Current Affairs London Protests

[Charro]

Haha

Why do people insist on defending these bellends?

 

[COYBL25]

I see lots of shoppers breaking the law today

I doubt any will get fined or get 14 days in prison

maybe they will turn themselves in...

Don’t worry @davek knows who each and everyone of them is and they’ll be rounded up and sent to the re education camps in due course.

All resistance is futile.

 

[Barnfred 55]

This is basically the approach that has been taken for many people for many years yet here we are.

Do you not think there has been a lot of positive change in this country over the last 30/40 years mate?. There's still a lot to do, but that doesn't mean you can just discount the considerable progress that has already been made. I agree that change cannot come quickly enough, but the important thing is that momentum is maintained, and for that you need the majority of the population on board with the cause.

I remember as a young teenager going to a cricket match at Aigburth in the 70s between Lancs and Hampshire. Clive Lloyd hit an Andy Roberts bouncer for 6, and there were cries around the ground of get back on your jam jar, with accompanied laughter. It was a reference to the Robinsons jam jar label. There was a distinct party atmosphere and literally nobody there had any awareness that what was happening was fundamentally wrong, and the irony that Clive Lloyd, who made that shot, was a fellow countryman of Roberts was totally lost on them.

I'm not by any means suggesting that the job is done here because it clearly isn't. But the implication that we haven't made inroads into racism over many years is just wrong.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

Just been out to the supermarket and seen a guy who runs one of the cafes on the big square near me get done €750 by the police for serving without a mask.

That's one way to have people take it seriously.

 

[dead_soft]

I think for certain crimes it's impossible for a threshold to be set. Pedophiles, serial killers, serial rapists, terrorists - I simply don't think you can ever set a threshold where they'd be reasonably safe for release.

For others, the current parole system but with a much more robust and consistent sentencing system would be fine. John Worboys being released after just 10 years is absurd, as just one example - it just doesn't work as it stands.

So to answer your question succinctly - for some, no threshold will ever work, for others it needs to be quite a bit higher but can work.

What defines serial for you? Would they have previously been rehabilitated? If psychological evaluation deems them to be a danger should they stay in jail forever? If it then says they aren't a danger should they be freed?

 

[Papa Shango]

Do you not think there has been a lot of positive change in this country over the last 30/40 years mate?. There's still a lot to do, but that doesn't mean you can just discount the considerable progress that has already been made. I agree that change cannot come quickly enough, but the important thing is that momentum is maintained, and for that you need the majority of the population on board with the cause.

I remember as a young teenager going to a cricket match at Aigburth in the 70s between Lancs and Hampshire. Clive Lloyd hit an Andy Roberts bouncer for 6, and there were cries around the ground of get back on your jam jar, with accompanied laughter. It was a reference to the Robinsons jam jar label. There was a distinct party atmosphere and literally nobody there had any awareness that what was happening was fundamentally wrong, and the irony that Clive Lloyd, who made that shot, was a fellow countryman of Roberts was totally lost on them.

I'm not by any means suggesting that the job is done here because it clearly isn't. But the implication that we haven't made inroads into racism over many years is just wrong.

Tough to tell really. I don't think its as blatant as it used to be but I also find that there is a bit more hatred in the people who are that way inclined.

I think a lot of racism these days is far more veiled because other people will pull people up on using what I would call route one racism.

Sadly I just think some people will always be that way inclined. Doesn't mean people should stop trying to fix it of course.

 

[Catfish Blues]

I don't think anyone thinks he intended to wee on the memorial.

And with the other factors involved, namely getting absolutely smashed outside where there are no available toilets and joining a violent, racist, far right demo, he deserves the sentence.

I see blokes taking a slash* in the street pre and post match most games, should they all be locked up for a fortnight ?

I think it's fair to say that this bloke is a knobhead, and has probably got away with doing worse in the past, but, if he didn't actually know about the monument, and was, in his own head, just taking a piss by a pillar, this does smack of populism. If he was deliberately pissing there because of the memorial then he deserves his sentence, but there'll be plenty of posters on here who've urinated in public places before now, and plenty more will go on to do it in the future.



*to be fair, I do make a habit of looking for them

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I see blokes taking a slash* in the street pre and post match most games, should they all be locked up for a fortnight ?

I think it's fair to say that this bloke is a knobhead, and has probably got away with doing worse in the past, but, if he didn't actually know about the monument, and was, in his own head, just taking a piss by a pillar, this does smack of populism. If he was deliberately pissing there because of the memorial then he deserves his sentence, but there'll be plenty of posters on here who've urinated in public places before now, and plenty more will go on to do it in the future.



*to be fair, I do make a habit of looking for them

He was pissing right in front of the Palace of Westminster. It's hardly like it was some pillar in the middle of nowhere, it's about 5 metres from the front gate! I dare say if he was caught pissing up against the front gate of Buckingham Palace a similar sentence would have been passed down, monument or not.

The fact that he was pissing up against a monument to someone defending the Palace from a terrorist attack, and therefore presumably something the knobhead would support, merely showed up the absurdity of the whole brainless mob.

 

[dead_soft]

I see blokes taking a slash* in the street pre and post match most games, should they all be locked up for a fortnight ?

I think it's fair to say that this bloke is a knobhead, and has probably got away with doing worse in the past, but, if he didn't actually know about the monument, and was, in his own head, just taking a piss by a pillar, this does smack of populism. If he was deliberately pissing there because of the memorial then he deserves his sentence, but there'll be plenty of posters on here who've urinated in public places before now, and plenty more will go on to do it in the future.



*to be fair, I do make a habit of looking for them

It's a rank act - learn to control your bladder or find somewhere covered to pee (that doesn't include an alleyway) - so yeah, it's a public health hazard and makes the place unpleasant so yep, fines or jail sentences if you really are desperate to piss fully viewable in public.

 

[Catfish Blues]

He was pissing right in front of the Palace of Westminster. It's hardly like it was some pillar in the middle of nowhere, it's about 5 metres from the front gate! I dare say if he was caught pissing up against the front gate of Buckingham Palace a similar sentence would have been passed down, monument or not.

The fact that he was pissing up against a monument to someone defending the Palace from a terrorist attack, and therefore presumably something the knobhead would support, merely showed up the absurdity of the whole brainless mob.

It's a rank act - learn to control your bladder or find somewhere covered to pee (that doesn't include an alleyway) - so yeah, it's a public health hazard and makes the place unpleasant so yep, fines or jail sentences if you really are desperate to piss fully viewable in public.

Fine him then, no real problem with that, but if we bang up everyone who's had a piss in public then we're going to need a fair few more cells.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Fine him then, no real problem with that, but if we bang up everyone who's had a piss in public then we're going to need a fair few more cells.

Seems there's a degree of discretion allowed by the law in terms of the response to such acts, and I'm sure had he peed behind a tree in St James Park he would have had less bother than peeing up against the national parliament building, which perhaps elevated it from being a bit gross to one of vandalism.

 

[Tubey]

What defines serial for you? Would they have previously been rehabilitated? If psychological evaluation deems them to be a danger should they stay in jail forever? If it then says they aren't a danger should they be freed?

Serial as in repeated acts. No, not dependent on whether they'd been rehabilitated before. Psychological evaluations aren't flawless and the risk of failure is so high that that's why I'm saying for certain crimes no threshold can be good enough.

 

[Catfish Blues]

Seems there's a degree of discretion allowed by the law in terms of the response to such acts, and I'm sure had he peed behind a tree in St James Park he would have had less bother than peeing up against the national parliament building, which perhaps elevated it from being a bit gross to one of vandalism.

Oh, that's true to a certain extent Bruce, but there does seem to be an element of distraction being used by the government here to chase a conviction and sentence on, what was, at the end if the day, a very minor offence.

Granted, he came forward and admitted what he'd done, so the government didn't have to waste any police time on it, but at a time when the governments main response to BLM has been to launch yet another soul searching commission on racism, the cynic in me thinks they were happy enough to see a bit of a distraction.

 

[Lelouch]

The fella who urinated on the Keith Palmer memorial has been given a 14 day sentence.

Justice.

"Prosecutor Michael Mallon said Banks, a Tottenham Hotspur fan, was in central London to "protect statues", but admitted he did not know which statues."

Man jailed for urinating at PC Keith Palmer memorial during protest

Andrew Banks had drunk 16 pints and was in central London to "protect statues", a court hears.

www.bbc.co.uk

how do you unironically consume 16 pints.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

how do you unironically consume 16 pints.

Considering it seems unlikely that any pubs would be open to actually serve pints of beer, especially in that part of town, that would equate to over 20 cans of beer. Does seem less of a morally-driven mission to protect monuments as it was a chance to have a piss up with his mates and crack some heads.