mjw47 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Reminds me of this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7979213/Gipsies-ride-horses-into-pub.html The landlord felt he couldn't ban the travellers who had been frequenting his pub over many months because he was in fear of retaliation and they'd smash it up. Instead, he got shut down. Well that is unacceptable, the police should have dealt with the matter, there was CCTV evidence and prosecutions should have taken place. No one is saying that any ethnic group should be given carte blanche to act as they wish simply because they are an ethnic group. They should be treated equally with the rest of the population. Being treat equally means that they should answer to the law and pay the price for breaking it just like everyone else. Making allowances for peoples behaviour because they belong to either a minority or majority is not only wrong it encourages racism. "This is our country and look what them uns are getting away with " is a recipe for increasing bigotry. The law should apply equally across the board, apart from football fans obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Still wilfully ignoring the judgement in favour of 8 of the people.............. Perhaps the judge should have checked their DNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Perhaps the judge should have checked their DNA. You're making the same mistake as the pub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 And the fact that the judge who heard all the story and the arguments from both sides found Wetherspoons guilty proves that they did. No doubt the evidence of the police inspector, the barrister and the priest who were with the travelers was taken into consideration. The CEO of Wetherspoons apologised, he had no need to do so but as he did he presumably accepted the judgement. The football fans scenario wouldn't apply because the landlord would refuse admission based on an obvious allegiance to a particular team. Any other rule tends to be disregarded when it comes to football fans, we don't like it but tend to accept it with varying degrees of good grace. No it just means in the opinion of the judge they discriminated based on ethnicity, and sometimes the opinion of judges is wrong, and on this occasion it is my opinion the judge was wrong. It usually pays to show remorse when you are found guilty even when you are innocent, so an apology from the CEO of Wetherspoons isn't proof that the they accept they did anything wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodmally Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 What happened to "ROAR"? What is ROAR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 No it just means in the opinion of the judge they discriminated based on ethnicity, and sometimes the opinion of judges is wrong, and on this occasion it is my opinion the judge was wrong. It usually pays to show remorse when you are found guilty even when you are innocent, so an apology from the CEO of Wetherspoons isn't proof that the they accept they did anything wrong. You're happy with the unfair discrimination altogether or you're happy with it as long as it's not based on ethnicity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 You're happy with the unfair discrimination altogether or you're happy with it as long as it's not based on ethnicity? I'm unhappy with unfair discrimination and that is why I disagree with the judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudds1 Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 What is ROAR? Right of admission reserved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 You're making the same mistake as the pub No the judge made the mistake of presuming they were travellers, you're the one who brought the DNA bit into it as proof they were a distinct group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InigoMontoya Posted May 21, 2015 Author Share Posted May 21, 2015 Meanwhile, on the other side of the Peak District, and a little more recently than 2011… http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2015/02/06/row-over-labour-in-vain-19th-century-pub-sign-showing-white-couple-washing-black-boy/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now