It looks like free speech in the UK is now on the slippery slope.

[Notanumber]

This thread is about the UK, though.

What is happening in the UK should be a warning to other western countries.

 

[oldbadger]

I know Mr Justice Knowles was right .....

So a judge gets a judgement correctly and you write in, moaning about it. *sighs*

..............but I fear that he is a lone voice or at least one of the very few prepared to stand up against the PC culture in the College of Policing.

Rubbish. Your fears are misguided if you think tyhat a Judge has to cow-tow to police colleges.
Judges judge on the basis of legislation, not cop's ideas.
It's cops (and the cps) that have to consider Judge's....

It seems that he is one of the few that has not so far been infected by Common Purpose and I applaud him.

You can't know the minds of 'the majority of Judges'. !!

The police certainly have new difficulties in connection with very fast and very far reaching media ciommunications, and they do need to react to 'incitement', 'harassment', 'victimisation', 'blackmail' and 'coercion', but when a judge rules that none of these actions has taken place then he has rules..... SUBJECT TO APPEAL!

Our system is not bad..............

 

[oldbadger]

What is happening in the UK should be a warning to other western countries.

Oh please!
What happens in the UK is a pretty good guide for other countries to follow.

You can say what you like here as long as you don't incite, harass, victimise, blackmail, coerce or frighten others. Not a bad track record.

 

[Notanumber]

Oh please!
What happens in the UK is a pretty good guide for other countries to follow.

You can say what you like here as long as you don't incite, harass, victimise, blackmail, coerce or frighten others. Not a bad track record.

Should the police be going round correcting someone’s thinking because someone else does not like what they have said?

How many of those visited are brave enough to stand their ground as Harry Miller did on this occasion?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Yes...there is

Where?

 

[Estro Felino]

Where?

Well...in my country there is no Idea I cannot express freely .

 

[oldbadger]

Should the police be going round correcting someone’s thinking because someone else does not like what they have said?

How many of those visited are brave enough to stand their ground as Harry Miller did on this occasion?

Should the police be going round correcting someone’s thinking because someone else does not like what they have said?

How many of those visited are brave enough to stand their ground as Harry Miller did on this occasion?

So a Judge sorts this out, an action which I guess that you would support, but instead you make a fuss and start shouting about failings?
And you want to warn the world that a judge ruled correctly on your opinion?

In the UK we will uphold the right of bigots to shout their mouths off, as long as their prejudiced rubbish does not lead to crimes, harassments, victimisation etc.

And there is you, moaning a out our free speech tenets?

Time to go back to sleep, methinks.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

How long will Mr Justice Knowles keep his position after he ruled against the police forces across the country on how they record "non-crime hate incidents"?

At last you are revealed as a foreigner! A judge can only be removed by the Queen on a petition from both Houses of Parliament.

PS I suppose you could be English and just ignorant

 

[Notanumber]

This group has the right idea, but in a free and open society, they would not be required and necessary.

POLICE: JUST ENFORCE THE LAW

Fair Cop exists to remind authority of Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights; to make the public aware of these rights; and to challenge illegal interference by the police, politicians and others who step across these rights in pursuit of ideological gain.

Fair Cop is campaigning for the College of Policing to change its Hate Crime Guidance.

 

[oldbadger]

Should the police be going round correcting someone’s thinking because someone else does not like what they have said?

How many of those visited are brave enough to stand their ground as Harry Miller did on this occasion?

Think about it!!!
A judge upheld free speech, and you run a thread about s slippery slope.

0/10.

 

[Notanumber]

Think about it!!!
A judge upheld free speech, and you run a thread about s slippery slope.

0/10.

It would seem that you are a little confused.

Try starting at the beginning instead of jumping in part way through.

 

[oldbadger]

It would seem that you are a little confused.

Try starting at the beginning instead of jumping in part way through.

Nah.
No confusion there.

 

[Notanumber]

Obviously, Mr Justice Knowles ruling is a breath of fresh air from the swamp of political correctness but what about the other 120,000 Thought Police incidents?

Can we guarantee that this recent development will be the turning point that is so desperately necessary?

 

[oldbadger]

Obviously, Mr Justice Knowles ruling is a breath of fresh air from the swamp of political correctness but what about the other 120,000 Thought Police incidents?

Can we guarantee that this recent development will be the turning point that is so desperately necessary?

Each case is judged on its own evidence and merits.

If you would like to direct us to 120,000 other cases that would be interesting to follow, but I think you'll find that most will have been about incitement, or harassment, or victimisation, or causing fear.

In the UK we support and seek to protect minorities from bigots, so where the bigots break the law with their rants you can expect that they'll get slapped, but in this case a judge has ruled that the bigot is free of such accusations.

 

[Notanumber]

Each case is judged on its own evidence and merits.

If you would like to direct us to 120,000 other cases that would be interesting to follow, but I think you'll find that most will have been about incitement, or harassment, or victimisation, or causing fear.

In the UK we support and seek to protect minorities from bigots, so where the bigots break the law with their rants you can expect that they'll get slapped, but in this case a judge has ruled that the bigot is free of such accusations.

It is discussed here -

It would seem that this former Muslim radical is far more liberal than the likes of you.

Maajid Nawaz: Police need to focus on knife crime not "thought crime" - LBC

 

[Estro Felino]

Each case is judged on its own evidence and merits.

If you would like to direct us to 120,000 other cases that would be interesting to follow, but I think you'll find that most will have been about incitement, or harassment, or victimisation, or causing fear.

In the UK we support and seek to protect minorities from bigots, so where the bigots break the law with their rants you can expect that they'll get slapped, but in this case a judge has ruled that the bigot is free of such accusations.

With all due respect, it is not bigotry to put certain minorities in their place when they want to get privileges not even Native British pepple have.

 

[oldbadger]

It is discussed here -

It would seem that this former Muslim radical is far more liberal than the likes of you.

Maajid Nawaz: Police need to focus on knife crime not "thought crime" - LBC

Smoke screens from you cannot throw our legal system into Scotch Mist. OK?

Spoken opinion is lawful here, so long as it does not incite crime, fear, harassment, victimization or blackmail. Even when spoken by bigoted nasties.!!

Just get that fixed securely in mind and you cannot go too far wrong.

 

[oldbadger]

With all due respect, it is not bigotry to put certain minorities in their place when they want to get privileges not even Native British pepple have.

What respect?
Trying to tell me that I would criticize others for speaking their minds is not respectful, it's downright untrue, OK?

But when any comments can incite crime, or harass, or put others in fear, or harass, or blackmail, then it becomes a crime. Which part of that is hard to grasp?

 

[Estro Felino]

What respect?
Trying to tell me that I would criticize others for speaking their minds is not respectful, it's downright untrue, OK?

But when any comments can incite crime, or harass, or put others in fear, or harass, or blackmail, then it becomes a crime. Which part of that is hard to grasp?

That there is an abyssal difference between expressing an idea about a religion, and inciting hatred towards people. Since religions are abstract concepts...they are not people.

 

[Notanumber]

That there is an abyssal difference between expressing an idea about a religion, and inciting hatred towards people. Since religions are abstract concepts...they are not people.

Some people just do not get it.