Is it worrying that EDL members freedoms are restricted

[moon23]

Interesting article here from SPIKED

banned from attending or helping to organise any demonstration, meeting or gathering held by his political organisation or even visiting its website for 10 years. In addition, he was banned from travelling by train anywhere in the UK and from entering a mosque, meeting room, school or cultural centre.

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/10290/

What do people think, obviously the EDL are repulsive but this is draconian punishments being handed down to their members.

 

[butchersapron]

I think the lib-dems are cunts.

 

[butchersapron]

..and of course it's ridiculous.

 

[_angel_]

How can you ban someone from looking at a website?

 

[DotCommunist]

The EDL want to exercise the freedom to beat muslims up- so they and 'ideologically neutral' spiked can chomp a fat one

 

[Fedayn]

This bit is interesting "But while he reportedly scared the family’s children, there is no suggestion he used violence in the attack. He didn’t throw punches at these individuals; only words. If we hope to live in an open and free society, feeling free to say what we think - even if it causes offence to some - is of primary importance." In Hayes eyes Overton has the right to racially abuse the family, as long as he doesn't use violence...

 

[stethoscope]

It'll be the Lib Dems next, etc.

 

[Das Uberdog]

that despite the latent threat of force was no doubt present if anyone in that family dared speak up.

it's not the fact he got done for abusing a family that's worrying, just the political nature of his punishment.

 

[moon23]

that despite the latent threat of force was no doubt present if anyone in that family dared speak up.

it's not the fact he got done for abusing a family that's worrying, just the political nature of his punishment.

Quite, he should have faced some punishment, but curtailing someone's political activity because they make unpleasant comments is totalitarian.

 

[Fedayn]

that despite the latent threat of force was no doubt present if anyone in that family dared speak up.

it's not the fact he got done for abusing a family that's worrying, just the political nature of his punishment.

I agree, but the idea that you have to use that latent threat to abuse a family is a 'freedom of speech' i've yet to see justified.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

This domain is blocked. Site blocked. www.spiked-online.com is not allowed on this network.

This site was categorized in: Adult Themes

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Quite, he should have faced some punishment, but curtailing someone's political activity because they make unpleasant comments is totalitarian.

What about if his political activity consisted in part in encouraging others to do what he had done not only at the station but on other previous occasions? You need to question your placing of absolutist abstractions, such as freedom of speech, above the lived needs of people; in this instance the need not to be racially abused and threatened (the kids definitely felt threatened which was why they were clinging to their parents). It's only by 'leaving aside the specifics of the case for a minute' that both you and Spiked can feign feign anti-establishment outrage.

Louis MacNeice

 

[moon23]

What about if his political activity consisted in part in encouraging others to do what he had done not only at the station but on other previous occasions? You need to question your placing of absolutist abstractions, such as freedom of speech, above the lived needs of people; in this instance the need not to be racially abused and threatened (the kids definitely felt threatened which was why they were clinging to their parents). It's only by 'leaving aside the specifics of the case for a minute' that both you and Spiked can feign feign anti-establishment outrage.

Louis MacNeice

Are you happy with his punishment?

 

[butchersapron]

Are you happy with his punishment?

Why not respond to what Louis said - the question he asked, instead of showing that he's right with your absolutist demand.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Quite, he should have faced some punishment, but curtailing someone's political activity because they make unpleasant comments is totalitarian.

His comments weren't "unpleasant", they were "illegal" as noted by his pleading guilty to the offence of using racially abusive language.

 

[frogwoman]

Quite, he should have faced some punishment, but curtailing someone's political activity because they make unpleasant comments is totalitarian.

Do you know what totalitarian means?

 

[bi0boy]

Do we know that he didn't opt for this as opposed to a short custodial sentence for example?

 

[likesfish]

would you consider calling a copper a cunt after a demo.
be punished by ten year ban from demos banned from urban and banned from helping organize demos.

much as the bloke is a cunt and the org he belongs a bunch of scum that's an excessive punishment.
for shouting abuse at people.

 

[goldenecitrone]

Are you happy with his punishment?

No, I'm not. He should have had a sharpened stick hammered up through his anus and out through his gaping mouth. Then the stick should have been planted in the ground in Luton town centre as a warning to other cretins.

 

[moon23]

Do you know what totalitarian means?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/totalitarianism

Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed:

 

[frogwoman]

The truth is that every state, ever, has locked up people for "unpleasant words".

 

[butchersapron]

She asked do you know what it means. Do you? Your sloppy use suggest that you don't.

 

[moon23]

would you consider calling a copper a cunt after a demo.
be punished by ten year ban from demos banned from urban and banned from helping organize demos.

much as the bloke is a cunt and the org he belongs a bunch of scum that's an excessive punishment.
for shouting abuse at people.

Quite, or what if you went to the recent Lib Dem protest and called Moon23 a cunt etc...

 

[LiamO]

perhaps someone who is in favour of this sentence could explain how the sentence prohibits him in any way from engaging in the same anti-social behaviour away from edl demos?

This is wrong. He will now become a celebrity 'victim' of 'political correctness' to his kind.

By all means prosecute him for what he did. But a ban on political activity?

This a dangerous precedent and follows a pattern.

In the 1980's it was convicted footie fans who first had their liberties clipped. Being banned from grounds or their vicinity; banned from away games; stopped en masse and either arrested or sent home. No one made a big deal about it cos it was only 'soccer hooligan scum'.

Then they did it to the Miners and their supporters during the strike. Too late to speak out, the precedent was well set.

No doubt Mubarak would have liked a few laws and Courts like this in the last couple of months.

 

[frogwoman]

perhaps someone who is in favour of this sentence could explain how the sentence prohibits him in any way from engaging in the same anti-social behaviour away from edl demos?

This is wrong. He will now become a celebrity 'victim' of 'political correctness' to his kind.

By all means prosecute him for what he did. But a ban on political activity?

This a dangerous precedent and follows a pattern.

In the 1980's it was convicted footie fans who first had their liberties clipped. Being banned from grounds or their vicinity; banned from away games; stopped en masse and either arrested or sent home. No one made a big deal about it cos it was only 'soccer hooligan scum'.

Then they did it to the Miners and their supporters during the strike. Too late to speak out, the precedent was well set.

No doubt Mubarak would have liked a few laws and Courts like this in the last couple of months.

Yup.

 

[moon23]

She asked do you know what it means. Do you? Your sloppy use suggest that you don't.

Yes I understand it's use which is why I called the excessive restrictions on this person's life and freedom of movement and expression of political thought totalitarian.

 

[Fruitloop]

Would you rather they were locked up?

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Are you happy with his punishment?

You're the one dolling out the hyperbole that this is totalitarian: i.e. we are in a situation where political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life. So what punishment do you think a serial racist offender should face? What punshment do you think would impact on someone who organises and promotes an increasingly overtly racist poltical group, and deter others from following his threatening and abusive example?

Louis MacNeice

 

[moon23]

perhaps someone who is in favour of this sentence could explain how the sentence prohibits him in any way from engaging in the same anti-social behaviour away from edl demos?

This is wrong. He will now become a celebrity 'victim' of 'political correctness' to his kind.

By all means prosecute him for what he did. But a ban on political activity?

This a dangerous precedent and follows a pattern.

In the 1980's it was convicted footie fans who first had their liberties clipped. Being banned from grounds or their vicinity; banned from away games; stopped en masse and either arrested or sent home. No one made a big deal about it cos it was only 'soccer hooligan scum'.

Then they did it to the Miners and their supporters during the strike. Too late to speak out, the precedent was well set.

No doubt Mubarak would have liked a few laws and Courts like this in the last couple of months.

Top post

 

[LiamO]

No, I'm not. He should have had a sharpened stick hammered up through his anus and out through his gaping mouth. Then the stick should have been planted in the ground in Luton town centre as a warning to other cretins.

Funny how, as usual, those calling for extreme violence would be least capable of administering it.