Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Protesters vs public


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Protesters vs public Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:05:53 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		Brian Haw, tent dwelling hippy....who's spent the last 9 years camped outside parliament protesting against war, was arrested this morning, before the state opening of parliament with queeny et al....
While this probably sounds suspicious timing, his arrest is actually entirely legitimate, he was obstructing the police searching the tents for drugs. The plural of tent is the clue.

For the vast majority of the time he is there alone, but with the worlds media watching, many suppporters of his and other causes have joined in...a small tent village (named 'democracy' apparently, ugh) has sprung up.


The problem, and point of this post...is that it'd got to the point that the protesters were taking up most of the square, and somewhat impeding tourists, the normal users, etc....
This leaves the police with a problem, while they don't (can't) object to each individual protesters right to protest, as a community, they were getting in the way. So, cops trying to find (legitimate) excuses to get rid of some of them. Searching hippies for weed, probably fairly high success rate.

This has been a recurring theme with Haw, multiple legal arguments about the sheer amount of...placards, banners, art...he'd collected....legally he has a right to protest, to camp there....but it's prime public area, he has no right to block any of it, in theory not even what's been under his tent all these years.


What does collarme think of the problem....is it okay for a protest to block access to public areas for other users? How could any protest over a few hundred people be allowed to go ahead if not? Is it okay if it's blocked by a swell of bodies, but taking up a load of space with tents and signs etc not good? Should someone be allowed to, literally, permanently, set up home on public land?
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:07:04 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		That should be a local decision.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:11:31 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		By who?
And wouldn't that just result in no-one being allowed to protest in particularly protest worthy areas? If I had varying subspecies of sloganites shouting outside my house 7/365...I might be tempted to take a less than neutral view of protest rights. Specially if my addy was 10 downing.

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:13:27 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		Woody- there are many problems that can never have a one size fits all answer.

This is one  of them.



(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:17:33 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline 		The police have a right to carry out drug searches, providing the follow the rules. I would be aghast if this was an attempt to silence free speech. The timing of the raid has to make one wonder.

Legally the question that needs to be asked is when does a protest camp, which is legal, start to become a home, which is not. Nice point about the camp obstructing a public thoroughfare as well.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:18:07 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		I would argue that this is an example of something that NEEDS a one size fits all answer....if it were just left to....say, parish councils...to decide as and when, they'd end up deciding...and changing...their policy based on each individual protest. Protests would surely be allowed or forbidden (to a greater or lesser degree) based upon their subject.....save the rainforest from logging companies?....go ahead, extra space specifically for shower facilities.....save the celtic race from negroid crossbreeding?....best keep the park free for dogwalkers...

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:19:58 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		What works in London- wont work in Peoria.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:21:57 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		I think the timing of the raid does coincide with media attention, but not purposely, merely because the overpopulation of protesters does purposefully. The home point was an interesting addition, probably not relevant in this case....it's a tiny tent, and he doesn't leave each morning off to work....but the obstruction issue is/was becoming a serious problem, I heard Boris was getting involved to try to sort it.....

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:24:18 PM   
DCWoody


Posts: 1401
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline 		So who should have more right to protest/less right to access public spaces as a causeless wanderer? Londoners or Peoria? :)

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 5:26:01 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		How about the home owners?


Let the others go home.

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 8:49:02 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The police have a right to carry out drug searches, providing the follow the rules. I would be aghast if this was an attempt to silence free speech. The timing of the raid has to make one wonder.

Legally the question that needs to be asked is when does a protest camp, which is legal, start to become a home, which is not. Nice point about the camp obstructing a public thoroughfare as well.



you people need a big flashing sign on your avatar that warns everyone you are under the queen because around here the police dont have a "right" to exercise agency.   They dont by you either but I dont care what you say about your side of the pond.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 9:11:58 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		Well, I don't know how the laws work there, but from a philosophical point of view, his right to swing a fist stops at then end of my nose. An encampment on a thoroughfare quickly becomes a case of their right to protest being granted a higher value than the rights of others to just get their asses to work on time.

Here, we would probably break it up over a lack of porta-shitters, and clear it out on health code violations if it came to that, but a drug inspection sounds like a good plan too. If he stayed 9 years (I'm assuming he stayed through the winters here) then I hope he at least gets his soapbox back. (If this is just a 'when the weather is nice,' thing, time to move the fuck along.)

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 9:19:56 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Well, I don't know how the laws work there, but from a philosophical point of view, his right to swing a fist stops at then end of my nose. An encampment on a thoroughfare quickly becomes a case of their right to protest being granted a higher value than the rights of others to just get their asses to work on time.

Here, we would probably break it up over a lack of porta-shitters, and clear it out on health code violations if it came to that, but a drug inspection sounds like a good plan too. If he stayed 9 years (I'm assuming he stayed through the winters here) then I hope he at least gets his soapbox back. (If this is just a 'when the weather is nice,' thing, time to move the fuck along.)


so you support prosecution of victimless crimes and take it upon yourself to trespass? 

You cant have it both ways like you just said.




_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 9:33:13 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		Society is the victim of drug users, Real. They steal our productivity.

At least, that's their story, and they are sticking to it.



_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/25/2010 10:19:46 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Society is the victim of drug users, Real. They steal our productivity.

At least, that's their story, and they are sticking to it.




of course its fraud and you nor "they" have challenged or rebutted my point.




_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/26/2010 1:39:05 AM   
RCdc


Posts: 8674
Status: offline 		Protest is an important part of democracy.
Due to recent legislation, you cannot protest within a certain area around parliment (I think it's within a mile).
Due to Mr Haw being there before the legislation came about, is exempt and legally allowed to remain.  So all these people have done have attatched themselves to Mr Haw to get around a legal loophole.  It is reported that Mr Haw doesn't agree with this other encampment and doesn't want anything to do with them - let alone be associated with them there but there is nothing to he can do about it.  If they really 'supported him' - they wouldn't be there!  It's all just stunt.
Boris Johnson was attempting to have him removed legally through the courts which is why he is part of this at the moment.

the.dark.

< Message edited by RCdc -- 5/26/2010 1:41:56 AM >

_____________________________
RC&dc


love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to DCWoody)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/26/2010 1:53:57 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you people need a big flashing sign on your avatar that warns everyone you are under the queen because around here the police dont have a "right" to exercise agency.





_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/26/2010 2:24:58 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you people need a big flashing sign on your avatar that warns everyone you are under the queen because around here the police dont have a "right" to exercise agency.







Umm.   My police chief told me pretty much the same thing the other day.

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/26/2010 2:37:01 AM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The police have a right to carry out drug searches, providing the follow the rules. I would be aghast if this was an attempt to silence free speech. The timing of the raid has to make one wonder.

Legally the question that needs to be asked is when does a protest camp, which is legal, start to become a home, which is not. Nice point about the camp obstructing a public thoroughfare as well.



you people need a big flashing sign on your avatar that warns everyone you are under the queen because around here the police dont have a "right" to exercise agency.   They dont by you either but I dont care what you say about your side of the pond.



Your post, like the previous 8073, makes no sense. If you have a point would you like to make it.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Protesters vs public - 5/26/2010 3:50:04 AM   
LadyEllen


Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline 		Stop and search powers, and powers of arrest by police without warrant are dealt with under PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act), and the basic premise is that the police have no right to do anything unless they have reasonable suspicion - and this reasonable suspicion must be held prior to stop/search or arrest, not acquired as a result of the stop/search or arrest.

All very well in theory of course, but I would not expect the public, particularly those elements prone to speculative police fishing trips, to be aware of it and I would not expect the police to be too keen on disclosing it either. There is also more than anecdote to suggest that the "cheerful Bobby" on the beat is just as often a thug as a stressed out, apprehensive public servant, but then so has it ever been.

Except of course that under the Terrorism Acts all bets are pretty much off when it comes to rights for public or police. Given how those particular attacks on civil liberties are drafted, there is reasonable suspicion my daughter is a terrorist.

Personally however I think this guy has had more than his chance to protest by now and for all the good it has done he might as well go home - but then he probably has nowhere to call home now and no chance of housing anyway.

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Protesters vs public Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.172