Sheffield freedom ride pensioners

[robbert69]

Because it doesn't excuse breaking the law - riding on a train without a valid ticket to do so.!!!!

so why was this not sorted out on the train when the inspector said tickets please thy said we are freedom riders he walk right past there was police on that train and could have done a on the spot fine but thy did not .... and made a arse of things on the station putting people health at risk ... the protesters that wanted to get of the station with valid passes and ticket was kettle d

[Annie Bynnol]

SYPTE say they can no longer afford concessionary travel for disabled people and older people on South Yorkshire trains.

 

What is older people?

Your protest blatantly discriminate against other older people who are over 60

 

You do not support the cause of the under 66s to have even a bus pass.

You do not support other Yorkshire folk or English folk to have the same rights as you.

You expect other pensioners to pay for your extra privileges and yet get none themselves.

You discriminate against those in more rural areas by taking away their public transport.

 

Your solidarity amongst yourselves to keep your privilege whilst other cannot ever share, cannot aspire to and are denied access is incredibly selfish.

I saddened that your group choses to equate yourselves with Solidarity and Freedom Rides - far more worthy causes where people put their lives at risk to change the world. All these protestors do is risk the lives of workers and passengers-2400 tonne trains pass within feet of the incident last week and would not have been able to stop even if they saw people on the track.

[robbert69]

SYPTE say they can no longer afford concessionary travel for disabled people and older people on South Yorkshire trains.

 

What is older people?

Your protest blatantly discriminate against other older people who are over 60

 

You do not support the cause of the under 66s to have even a bus pass.

You do not support other Yorkshire folk or English folk to have the same rights as you.

You expect other pensioners to pay for your extra privileges and yet get none themselves.

You discriminate against those in more rural areas by taking away their public transport.

 

Your solidarity amongst yourselves to keep your privilege whilst other cannot ever share, cannot aspire to and are denied access is incredibly selfish.

I saddened that your group choses to equate yourselves with Solidarity and Freedom Rides - far more worthy causes where people put their lives at risk to change the world. All these protestors do is risk the lives of workers and passengers-2400 tonne trains pass within feet of the incident last week and would not have been able to stop even if they saw people on the track.

like i said the protesters did not want to be on the station

 

Kettling (also known as containment or corralling)[1] is a police tactic for controlling large crowds during demonstrations or protests. It involves the formation of large cordons of police officers who then move to contain a crowd within a limited area. Protesters are left only one choice of exit, determined by the police, or are completely prevented from leaving.

 

The tactic has proved controversial, not least because it has resulted in the detention of ordinary bystanders as well as protestors.[2] In March 2012 kettling was ruled lawful by the European Court of Human Rights following a legal challenge.

Edited July 1, 2014 by robbert69

[Jmack]

Keep free bus travel for disabled people. But not for pensioners. If a student can't travel for free to do study and better themselves, why should a pensioner travel free to go to the market or whatever they do. In my opinion pensioners have a privileged position in society because they vote. It's time for more fairness.

[alchemist]

George and Tony were resisting assault, not arrest. There was no formal caution or warning given by police that they would arrested, from what we can tell, and the police then grabbed Tony and George, which counts as assault. Also, the freedom riders WANTED to leave the station but they were PREVENTED from leaving the station, so they were forced to trespass against their will. Peaceful protest under Article 11 of the Human Rights act can take place on any property as UKUncut have proven. Also, the whole point of doing this is to throw the acceptability and robustness of the law into question; if it is legal one day for OAPs to travel for free on trains, then an unelected body (SYPTE) decides it is not legal without any consultation with passengers, then a few weeks down the line decides that is legal for OAPs to travel at only half-concession how robust is that law? Some would say it throws the law into disrepute and show it to be a nonsense. That's the whole point of protest. And Tony and George were arrested for taking part in that protest by being singled out as 'ringleaders'; many others on the protest also travelled without paying. They were also not given a police caution, as far as we can tell. Yet they were not assaulted by police or arrested. Ultimately, you either support this action or you don't. You either accept that some laws are not robust and should be challenged, as civil and human rights campaigners have done for centuries, or you don't.

 

They were known and proven thieves. Why should the police not want to take them into custody? Are you yet again going to claim that being elderly and "protesting" means that they are allowed to break the law?

 

---------- Post added 01-07-2014 at 18:31 ----------

 

This is the situation in the UK under Article 11 of the Human Rights Act. 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

 

2. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the state.

 

There are two aspects to Article 11. It protects the right to peaceful assembly, which includes the freedom to hold public or private meetings, demonstrations, rallies and sit-ins, without interference from the State.

 

This may include a positive obligation on the State to ensure that demonstrators are protected from counter-demonstrators trying to prevent their demonstration. However, it does not generally include a positive obligation on the State to ensure that the right to peaceful assembly is protected on private property (Appleby v UK 2003).

 

Article 11 also protects the freedom to associate with others, including the right to form or join a political party or other group or association, and the right to belong to a trade union. However, the right to join a trade union does not extend to police officers, soldiers and some other groups who work for the Government. Article 11 also guarantees the right not to have to associate with others, including the right not to join a union and imposes a positive obligation on the State to secure this.

 

Article 11 is a qualified right. This means that an interference with the right can be justified. The circumstances in which an interference can be justified are similar to those which justify an interference with rights under Article 8 (See section headed ‘A qualified right’ under Article . You should note that a requirement to obtain prior authorisation or to provide prior information about an assembly will not constitute an interference with the freedom of assembly where the purpose of the requirements falls within one the legitimate aims set out in Article 11(2). The actions taken by UKUncut have shown that peaceful protest on private property is not in itself an illegal act (see the Fortnum and Mason 145 arrested in London 2011; most were acquitted without charge. But those who were charged were charged on offences such as taking a certain amount of leaflets into the store. That in itself seems a questionable judgment in a democratic society) http://www.yourrights.org.uk/.../article-11-freedom-of...

 

And where does it say that such protests allow the breaking of the law and theft?

 

---------- Post added 01-07-2014 at 18:33 ----------

 

put it this way we will see in the court of law

 

put it this way, you have no argument and are starting to realise that you are on VERY shaky ground

[robbert69]

its only proven in a court of law instant till proven guilty so what a load a cobs wollop

[alchemist]

why all the bitterness are the police scared of getting fined we will see next week stay tuned folks

 

Bitterness?? NO, just wondering why you are so determined to defend thieves and criminals?

 

---------- Post added 01-07-2014 at 18:38 ----------

 

like i said the protesters did not want to be on the station

 

Kettling (also known as containment or corralling)[1] is a police tactic for controlling large crowds during demonstrations or protests. It involves the formation of large cordons of police officers who then move to contain a crowd within a limited area. Protesters are left only one choice of exit, determined by the police, or are completely prevented from leaving.

 

The tactic has proved controversial, not least because it has resulted in the detention of ordinary bystanders as well as protestors.[2] In March 2012 kettling was ruled lawful by the European Court of Human Rights following a legal challenge.

 

As you seem to be the one defending these thieves so much i will direct my question at YOU. WHO are the thieves, sorry "protesters" protesting against?

[robbert69]

Bitterness?? NO, just wondering why you are so determined to defend thieves and criminals?

 

---------- Post added 01-07-2014 at 18:38 ----------

 

 

As you seem to be the one defending these thieves so much i will direct my question at YOU. WHO are the thieves, sorry "protesters" protesting against?

 

ask your resident Lawyers that QUOTE

[alchemist]

its only proven in a court of law instant till proven guilty so what a load a cobs wollop

 

did they or did they not travel without a valid ticket?

 

---------- Post added 01-07-2014 at 18:40 ----------

 

ask your resident Lawyers that QUOTE

 

I AM asking the resident lawyer, YOU. WHO are the protesting against???

[Annie Bynnol]

like i said the protesters did not want to be on the station

 

Kettling (also known as containment or corralling)[1] is a police tactic for controlling large crowds during demonstrations or protests. It involves the formation of large cordons of police officers who then move to contain a crowd within a limited area. Protesters are left only one choice of exit, determined by the police, or are completely prevented from leaving.

 

The tactic has proved controversial, not least because it has resulted in the detention of ordinary bystanders as well as protestors.[2] In March 2012 kettling was ruled lawful by the European Court of Human Rights following a legal challenge.

 

Here is another attempt to compare a selfish little local protest with national and international events.

 

I do not see "...large cordons of police officers..." "...controlling large crowds...".

 

So what is the point of explaining something that did not happen.

Particularly to residents of a county heavily involved in the two largest disputes of modern times.