Halibut Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 :confused:What an odd thing to say:confused: Sarah, what do you think Mr Robinson's motive was, in deliberately ignoring the limits the police imposed on his planned walk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 If you want to argue that free speech should extend to people's right to effectively cause a riot They weren't going to cause a riot though, there were very few of them and they were walking with the police. The police stopped them from walking through the area because they were afraid of what others would do if they did continue. That's just plain wrong. If I say or do something that offends you, but doesn't harm you or anyone else and does'nt break the law, and the police think that you are likely to punch me in the face for it, you should be the one who gets arrested, not me. And yes, I do strongly defend left wing protests as well, you'll find no double standards here. The double standards on display in this thread are equally distasteful on both sides. As you've rightly pointed out we've got all the right wingers who suddenly think protest is a sacred right, but on the flip side all the left wingers who would are usually very in favour of protest and very much against the way that protests are policed, but all of a sudden they're totally in favour of the police shutting down protests unjustly, just as long as it's someone they disagree with being shut down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 They weren't going to cause a riot though, there were very few of them and they were walking with the police. The police stopped them from walking through the area because they were afraid of what others would do if they did continue. That's just plain wrong. If I say or do something that offends you, but doesn't harm you or anyone else and does'nt break the law, and the police think that you are likely to punch me in the face for it, you should be the one who gets arrested, not me. And yes, I do strongly defend left wing protests as well, you'll find no double standards here. The double standards on display in this thread are equally distasteful on both sides. As you've rightly pointed out we've got all the right wingers who suddenly think protest is a sacred right, but on the flip side all the left wingers who would are usually very in favour of protest and very much against the way that protests are policed, but all of a sudden they're totally in favour of the police shutting down protests unjustly, just as long as it's someone they agree with. Not often I agree with you, but for once your spot on ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 They weren't going to cause a riot though, there were very few of them and they were walking with the police. The police stopped them from walking through the area because they were afraid of what others would do if they did continue. That's just plain wrong. If I say or do something that offends you, but doesn't harm you or anyone else and does'nt break the law, and the police think that you are likely to punch me in the face for it, you should be the one who gets arrested, not me. Well and succinctly put. Exactly right. It's hard to see how we've got into a situation where a section of the population is, or at least appears to be, above the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Sarah Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Sarah, what do you think Mr Robinson's motive was, in deliberately ignoring the limits the police imposed on his planned walk? I have no idea. He could have been trying to wind up the muslims He could have been doing what he said he was, a charity walk. Thats not really the issue for me. The issue for is is that he was stopped from walking on an English street by British bobbies so as not to offend or upset some out of date religion and its sheeple. They should have let him continue and if he was assaulted or even killed, the perpetrators of the assault or murder should feel the full weight of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 I have no idea. He could have been trying to wind up the muslims He could have been doing what he said he was, a charity walk. Thats not really the issue for me. The issue for is is that he was stopped from walking on an English street by British bobbies so as not to offend or upset some out of date religion and its sheeple. They should have let him continue and if he was assaulted or even killed, the perpetrators of the assault or murder should feel the full weight of the law. Quite right. Both you and flamingjimmy have hit the nail firmly on the head for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 I have no idea. He could have been trying to wind up the muslims He could have been doing what he said he was, a charity walk. Thats not really the issue for me. You're answering a different question - you're speculating on his intentions for making the walk in the first place. I was asking if you had any idea why he chose to deliberately ignore the limits imposed on his walk. The issue for is is that he was stopped from walking on an English street by British bobbies so as not to offend or upset some out of date religion and its sheeple. That isn't why he was arrested. He was arrested because he chose to ignore the limits placed on his choice of route. Exactly the same laws were used to arrest a large number of anti fascists a couple of weeks ago. They sat down in a road to try and block a march by the BNP. You condemn those arrests equally don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 He could have been doing what he said he was, a charity walk. Sure he was. Just an innocent walk, for char-a-tee. I'd have a little more respect for him if he dropped his moral prop. "I'm going to walk through London because it's my right, and if people are offended by me then so be it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Sarah Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 Sure he was. Just an innocent walk, for char-a-tee. I'd have a little more respect for him if he dropped his moral prop. "I'm going to walk through London because it's my right, and if people are offended by me then so be it." What about the rest of my post? Or are you just cherry picking what suits? ---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 11:35 ---------- You're answering a different question - you're speculating on his intentions for making the walk in the first place. I was asking if you had any idea why he chose to deliberately ignore the limits imposed on his walk. That isn't why he was arrested. He was arrested because he chose to ignore the limits placed on his choice of route. Exactly the same laws were used to arrest a large number of anti fascists a couple of weeks ago. They sat down in a road to try and block a march by the BNP. You condemn those arrests equally don't you? I think ive answered your question well enough. He did what he did for reason only really known to himself. If i could have the ability to read peoples minds id be very rich by now. ---------- Post added 30-06-2013 at 11:37 ---------- You're answering a different question - you're speculating on his intentions for making the walk in the first place. I was asking if you had any idea why he chose to deliberately ignore the limits imposed on his walk. That isn't why he was arrested. He was arrested because he chose to ignore the limits placed on his choice of route. Exactly the same laws were used to arrest a large number of anti fascists a couple of weeks ago. They sat down in a road to try and block a march by the BNP. You condemn those arrests equally don't you? Those limits that were imposed were wrong. If i were him and i wanted to do a charity walk i wouldnt listen to the police either. They are our servants, not our masters. Sometimes they forget that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted June 30, 2013 Share Posted June 30, 2013 What about the rest of my post? Or are you just cherry picking what suits? What about it? Ask a specific question of me and I shall answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.