I mean I get offended by the notion that someone in the UK could get arrested from being offended by anything I say.
Does that mean that particular officer is arrested?
"Officer came & asked for my details. He confirmed that if I wrote “Not My King” on it, he would arrest me under the Public Order Act because someone might be offended."
Thanks for your reply
But why a nonce? I understand this word as a "one time usable", and I don't get why this word refers to a pig associated with Epstein
In situations like this, where an English word doesn't make any sense in the context, I recommend looking it up in Urban Dictionary. It's really useful to understand slang ;-)
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nonce
It comes from British prison slang. Originally an acronym for "Not on normal courtyard exercise", meaning that prison guards would not let them out of their cells when other inmates were out, as they were at risk of being beaten or killed.
Usually means they committed a reprehensible crime, such as rape of a minor, which is why they are a target for other inmates.
Will we ever get a post or article that actually covers the issue? The abuse of public peace and order laws.
This has nothing to do with being anti-monarchist. It's about the fact that we have poorly and vaguely written laws that can be poorly interpreted and enforced when it comes to keeping public peace and order. The more this continues to be targeted against the monarchy, the more the actual issue gets ignored and hidden.
>Will we ever get a post or article that actually covers the issue. The abuse of public peace and order laws.
They need complete reform.
Also, section 127 of the Communications Act, that is repeatedly used to arrest people for tweets, needs to be scrapped.
Making being 'offensive' illegal, was a really really fucking stupid thing our politicians did.
It wasn't stupid on their part, it's doing exactly what the intention was at the time. Distracting the public and setting them against each other, rather than challenging the government on real issues.
in scotland im sure the new hate crime bill has it so if you have a offensive meme on ur phone (who deems whats offensive?) you can get up to 7 years in jail just for having that meme, not posting it or anything.
youd get less for child porn, (someone near my got no time other than remand during quarantine for having 1000s of images and videos)
>It's about the fact that we have poorly and vaguely written laws that can be poorly interpreted and enforced when it comes to keeping public peace and order.
This is the reason the charge of "treason" is so strictly defined in the US. The British government would just use "treason" as a catch-all for any behavior they didn't like.
It's also why America has the 5th Amendment
(No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Basically, if you refuse to answer a question you are not automatically seen as guilty of the crime.)
Because for a very long time in Britain if you refused to answer in court you were automatically charged as guilty. It was changed in Britain and now we have the same ability to refuse to answer.
however, there are still very old laws that do allow you to imply guilt on someone who refuses to speak because when they fixed the laws thay didn't look at all laws pertaining to the admittance of guilt. I personally think it was deliberate so thay could use it as a loophole later but I don't have any evidence for that.
Not wasted, specifically dumped. The Crown had a lot of money in those leaves, a lot of money that was supposed to be recouped by selling in the colonies.
A lot of the time the Boston Tea Party is written off like an adult hissy fit, but in reality it served as an act of economic warfare.
Why do you think it's stupid? They want the ability to silence you. To start lubricating the slippery slope they start applying those laws at this moment just to definitely be on the right side of public opinion.
They also created crecedences like with the nazi pug case. His crime? An offensive joke in a video where he thoughroughly explained the joke just to be sure. They really did their best to get that conviction, including breaking protocol several times, teaming up with the media to make his life as miserable as humanly possible, trying to upgrade his charge mid-sentence, denying his appeals and even threatening his lawyer for doing their job, then stealing money from his accout without a warning.
The message is clear: if you go out of the way we like, we will destroy your life.
> Making being 'offensive' illegal, was a really really fucking stupid thing our politicians did.
Depends on how its written, if they use the word offensive in the law, then it's too vague. Even free speech need boundaries, my right to free speech should be restricted if i use it to make threats for example.
Yet it is explicitly in UK law that you are allowed to protest the monarch without persecution, dating from 1689 (Declaration of Right), meaning it is protected speech and those arresting officers and/or their constabulary are opening themselves up to being sued.
It’s a tricky one because part of the current law is that you can be arrested if the actions you take, while legal are likely to cause a breach of the peace. For example turning up to an animal rights protest with a pro-fur trade sign, it’s your right to do it, but there’s a huge risk of fights breaking out.
Laws are written poorly and vaguely on purpose, so they can be stretched and abused. None of these rats would want to be a politician if the laws were written like science books.
I think you are ignoring that the laws being vague are not an issue (to the ones writing them), it's a feature. The laws are "poorly" written so that they can be "poorly" interpreted and enforced.
Absolutely. In my lifetime there has never been a British government that expanded civil liberties and left the population freer than when it entered office.
And a small irony around it being in Edinburgh is that the devolved government passed even more restrictive speech laws than exist elsewhere lmao the fucking state of it all
>Absolutely. In my lifetime there has never been a British government that expanded civil liberties and left the population freer than when it entered office.
Are we just going to ignore that gay marriage, adoption etc is a thing now?
Yeah, sure, in Russia propaganda also love to say "protesters were blocking roads for ambulance" and "protesters ruined everyone's celebration". It's easy to cover up arrests by saying that people broke the law, not because they were against someone
This is a problem with most laws.
Any time those in power wants people put away, getting out a poorly worded law is the perfect way.
Not a bug, it's a feature.
Public protests inevitably disrupt public peace. If those laws are intentionally written this way that they can be enforced when needed, this indeed has a lot to do with being anti-monarchist.
I think you're misunderstanding what is occuring. Protests and civil disobedience is protected (less than it used to but fuck Patel). This laws are intended to stop people from being a general nuance, such as shouting at random people in public and harassing them. The issue is that the law can technically extend to a protester using the word "fuck" or calling Andrew a "nonce" (more of an observation there) which is likely being used by some officers to abuse their powers. I expect them to get reprimanded for it.
Because it's a highly publicised, highly emotional, and extremely popular series of gatherings. It's a melting pot for these issues to expose themselves again.
I see. Maybe I worded it wrong. I should have said something along the lines of “people should be allowed to protest in any manner they want as long as they remain peaceful and aren’t inciting violence.”
That's the crux of the issue. These laws are designed to make sure that that (along other public things) follow that, however it's clear the laws are flawed as they are misused and abused as we can see here. Saying "fuck Imperialism" is not breaching any public peace, yet these laws can be interpreted in a way that says that it is. That is the issue the needs to be solved, and the reason I take so much issue with it being pinned as a anti-monarchist thing is that is takes away from that real issue.
Well we certainly agree there. However, I think it’s important to acknowledge the context in which some of these arrests are happening. For example, a man was arrested for ‘threatening’ to write on a blank sign “not my king”.
The offense is so menial that I think we must look at the motivation behind the arrest. It’s clear that they aren’t disturbing the peace. So why else would they be arrested? Well I suppose it would make sense if the police arresting them weren’t big fans of that message.
I definitely think there are personal motives from certain officers. It's pretty common that those in power will abuse power for what they want when they have the opportunity to do so. But it's important to realise that while individual officers may be personally biased, the tools they are abusing are what I've explained before>
Yeah, you’re totally right. It’s very important and equally as concerning that the laws themselves can be applied in ways that so blatantly go against common sense.
Duuuude it's not our poorly worded laws that should be the focus here it's definitely how and when they are being interpreted we aren't pieces of software that needs to be programmed but I agree the laws need an update
I bet a friend 12 years ago that we'll see UK go full totalitarian shithole within our lifetime. He laughed. I wrote that UK is a totalitarian country in disguise, and the people are in denial in there, on Reddit - I got downvoted and laughed at.
But the odds are ever increasingly in my favour. It's a bittersweet victory tho.
Many on Reddit, especially the default subs, tend to approve and even cheer on such draconian laws since they tend to align with their view points. Because yes , as dumb as the nazi pug thing was a lot of them were frothing at the mouth at the evil nazi. What they fail to see is that they are the same as the humorless pearl clutchers of old, just under a different and more mainstreamly acceptable branding and that those oppressive policies they cheer for now can just as easily be used against them. And they will, some day.
In Turkey, those who criticize Erdogan are imprisoned.
Reddit is the only safe social media as it does not give an IP address to Turkey.
There was a guy convicted of a hate crime because of a funny dog video he made for his girlfriend. In the video, his pug raised a paw when he said "seig heil". All of the millions of people who watched that viral video knew that it was intended to be funny, but British courts were so hell-bent on denying freedom of speech that they pretended that he was *training a dog to be an actual nazi* convicted him of a **hate crime**. The icing on the cake was when they denied his constitutional right to appeal, stating that the his case was "not arguable" due to the nature of the "deeply unpleasant offence".
His politics are looney as fuck but I can't justify what they did to him either. Plus I do enjoy his mad lad videos, I just wish he wasn't politically stupid. Wants 0 taxes, like how do you expect that to work mate
I don't know if he cherry picked and all but it seemed like they made threats to his lawyer about it, but it could be me reading it wrong
Oh for sure. He's politically pretty extreme about taxes and brexit, but I just haven't seen anything that even suggest nazi affiliation. I've been asking in this thread and so far nobody has even responded.
If the dude's a nazi, I want to know about it. It would be nice to point to something when people get aggressive about defending him any time he's mentioned.
The guy in question is known as Count Dankula online, real name Mark Meechan and he was a candidate for the scottish UKIP branch toward the European Parliament.
I agree, it's a fucked up thing to sentence someone for, but the term 'dog whistling' has never been more appropriate in this day and age.
He may have changed his views since leaving UKIP, I have no idea.
He's a political nut. He's fine socially with like gays and everything else, let people live how they want. But he wants 0 taxes and to make towns and cities autonomous and self governing. Like no Scotland, make Glasgow its own thing and all. He'd be a libertarian in America
And disturbing a funeral procession with shouting and screaming at mourners is different from an organized protest on a town square, in my opinion. Im not for any monarchy, but come on, they are for the monarchy (or constitutional monarchy) and their queen died, have a little decency, right? You can throw eggs at the palace any other day, but its trashy to protest during a funeral.
Come on, you understand. Look at the angry, self-righteous monarchists in this thread. *Furious* that anyone would *dare* disrespect the monarchy. That's the kind of people that many of our police are, sadly. They're not all right-wing psychos or anything, but they aren't exactly the most liberal and forward-thinking either.
It's beyond that as they apparently were heckling Andrew for being a nonce which is pretty much confirmed as someone who isn't a nonce doesn't give several million pounds in hush money to an alleged minor victim. When one rapes children, being poorly received in public should be par for the course. That person was just doing a public service for the people in Scotland in letting them know not to leave their children unattended while Andrew is in the country.
I feel like you’re talking about why you personally disagree with what he’s doing. Which is fine, you do sort of have a point and it’s an opinion many people share. But I feel like there’s a massive gulf between what you disagree with and what someone should be arrested for, and in a free country this isn’t one of those things.
Including toxic Andrew in the procession is the trashing thing that is disturbing the Queen's State Funeral.
Andrew is very toxic and has been banned from military and public roles and privileges. Put him under Public View is challenging the general Public notion of adequate propriety and that is what is causing a problem.
Isn't the hate crime bill there to offer harsher punishment for people who commit an offence purely because of the other person race/gender/age/disability/sexuality etc? Its not making it illegal to hate something.
I.e if someone commits a crime against someone they get x punishment, but if they commit the same crime purely because the other person was gay then the punishment is more severe? I believe England also has separate offences for racially aggravated crimes etc.
Just want to point out that in Scotland the nationalist (and often republican) government passed laws that specifically target “offensive language”, effectively curbing free speech. Now the same people are angry they can’t say fuck the monarchy during a funeral procession because it’s offensive.
This is a classic r/leopardsatemyface
In Scotland we have something called "Breach of Peace", which is what the police charge you with if they can't prove you have committed an actual crime. The criteria are so vague that you can basically be arrested for being annoying – you merely have to, in the opinion of a police officer, "cause alarm to ordinary people and threaten serious disturbance to the community".
So I live in the UK and have met people who proudly proclaimed that they LOVE the Queen and being her subject. I tried asking questions. Still don't get it.
I mean, people say they love their president constantly. Figure heads are just a prime subject for projection. I'd rather the Brits projected their love on the monarchy so they can focus in on throwing shit on the political leadership and elite that actually holds power.
[https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1569357409382182912](https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1569357409382182912)
Essentially the Met have said that the person holding "Not my King" was actually asked to move away from the gates to allow vehicles to get in and out. Not exactly North Korea is it?
Not a good time to the new guy in the office asked to run out to WH Smith's for more printer paper.
"'Ello, 'Ello. What's going on here then? Planning a few treasonous signs are we, Son?"
Cool, what about the others?
>A 22-year-old woman was arrested on Sunday outside St Giles cathedral in Edinburgh, where the Queen’s coffin was due to lie until Monday, for holding up a sign that said “fuck imperialism, abolish monarchy.”
And the guy who just yelled something while walking past another memorial?
She was arrested for the "fuck" in the sign rather than the anti-monarch message. In Scotland at least swear words on signs like that would fall either under either the vague hate speech laws or the vague disturbance of peace laws. Other protesters with her didn't have "fuck" written on their signs and weren't arrested.
These are seem almost purposefully designed to be as vague as possible and really need to be more clearly defined.
I hope all monarchies will be dissolved soon. I don’t understand why anyone in Europe cheers for monarchies. Like wth? Monarchs were the people ho made your ancestors slaves.
Our laws are poorly worded and open for abuse by law enforcement. What is strange here is that the police are behaving in this way? given that the police in the UK rarely do anything for real crime, why are they choosing, or being leant upon to do this?
Yeah, this one is troubling. Used to be that you could call out anti-monarchist statements in the street and, you know, it was regarded as free speech. Also, such sentiments weren't regarded as extreme. There was a well understood anti-monarchist section of the public who regularly showed up at various events. The idea that these people merit arrest is both ludicrous and appalling. And the very icy tip of a slippery slope. For shame, UK police. For shame.
From the people I saw they seemed to be arrested for insulting people at a funeral.
If someone was shouting insults at me while I bury my grandma I would want them to be removed too.
If you were in Andrew's position, nobody would be shouting abuse at you at your grandma's funeral, because you simply would not be there. You would be serving time in prison, because you would not have the millions to settle out of Court.
Andrew deserved all the heckling he got today. He can attend his Mother's Funeral, just get him in through a discreet entrance, quietly to avoid provoking public anger. To put him right under Public View is rubbing the Public nose in it and people are getting pissed off about it.
1. Her funeral hasn't happened yet. Nobody has been arrested at her funeral.
2. Your grandma presumably wasn't the *unelected head of state*. I believe in representative democracy, as you enjoy in France and most of the developed world. That's not the same as a private citizen dying.
3. These people were not shouting insults. Not at all. Please read about it, they were not grossly offensive.
4. These people were not removed, they were arrested. It's not the same.
5. No members of her family were present when these people were arrested.
I'd also add that the bundling up of the Queen's 10 day death tour with Charles' accession as King is being used to shut down any protest or even discussion about the future of the monarchy in the UK.
The chorus of 'this is not the time' deeming republican sentiments and protest as rude or insulting really are missing this crucial point.
If you don't want someone to protest your presence, don't be a creepy nonce and parade down the high street of the capital. Andrew should not have been involved in that parade at all.
When it comes to huge political figures who represent our country, I think it’s fair to protest. Some may say it’s disrespectful but law should not be involved at all
A woman was arrested for holding a sign that said "Abolish the Monarchy", who was she insulting?
Besides, if people were causing a disturbance you could have them removed instead of arresting them
Apparently she was arrested because one of her signs said “fuck imperialism” which is illegal because she used the word “fuck” on a sign in public. Not saying I agree with it, but at least get the facts straight
Someone was arrested for holding a sign asking "who elected him?"
A legitimate thought provoking question, nobody is insulted, and what does he get? Put to jail? Is this fucking Moscow or what
>If someone was shouting insults at me while I bury my grandma I would want them to be removed too.
Then they should have a private funeral on private property and leave everyone else the hell alone lol.
When you choose to make a production of it and march the procession through the streets, people have the right to shout at you.
>for insulting people at a funeral
If it's a public funeral funded by public money, I think the public deserve the right to be there and treat it however they'd like.
I think everyone is allowed to protest a new ruler being imposed onto them.
Have an election if you think this is the desire of the people.
In this moment nobody asked and i hope a lot more would protest. I hope everyone would protest.
I am not a servant.
I am not a subject.
We don't need them.
I'm no fan of royalty or it's history
However I think it's futile to stand there with a bit of cardboard with not my king on it surrounded by people who are grieving it's going to cause an argument so the police are going to remove the individuals 1 for their own safety and 2 to keep the peace.
I'm sure they was taken to a station given a cup of tea and released a few hours later ?
More likely they are being arrested for breach of the peace. Actually it's not even that, it just seems they have been told to leave by the police and that's understandable to do that.
They have been charged with breach of the peace which is a criminal offense in Scotland that can lead to imprisonment:
https://www.thenational.scot/news/21319718.protester-arrested-king-charless-proclamation-edinburgh-charged/
I'm British and anti-Monarchy. But timing your protest to the Queen's coffin procession seems kind of crass. Certainly doesn't help the Republican cause.
Protest the King's coronation. Better PR.
I mean I get offended by the notion that someone in the UK could get arrested from being offended by anything I say. Does that mean that particular officer is arrested? "Officer came & asked for my details. He confirmed that if I wrote “Not My King” on it, he would arrest me under the Public Order Act because someone might be offended."
You find me offensive? I find you offensive for finding me offensive! - Eminem
Hence if I should draw the line any fences
Just like in Russia when you protest against war or Putin
The guy that called the Nonce a Nonce, is going to face a stiffer penalty than the Nonce did for actually being a Nonce.
I am not british and I don't get why you call the prince the nonce? Can you explain please ?
They're talking about Prince Andrew, who is known to have associated with Epstein.
Thanks for your reply But why a nonce? I understand this word as a "one time usable", and I don't get why this word refers to a pig associated with Epstein
nonce = pedophile
A "nonce" is also British slang for a paedophile.
In situations like this, where an English word doesn't make any sense in the context, I recommend looking it up in Urban Dictionary. It's really useful to understand slang ;-) https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nonce
Or… an actual dictionary? https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nonce
both
Booooring
It comes from British prison slang. Originally an acronym for "Not on normal courtyard exercise", meaning that prison guards would not let them out of their cells when other inmates were out, as they were at risk of being beaten or killed. Usually means they committed a reprehensible crime, such as rape of a minor, which is why they are a target for other inmates.
Those etymologies that rely on acronyms are almost always wrong. More likely it is an alteration of “nance”, perhaps influenced by “ponce”.
Because he's a child rapist and a sex trafficker who was let free because he was a prince
[удалено]
I think you mean the taxpayer paid for it.
Because he’s a nonce
Sweaty nonce*
It's because he allegedly slept with a trafficked 17yo and just being a rapist isn't enough for some people.
Sixpence nonce the richer
I shouldn't laugh but it's true
Will we ever get a post or article that actually covers the issue? The abuse of public peace and order laws. This has nothing to do with being anti-monarchist. It's about the fact that we have poorly and vaguely written laws that can be poorly interpreted and enforced when it comes to keeping public peace and order. The more this continues to be targeted against the monarchy, the more the actual issue gets ignored and hidden.
>Will we ever get a post or article that actually covers the issue. The abuse of public peace and order laws. They need complete reform. Also, section 127 of the Communications Act, that is repeatedly used to arrest people for tweets, needs to be scrapped. Making being 'offensive' illegal, was a really really fucking stupid thing our politicians did.
It wasn't stupid on their part, it's doing exactly what the intention was at the time. Distracting the public and setting them against each other, rather than challenging the government on real issues.
“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” -Abraham Lincoln
France is bacon
I'm a frayed knot.
A house divided against itself is easily manipulated and ruled by bad rulers is equally true.
Wait there is a law against tweeting something offensive? Say what??
[Yup!](https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/7/22912054/uk-grossly-offensive-tweet-prosecution-section-127-2003-communications-act)
I'm offended by that.
Well guess it’s off to jail for me.
I meant by the case (and the law) but if you want to go to jail too that's fine by me.
It's how they convicted that guy for making a YouTube video of a pug doing a Nazi salute.
in scotland im sure the new hate crime bill has it so if you have a offensive meme on ur phone (who deems whats offensive?) you can get up to 7 years in jail just for having that meme, not posting it or anything. youd get less for child porn, (someone near my got no time other than remand during quarantine for having 1000s of images and videos)
>It's about the fact that we have poorly and vaguely written laws that can be poorly interpreted and enforced when it comes to keeping public peace and order. This is the reason the charge of "treason" is so strictly defined in the US. The British government would just use "treason" as a catch-all for any behavior they didn't like.
It's also why America has the 5th Amendment (No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Basically, if you refuse to answer a question you are not automatically seen as guilty of the crime.) Because for a very long time in Britain if you refused to answer in court you were automatically charged as guilty. It was changed in Britain and now we have the same ability to refuse to answer. however, there are still very old laws that do allow you to imply guilt on someone who refuses to speak because when they fixed the laws thay didn't look at all laws pertaining to the admittance of guilt. I personally think it was deliberate so thay could use it as a loophole later but I don't have any evidence for that.
Still, all that wasted tea in the bay. Jesus.
Not wasted, specifically dumped. The Crown had a lot of money in those leaves, a lot of money that was supposed to be recouped by selling in the colonies. A lot of the time the Boston Tea Party is written off like an adult hissy fit, but in reality it served as an act of economic warfare.
Why do you think it's stupid? They want the ability to silence you. To start lubricating the slippery slope they start applying those laws at this moment just to definitely be on the right side of public opinion.
They also created crecedences like with the nazi pug case. His crime? An offensive joke in a video where he thoughroughly explained the joke just to be sure. They really did their best to get that conviction, including breaking protocol several times, teaming up with the media to make his life as miserable as humanly possible, trying to upgrade his charge mid-sentence, denying his appeals and even threatening his lawyer for doing their job, then stealing money from his accout without a warning. The message is clear: if you go out of the way we like, we will destroy your life.
>Making being 'offensive' illegal, was a really really fucking stupid thing our politicians did. 💯 Straight up censorship.
> Making being 'offensive' illegal, was a really really fucking stupid thing our politicians did. Depends on how its written, if they use the word offensive in the law, then it's too vague. Even free speech need boundaries, my right to free speech should be restricted if i use it to make threats for example.
They use the term "grossly offensive" without any explanation of what it is and isn't.
>if they use the word offensive in the law They have. Many times.
Yet it is explicitly in UK law that you are allowed to protest the monarch without persecution, dating from 1689 (Declaration of Right), meaning it is protected speech and those arresting officers and/or their constabulary are opening themselves up to being sued.
It’s a tricky one because part of the current law is that you can be arrested if the actions you take, while legal are likely to cause a breach of the peace. For example turning up to an animal rights protest with a pro-fur trade sign, it’s your right to do it, but there’s a huge risk of fights breaking out.
These types of laws are vague by design. The UK isn’t exactly the bastion of freedom relative to other western countries.
Laws are written poorly and vaguely on purpose, so they can be stretched and abused. None of these rats would want to be a politician if the laws were written like science books.
I think you are ignoring that the laws being vague are not an issue (to the ones writing them), it's a feature. The laws are "poorly" written so that they can be "poorly" interpreted and enforced.
Absolutely. In my lifetime there has never been a British government that expanded civil liberties and left the population freer than when it entered office. And a small irony around it being in Edinburgh is that the devolved government passed even more restrictive speech laws than exist elsewhere lmao the fucking state of it all
>Absolutely. In my lifetime there has never been a British government that expanded civil liberties and left the population freer than when it entered office. Are we just going to ignore that gay marriage, adoption etc is a thing now?
Net freedom.
Is that Gross freedom with costs removed?
Freedom after tax
Yeah, sure, in Russia propaganda also love to say "protesters were blocking roads for ambulance" and "protesters ruined everyone's celebration". It's easy to cover up arrests by saying that people broke the law, not because they were against someone
Or "gesticulated aggressively and used foul language at passers-by". And "resisted arrest", of course.
You guys should adopt this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/vagueness_doctrine
This is a problem with most laws. Any time those in power wants people put away, getting out a poorly worded law is the perfect way. Not a bug, it's a feature.
Public protests inevitably disrupt public peace. If those laws are intentionally written this way that they can be enforced when needed, this indeed has a lot to do with being anti-monarchist.
I think you're misunderstanding what is occuring. Protests and civil disobedience is protected (less than it used to but fuck Patel). This laws are intended to stop people from being a general nuance, such as shouting at random people in public and harassing them. The issue is that the law can technically extend to a protester using the word "fuck" or calling Andrew a "nonce" (more of an observation there) which is likely being used by some officers to abuse their powers. I expect them to get reprimanded for it.
> we have poorly and vaguely written laws that can be poorly interpreted and enforced That's not a bug, that's a feature.
Why do you think they’re being enforced now when people are protesting the monarchy though?
Because it's a highly publicised, highly emotional, and extremely popular series of gatherings. It's a melting pot for these issues to expose themselves again.
I see. Maybe I worded it wrong. I should have said something along the lines of “people should be allowed to protest in any manner they want as long as they remain peaceful and aren’t inciting violence.”
That's the crux of the issue. These laws are designed to make sure that that (along other public things) follow that, however it's clear the laws are flawed as they are misused and abused as we can see here. Saying "fuck Imperialism" is not breaching any public peace, yet these laws can be interpreted in a way that says that it is. That is the issue the needs to be solved, and the reason I take so much issue with it being pinned as a anti-monarchist thing is that is takes away from that real issue.
Well we certainly agree there. However, I think it’s important to acknowledge the context in which some of these arrests are happening. For example, a man was arrested for ‘threatening’ to write on a blank sign “not my king”. The offense is so menial that I think we must look at the motivation behind the arrest. It’s clear that they aren’t disturbing the peace. So why else would they be arrested? Well I suppose it would make sense if the police arresting them weren’t big fans of that message.
I definitely think there are personal motives from certain officers. It's pretty common that those in power will abuse power for what they want when they have the opportunity to do so. But it's important to realise that while individual officers may be personally biased, the tools they are abusing are what I've explained before>
Yeah, you’re totally right. It’s very important and equally as concerning that the laws themselves can be applied in ways that so blatantly go against common sense.
Duuuude it's not our poorly worded laws that should be the focus here it's definitely how and when they are being interpreted we aren't pieces of software that needs to be programmed but I agree the laws need an update
People in the UK have been arrested for posting memes on Facebook. This is hardly news
A teenager was arrested over tweeting song lyrics. The absolute state of the UK.
I bet a friend 12 years ago that we'll see UK go full totalitarian shithole within our lifetime. He laughed. I wrote that UK is a totalitarian country in disguise, and the people are in denial in there, on Reddit - I got downvoted and laughed at. But the odds are ever increasingly in my favour. It's a bittersweet victory tho.
Many on Reddit, especially the default subs, tend to approve and even cheer on such draconian laws since they tend to align with their view points. Because yes , as dumb as the nazi pug thing was a lot of them were frothing at the mouth at the evil nazi. What they fail to see is that they are the same as the humorless pearl clutchers of old, just under a different and more mainstreamly acceptable branding and that those oppressive policies they cheer for now can just as easily be used against them. And they will, some day.
Literally 1984
In Turkey, those who criticize Erdogan are imprisoned. Reddit is the only safe social media as it does not give an IP address to Turkey. 
[удалено]
Can you post some examples? I've never heard of that happening here.
I highly doubt this happened. Could you provide sources?
Unfortinately, u/OldRabies had now been arrested for propaganda against the state on reddit. I doubt you'll get a response.
There was a guy convicted of a hate crime because of a funny dog video he made for his girlfriend. In the video, his pug raised a paw when he said "seig heil". All of the millions of people who watched that viral video knew that it was intended to be funny, but British courts were so hell-bent on denying freedom of speech that they pretended that he was *training a dog to be an actual nazi* convicted him of a **hate crime**. The icing on the cake was when they denied his constitutional right to appeal, stating that the his case was "not arguable" due to the nature of the "deeply unpleasant offence".
Scottish court actually. And it was a conviction under section 127 of the communications act, not a hate crime.
His politics are looney as fuck but I can't justify what they did to him either. Plus I do enjoy his mad lad videos, I just wish he wasn't politically stupid. Wants 0 taxes, like how do you expect that to work mate I don't know if he cherry picked and all but it seemed like they made threats to his lawyer about it, but it could be me reading it wrong
Oh for sure. He's politically pretty extreme about taxes and brexit, but I just haven't seen anything that even suggest nazi affiliation. I've been asking in this thread and so far nobody has even responded. If the dude's a nazi, I want to know about it. It would be nice to point to something when people get aggressive about defending him any time he's mentioned.
The guy in question is known as Count Dankula online, real name Mark Meechan and he was a candidate for the scottish UKIP branch toward the European Parliament. I agree, it's a fucked up thing to sentence someone for, but the term 'dog whistling' has never been more appropriate in this day and age. He may have changed his views since leaving UKIP, I have no idea.
He's a political nut. He's fine socially with like gays and everything else, let people live how they want. But he wants 0 taxes and to make towns and cities autonomous and self governing. Like no Scotland, make Glasgow its own thing and all. He'd be a libertarian in America
That’s not what dog whistling is and the guy isn’t a Nazi, so idk what you are on about. I guess I forgot I’m on Reddit where ukip=Nazi party.
Oh he's become far, far worse than that. He's very much far right, deep into conspiracy stuff etc.
And disturbing a funeral procession with shouting and screaming at mourners is different from an organized protest on a town square, in my opinion. Im not for any monarchy, but come on, they are for the monarchy (or constitutional monarchy) and their queen died, have a little decency, right? You can throw eggs at the palace any other day, but its trashy to protest during a funeral.
I still don't understand why they didn't arrest those who assaulted the man? They literally also breached the peace
Come on, you understand. Look at the angry, self-righteous monarchists in this thread. *Furious* that anyone would *dare* disrespect the monarchy. That's the kind of people that many of our police are, sadly. They're not all right-wing psychos or anything, but they aren't exactly the most liberal and forward-thinking either.
It's beyond that as they apparently were heckling Andrew for being a nonce which is pretty much confirmed as someone who isn't a nonce doesn't give several million pounds in hush money to an alleged minor victim. When one rapes children, being poorly received in public should be par for the course. That person was just doing a public service for the people in Scotland in letting them know not to leave their children unattended while Andrew is in the country.
He shouted "Not my King" on the Day this King was declared. Reasonable and fitting moment.
In fact, I would even go to say that there is no more fitting moment than that day.
I feel like you’re talking about why you personally disagree with what he’s doing. Which is fine, you do sort of have a point and it’s an opinion many people share. But I feel like there’s a massive gulf between what you disagree with and what someone should be arrested for, and in a free country this isn’t one of those things.
Including toxic Andrew in the procession is the trashing thing that is disturbing the Queen's State Funeral. Andrew is very toxic and has been banned from military and public roles and privileges. Put him under Public View is challenging the general Public notion of adequate propriety and that is what is causing a problem.
It's completely missing the point of OP. The concern isn't about monarchy per se, it's that people can get arrested at all for the most vague things.
Even if he was arrested for life he would likely be allowed to go to his mother's funeral
God forbid someone call a pervert a pervert anymore
[удалено]
Having met many Glaswegians in my life, all I can say is the police must be busy!
> the police must ~~be busy~~ have a [bussy](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bussy)!
No you just make an enemy for life
Sure are a contentious people.
That's it, you've made an enemy for life!
Isn't the hate crime bill there to offer harsher punishment for people who commit an offence purely because of the other person race/gender/age/disability/sexuality etc? Its not making it illegal to hate something. I.e if someone commits a crime against someone they get x punishment, but if they commit the same crime purely because the other person was gay then the punishment is more severe? I believe England also has separate offences for racially aggravated crimes etc.
Just want to point out that in Scotland the nationalist (and often republican) government passed laws that specifically target “offensive language”, effectively curbing free speech. Now the same people are angry they can’t say fuck the monarchy during a funeral procession because it’s offensive. This is a classic r/leopardsatemyface
In Scotland we have something called "Breach of Peace", which is what the police charge you with if they can't prove you have committed an actual crime. The criteria are so vague that you can basically be arrested for being annoying – you merely have to, in the opinion of a police officer, "cause alarm to ordinary people and threaten serious disturbance to the community".
"Help, help, I'm being repressed!"
Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
"Bloody PEASANT!"
A totally sane, 21st-century democracy. Nothing to see here...
[удалено]
[удалено]
Alexa, play "God Save the Queen". No, not that one. The [good](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqrAPOZxgzU) version.
Sex Pistols? Yup, Sex Pistols
You got a permit for that dissenting opinion?!
Oi mate, you got a loicense for that permit?
UK moment
Scotland moment
The thing I wonder is how can there be kings and queens in 21'st century? How can anyone be proud of being a subject?
So I live in the UK and have met people who proudly proclaimed that they LOVE the Queen and being her subject. I tried asking questions. Still don't get it.
I mean, people say they love their president constantly. Figure heads are just a prime subject for projection. I'd rather the Brits projected their love on the monarchy so they can focus in on throwing shit on the political leadership and elite that actually holds power.
[удалено]
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/pregnant-black-activist-serving-4-years-protest-comments-rcna46453
ah just imagine the headlines if this was russia
I'm pretty sure the monarchy doesn't worry about rising energy bills after all the taxpayers pay it
Because rulers must rule and questioning is unacceptable
[https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1569357409382182912](https://twitter.com/Fhamiltontimes/status/1569357409382182912) Essentially the Met have said that the person holding "Not my King" was actually asked to move away from the gates to allow vehicles to get in and out. Not exactly North Korea is it?
This is one which is concerning, and legally incorrect. https://twitter.com/paulpowlesland/status/1569350005462564865
Not a good time to the new guy in the office asked to run out to WH Smith's for more printer paper. "'Ello, 'Ello. What's going on here then? Planning a few treasonous signs are we, Son?"
Cool, what about the others? >A 22-year-old woman was arrested on Sunday outside St Giles cathedral in Edinburgh, where the Queen’s coffin was due to lie until Monday, for holding up a sign that said “fuck imperialism, abolish monarchy.” And the guy who just yelled something while walking past another memorial?
She was arrested for the "fuck" in the sign rather than the anti-monarch message. In Scotland at least swear words on signs like that would fall either under either the vague hate speech laws or the vague disturbance of peace laws. Other protesters with her didn't have "fuck" written on their signs and weren't arrested. These are seem almost purposefully designed to be as vague as possible and really need to be more clearly defined.
Fuck these laws.
No way!! You're telling me that a news publication might be lying to us? I am shocked
Username checks out.
I hope all monarchies will be dissolved soon. I don’t understand why anyone in Europe cheers for monarchies. Like wth? Monarchs were the people ho made your ancestors slaves.
Our laws are poorly worded and open for abuse by law enforcement. What is strange here is that the police are behaving in this way? given that the police in the UK rarely do anything for real crime, why are they choosing, or being leant upon to do this?
This is for everyone explaining to me in this subreddits that “the UK is a monarchy but we invented the parliamentary democracy”.
Well here's one problem america doesn't have
One problem america doesn't have *so far*.
The monarchy is simply proving that there is a good reason to protest against monarchy…
Yeah, this one is troubling. Used to be that you could call out anti-monarchist statements in the street and, you know, it was regarded as free speech. Also, such sentiments weren't regarded as extreme. There was a well understood anti-monarchist section of the public who regularly showed up at various events. The idea that these people merit arrest is both ludicrous and appalling. And the very icy tip of a slippery slope. For shame, UK police. For shame.
This is like the 10th time this same story got posted
Now you know how the rest of us feel whenever something happens in the U.S. and we all have to hear about it ad infinitum.
We also got hundreds of almost identical articles mourning her death.
really? I didn't see any of 'em. Pardon me.
I haven't seen anything either. So thank you for posting.
Me neither. This is the first one I see.
Not for protesting the monarchy, no.
From the people I saw they seemed to be arrested for insulting people at a funeral. If someone was shouting insults at me while I bury my grandma I would want them to be removed too.
If you were in Andrew's position, nobody would be shouting abuse at you at your grandma's funeral, because you simply would not be there. You would be serving time in prison, because you would not have the millions to settle out of Court. Andrew deserved all the heckling he got today. He can attend his Mother's Funeral, just get him in through a discreet entrance, quietly to avoid provoking public anger. To put him right under Public View is rubbing the Public nose in it and people are getting pissed off about it.
Also, the funeral is on Monday.
It's not a funeral. It's a public display that Andrew chose to be a part of. It is a literal parade.
Prisoners are allowed temporary leave to attend close family members' funerals
But Andrew isn't in prison and hasn't been for being a pedo
That’s not really the point.
Je suis Charlie, but only when convenient.
King Charlie the third.
1. Her funeral hasn't happened yet. Nobody has been arrested at her funeral. 2. Your grandma presumably wasn't the *unelected head of state*. I believe in representative democracy, as you enjoy in France and most of the developed world. That's not the same as a private citizen dying. 3. These people were not shouting insults. Not at all. Please read about it, they were not grossly offensive. 4. These people were not removed, they were arrested. It's not the same. 5. No members of her family were present when these people were arrested.
If what you say is right then I agree with you that it was excessive.
Maybe you should read the article first.
Every word he said is correct! And it's nice of you to say what you said so take my up vote 😃
points 3 and 5 are wrong
I'd also add that the bundling up of the Queen's 10 day death tour with Charles' accession as King is being used to shut down any protest or even discussion about the future of the monarchy in the UK. The chorus of 'this is not the time' deeming republican sentiments and protest as rude or insulting really are missing this crucial point.
If you don't want someone to protest your presence, don't be a creepy nonce and parade down the high street of the capital. Andrew should not have been involved in that parade at all.
When it comes to huge political figures who represent our country, I think it’s fair to protest. Some may say it’s disrespectful but law should not be involved at all
Did your grandma spend 12,000,000 for legal aid to a pedo?
12m of public funds*
A woman was arrested for holding a sign that said "Abolish the Monarchy", who was she insulting? Besides, if people were causing a disturbance you could have them removed instead of arresting them
Apparently she was arrested because one of her signs said “fuck imperialism” which is illegal because she used the word “fuck” on a sign in public. Not saying I agree with it, but at least get the facts straight
it's illegal to say the word "fuck" in public?
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/5
Someone was arrested for holding a sign asking "who elected him?" A legitimate thought provoking question, nobody is insulted, and what does he get? Put to jail? Is this fucking Moscow or what
Fair enough.. but if you were guilty in the public eye as being a paedo and that grandma covered it up, you might just have to deal with it
>If someone was shouting insults at me while I bury my grandma I would want them to be removed too. Then they should have a private funeral on private property and leave everyone else the hell alone lol. When you choose to make a production of it and march the procession through the streets, people have the right to shout at you.
>for insulting people at a funeral If it's a public funeral funded by public money, I think the public deserve the right to be there and treat it however they'd like.
I think everyone is allowed to protest a new ruler being imposed onto them. Have an election if you think this is the desire of the people. In this moment nobody asked and i hope a lot more would protest. I hope everyone would protest. I am not a servant. I am not a subject. We don't need them.
[удалено]
Well they British like to bow to their royal overlords so why not?
Lots of us don’t like them at all
You could simp for the global corporate oligarchy like real peasants.
He worships the FTSE 100
Well don't tell them that! By doing that you could breach the peace.
I do not care.
What a democracy...
Quick peasants rise up against the monarchy.
time to burn that mother fucker down lads
Looks like you have a government that doesn't fear its people.
this is a fucking joke, what in the fuck. at this point im down to kick that fucking nonce out
I'm no fan of royalty or it's history However I think it's futile to stand there with a bit of cardboard with not my king on it surrounded by people who are grieving it's going to cause an argument so the police are going to remove the individuals 1 for their own safety and 2 to keep the peace. I'm sure they was taken to a station given a cup of tea and released a few hours later ?
More likely they are being arrested for breach of the peace. Actually it's not even that, it just seems they have been told to leave by the police and that's understandable to do that.
They have been charged with breach of the peace which is a criminal offense in Scotland that can lead to imprisonment: https://www.thenational.scot/news/21319718.protester-arrested-king-charless-proclamation-edinburgh-charged/
I'm British and anti-Monarchy. But timing your protest to the Queen's coffin procession seems kind of crass. Certainly doesn't help the Republican cause. Protest the King's coronation. Better PR.
Well in Portugal the republicans actually shot the king and his son so a bit more hardcore than protesting at the funeral.