FedditUK to criminalise protests outside homes of public officials under new law
www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-criminalise-protest…
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/52394067
Britain will introduce a new criminal offence banning protests outside the homes of elected officials, judges and local councillors
24 Comments
Comments from other communities
mjrBecause they feel this is more of a priority than climate change, the cost of living, air pollution, …?
I wonder how many areas don’t have some local councillor’s home in them, given that most of England still has county, district and town/parish councils, each with between 12 and 90 councillors. This law could easily have some unforseen consequences.
talkingpumpkin
Destide
huppakeeThough i’m against criminalizing protesters, i do think people who do bad things on their job also deserve a private life. If they break the law they should be brought to court obviously, but if they act within the bounds of the rule of law protest should be against the movement or the system that allows this bad individual that does the bad thing. I’ll get some downvotes for saying this, but i believe we should not only be decent to people who do things we like, but to literally everyone.
but if they act within the bounds of the rule of law protest should be against the movement or the system that allows this bad individual that does the bad thing
This is how it should be in a just world, but we do not live in one; it falls apart when you realise the rule of law is not a reflection of morality or ethics, and can be entirely corrupted by criminals with whom the rule of law only exists to use as a means of controlling and oppressing others.
I say fuck em. If you choose to be a politician, you should not be free from the consequences of your own actions, especially corruption. In fact, any corruption should land you in prison for life… but again, we do not live in a just world, and the only reason we even have basic human rights at all is because they were violently protested for, and 99% of the violence came from the state.
This is how it should be in a just world, but we do not live in one
I agree, but if we as people do whatever the fuck we want the politicians won’t have a good example of how they’re supposed to treat people.
and the only reason we even have basic human rights at all is because they were violently protested for, and 99% of the violence came from the state.
We the people do have allies within the state, although there are plenty of places were those allies are kicked out as soon as they do some good, not all states are an enemy of the people. Again, i too believe we should uphold politicians to high standards and we should praise them without good reason, but the least we can do is treat them as decently as we’d like to be treated ourselves. But i guess if i was living in a place where national politics was a mess like the UK or US, i’d be less willing to defend the basterds that are breaking ‘my’ democracy too. Not judging anyone in that regard.
Though i’m against criminalizing protesters, i do think people who do bad things on their job also deserve a private life.
If public officials don’t like how they’re being treated by the public, they can easily remedy the situation by *fucking resigning*.
Otherwise, they deserve no quarter and I have no sympathy at all.
Doesn’t that just lead to rule by the arrogant and insensitive?
Class warfare is alive and well in the UK, the wealthy continue to oppress through state violence while they outlaw peaceful protest. If you outlaw the peaceful way that just leaves the other thing.
That’s why they spent decades running the “war on terror” angle. To make the working class believe violence against oppressors is never justified.
Meanwhile the government has a monopoly on violence, and uses it whenever the political class, oligarchs, or corporations are threatened.
“Why does it seem like the ones who have everything have nothing inside?”
Because all of their self-worth is derived from being served by others.
Once you take away their servants, they have nothing to offer and they know it.
It’s always the people in power who say the time for violence is over.
Nevermind how they got that power. Don’t think about that.
So all the protests will now have to be held inside?
Inside your own house, yes. As long as it’s quiet.
UK, do you have to keep proving that the US came from you?
How close qualifies as outside their home, anyway?
Also: what counts as “protesting”?
if I had to guess? 200 miles, at least (CBP range in USA from borders*)
The fuck is this? V for Vendetta?
Airstrip One, right on schedule.
So you want people to protest inside the homes of public officials, got it.
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.
Nationality does not apply to snowflakes.
England is rapidly becoming the reason why every nation mocks them.
You need a loicense for that.
You’re thinking in terms of pro-palestine protests, which explains the backlash. Now imagine it’s the opposite, and Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (Tommy Robinson) and his chud squad is protesting outside the house of an LGBQT ethnic MP because they decide to vote against selling weapons to Israel. How would you feel about this law then?
So long as it is actually a peaceful protest, I see no issue with them speaking their mind. You can disagree with someone’s politics, but it should not enable you to condemn their ability to express themselves. If however them protesting becomes violent, then I could agree with such a ban, but there would have to be a lenient definition on violent since otherwise it becomes easily susceptible to false flags.
The other groups who do this are animal rights and anti-abortionists. I think its for the best, yeah
You’re really going to group animal rights activists with forced-birthers?
This is actually good.
I don’t believe politicians that you disagree with should be threatened.
You make a fine subject.
what do you mean threatened? do you not believe politicians should be held accountable?