The Student Room Group

'Extreme' protest groups face ban under proposal

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2qv7425gvwo

Not sure, slippery slope here possibly
It's John Woodcock, former apologist for Erdogan's repression in Turkey, who was kicked out of Labour for being a sex pest, so unsurprising that he's become a willing advocate of Tory repression.
Restrictions on right to assembly? Sounds remarkably Russian.
Reply 3
Good. If they are committing acts that break the law there should be serious consequences. Criminal damage and stopping the passage of ambulances doesn't help their causes. What does trying to smash up a painting have to do with oil and gas licences or Palestine? Why should they get away with disrupting people's lives and livelihoods?
In theory it seems fair. Obviously the right peaceful protest should always be protected, but if the methods of protest start to become illegal (e.g. public disturbances, criminal damage, threats, violence etc.) then they shouldn't be allowed to go ahead.

I suppose the risk is that the definition of "extreme" won't be sufficiently clear, so these measures won't be applied consistently and might be used as a pretext to ban protest groups on the basis of whether or not one sides with the cause that they are protesting about.
My issue with this is that what gets defined as "extreme"? A part of me has the theory nowadays that anything that doesn't suit the intended narrative is labelled as "extreme" or "hateful" or in my personal experience you're told to "reconsider your tone/language/posting style/words" etc

I dislike the likes of Just Stop Oil and I believe that groups like Insulate Britain should be held to account and stopped/disbanded (because they blocked the M25) but I feel like this kind of policy opens the door to governments to label anything that they don't like as extreme or criminal then shut the protest down as a result.

Maybe I'm just being cynical though despite being someone who is for law and order.
Turns out the author of the report Lord Walney is a lobbyist for both fossil fuels and arms companies.
These groups are already breaking the law and even veering into terrorism.
The state has just chosen not to do anything about.
Original post by Talkative Toad
My issue with this is that what gets defined as "extreme"? A part of me has the theory nowadays that anything that doesn't suit the intended narrative is labelled as "extreme" or "hateful" or in my personal experience you're told to "reconsider your tone/language/posting style/words" etc
I dislike the likes of Just Stop Oil and I believe that groups like Insulate Britain should be held to account and stopped/disbanded (because they blocked the M25) but I feel like this kind of policy opens the door to governments to label anything that they don't like as extreme or criminal then shut the protest down as a result.
Maybe I'm just being cynical though despite being someone who is for law and order.

I believe that anyone should be able to protest about anything. But if it involves blocking ambulances or destroying paintings, this has gone too far and there should be serious consequences.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending