you argued that not all the people surrounding him are likely to be ok with that kind of language? But even then he might be able to rely on the defence that he didn't believe anyone present would be upset by the words. Either way, bloke is a ****** as are those clapping and cheering along.
And that’s **** and I’ve no doubt there are people who thoroughly deserve being brought before the law for expressing their hatred of Jewish people. It’s vile. Public order policing is all about maintaining order though. All of those ‘patriots’ at the Centotaph mass singing ‘who the **** is Allah’ and much, much stronger stuff. Arrests, for sure but I don’t remember those being about things being chanted. They were for assaults, carrying weapons etc.
Spot on, plus the specifics of what he was shouting are important. Yelling "Two nil to the Arsenal" and "I know where your kids go to school" are two very different things. Gesticulating in people's faces" is also relevant - it's one thing yelling at someone from the other side of the road, but getting up into someone's face and doing it is definitely an aggression multiplier. The reality is that violent speech and aggressive body language are the components of assault, which most people will recognize quite easily if ever faced with it. I suspect that the weight of this charge would be very different if the specifics of the words used, physical body language engaged in, and his priors were all known. The reality is this guy wasn't given a two year sentence just for shouting in the street a bit. There would have been serious aggravating factors.
So Hateful Rhetoric, what can be done? It seems clear from this thread it’s very hard to tackle, Bubble is like a dog with a bone, frothing at the mouth trying to engage in some awfully ratioed whataboutery, because one Labour councillor said something awful and stupid, which everyone has roundly condemned. Of course the mere fact that one person said one idiotic thing now completely wipes a decade of political hate speech and dog whistling from the slate, either like it never happened or is actually ok after all. That’s how it works isn’t it, find one example of the people you don’t like doing or saying something, and that completely justifies 1000 other examples of similar things that that the people you do like have done that you completely ignore. That’s how we’ve arrived at two tier policing, “look over here at this grainy video of a brown person not getting punished!!?, why can’t I set a hotel on fire and get away with it?!” As for the long sentences, there are much finer legal minds on here than me, but I had assumed the reason for the overly long sentences was obvious? Surely it’s the same reason that JSO protestors are getting 4/5 year prison sentences for very minor crimes? Things like riots and these type of public disturbances are one off events that can quickly snowball and get out of control. The best way to tackle them has been proven in the past, swift and severe sentencing, that tends to stop it in its tracks. It’s a proven method of stamping them out quickly and stopping them from gaining too much traction and getting out of control, the swift and severe sentencing of an early few prevents many thousands of others doing the same thing. It’s a wholly different type of crime and event than endemic crimes like burglary or drug dealing. It doesn’t matter what you do with sentencing for crimes like those, they will always happen. The prison service and the law courts couldn’t cope if we suddenly decided we could prevent endemic crime like this by massively increasing sentencing and prosecution times, and it would make next to no difference anyway. But what I don’t understand is why some idiot getting 26 months has to be an issue, or an either or? Hopefully this labour councillor gets the book thrown at him for what he said which was idiotic, but at the same time what is wrong with another idiot getting 26 months, in the name of stopping thousands of other idiots like him going on to do the same thing?
I don’t really understand the point of this though, surely this would please all the anti-labour reform lot who think Labour have lost the country in a few weeks? Or is Musk just out to have a pop at labour regardless of the angle? Edit: oh it’s not about immigration but law breaking? Assumed it was like a Rwanda thing.
No, the point I am making is that he is retweeting not from the 'Telegraph' directly but from Ashlea Simon, and she has preceded the article with two laughter emojis.
Yes, I get that. However, the emojis can be interpreted simply be laughing at the proposal rather than indicating it is knowing satire. Is that an indemnifier? Clearly the Telegraph felt it needed to say something.
I mean, the 'proposal' is so ridiculous that it's hard to see anyone taking it seriously. Apart from anything else, it would cost millions and milllons of pounds. Still, that never stops gullible people on social media.
"If I hated Australia, came to the country under false pretences, hated their way of life, hated their history, broke into the country, spent my time trying to undermine Australia why should I be there...?" Sure there's a fair few aboriginal Australians that might raise an eyebrow at that coming from a staunch defender of the British Empire...
