Not The Politics Thread.

[Sampson]

25 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Well, for a start, i think the police have enough on their plate without levering superglued nutters off the street and I think you'd be pretty unlucky to be carrying a tube of superglue for your child's homework(or several tubes as would be required to properly glue yourself to the road) whilst walking past a protest and then end up in prison, i mean, it's not going to happen is it.

You're missing the point - these are permanent changes in the law. Just because the police are short on numbers right now due to cuts and austerity in austerity in 2021, does not mean that will always be the case in 5, 10, 20 or 50 years time. Just because the police have other things on their plate in 2021 and won't bother with this does not mean that will be the case in 2031 - if, let's say, protests become a more regular occurrence due to a government abusing their powers.

Maybe you don't think Insulate Britain or their tactics are a worthwhile cause, fair enough - but for example, being in the vicinity of a place where people are likely to peaceful protest people linking arms against draconian government policy is just as much covered by this legislation as Insulate Britain blocking ambulances by gluing themselves to the road.

This is a massive, permanent extension of police powers, a massive, permanent extension of state powers, that opens the door for all manners of abuses and further feature creep and usage creep.

A good example is the police being given the power to search people's cars without a permit in the US during prohibition era in the 1930s, which spread to the rest of the western world due to fear of prohibition and importing etc. - still the only private property currently allowed to be searched without a permit in most western countries are motor vehicles. I hate to do the "friend of my 2rd cousin removed anecdote" but I know of a colleague of a friend who was a Muslim in London who earnt good money in Computer Networking, who allegedly said he used to get stopped and have his car searched by police several times a year just because he was a black muslim who drove a nice car and worse a nice suit, I very much doubt he is alone in this.

These laws stick around for long after we are gone and get used for all manner of things that we cannot predict they will be used for due to changes in technology and the like.

Edited 13 December 2021 by Sampson

[yorkie1999]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

You're missing the point - these are permanent changes in the law. Just because the police are short on numbers right now due to cuts and austerity in austerity in 2021, does not mean that will always be the case in 5, 10, 20 or 50 years time. Just because the police have other things on their plate in 2021 and won't bother with this does not mean that will be the case in 2031 - if, let's say, protests become a more regular occurrence due to a government abusing their powers.

Maybe you don't think Insulate Britain or their tactics are a worthwhile cause, fair enough - but for example, being in the vicinity of a place where people are likely to peaceful protest people linking arms against draconian government policy is just as much covered by this legislation as Insulate Britain blocking ambulances by gluing themselves to the road.

This is a massive, permanent extension of police powers, a massive, permanent extension of state powers, that opens the door for all manners of abuses and further feature creep and usage creep.

A good example is the police being given the power to search people's cars without a permit in the US during prohibition era in the 1930s, which spread to the rest of the western world due to fear of prohibition and importing etc. - still the only private property currently allowed to be searched without a permit in most western countries are motor vehicles. I hate to do the "friend of my 2rd cousin removed anecdote" but I know of a colleague of a friend who was a Muslim in London who earnt good money in Computer Networking, who allegedly said he used to get stopped and have his car searched by police several times a year just because he was a black muslim who drove a nice car and worse a nice suit, I very much doubt he is alone in this.

These laws stick around for long after we are gone and get used for all manner of things that we cannot predict they will be used for due to changes in technology and the like.

No, the point is that all this started because the police were trying to protect insulate Britain activists from being attacked by angry drivers on the m25 because that’s what they do, protect people. Let’s take away the police and what happens, demonstrators getting a kicking, that’s what happens. So, how do you stop that problem, we’re not going to insulate every home in the U.K. are we, reason being, half the homes in the U.K. are falling down and a bit of insulation ain’t going to make any difference and we’re not going knock the houses down and rebuild, although most of the houses round filbert street need blitzing. So, we’re left with one choice, get rid of insulate Britain for their own good. Ffs, the joint leader of insulate Britain can’t even insulate his own home! What would you say to someone like that, who is a full time electrician, how about ffs mate, go and do a few hours extra and get someone in to insulate your flat, for 200 quid.

[Sampson]

45 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

No, the point is that all this started because the police were trying to protect insulate Britain activists from being attacked by angry drivers on the m25 because that’s what they do, protect people. Let’s take away the police and what happens, demonstrators getting a kicking, that’s what happens. So, how do you stop that problem, we’re not going to insulate every home in the U.K. are we, reason being, half the homes in the U.K. are falling down and a bit of insulation ain’t going to make any difference and we’re not going knock the houses down and rebuild, although most of the houses round filbert street need blitzing. So, we’re left with one choice, get rid of insulate Britain for their own good. Ffs, the joint leader of insulate Britain can’t even insulate his own home! What would you say to someone like that, who is a full time electrician, how about ffs mate, go and do a few hours extra and get someone in to insulate your flat, for 200 quid.

Mate, again, this isn't the point at all. You're massively focused on Insulate Britain and that isn't what's going on here! Most of this stuff has nothing to do with blocking roads to not let ambulances through or whatever. Most of this was proposed 2 years ago, long before that was a story only a few months ago.

The legislation and law are very black and white, they are not "well we'll only use it in these specific cases" and these are permanent, legal changes to police powers and state powers that go way beyond the usage of the one very specific case you mention. 

You can argue that the reason they were initially talked about and proposed was because of Insulate Britain (which it wasn't) - but again, this is permeant legislation that goes way beyond people blocking roads and says very wide-ranging things that have nothing to do with blocking roads - such as about stop and search powers of people who police do not even need to have suspicion of, people voluntarily linking arms with more than 1 other person, the ability for police to ban or take part people from organising any other type of protest in the future (which includes their ability to regulate their internet usage), imprisonment of up to 51 weeks for protesters.

I forgot to mention it also gives the Home Secretary the power to decide what is considered "a public nuisance" via statutory instruments which don't need to pass through parliament, so it essentially gives the Home Secretary the power to shut down any protest they don't like. Theresa May even talked out against this part of the bill in parliament but afaik it hasn't been changed.

It's not "well who has time to really implement this" - if someone prosecutes you for an entirely different situation in 20 years time protesting say, a decision of the UK going to war (similar to the mass protests against the Iraq War in 2003) , be they police or private, the courts have to go by these very black and white and permeant laws, there is no "this was designed for Insulate Britain solely" get out here. The law and courts are very technical and black and white, they don't deal in "this was for Insulate Britain only".

Edited 13 December 2021 by Sampson

[Buce]

 

So, all these Tories planning to vote against Covid restrictions on the grounds of infringement of civil liberties.

 

Can we assume they'll be voting against the govt's Human Rights reforms?

 

Thought not.

[Facecloth]

34 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

So, all these Tories planning to vote against Covid restrictions on the grounds of infringement of civil liberties.

 

Can we assume they'll be voting against the govt's Human Rights reforms?

 

Thought not.

Pretend they care about our civil liberties, whilst simultaneously trying to take many of them away. 

 

Faux libertarians. When it comes to people's civil liberties and rights they have no issue taking away people rights to live and work across Europe, or the crime and sentencing Bill, or the right to protest, your right to protest what the government are doing.

 

The reason they don't care is because these are changes to law that are unlikely to touch them and their family. They are unlikely to struggle to get a visa to work or travel abroad, they are unlikely to protest against the Tory government. When you talk about taking those rights off normal people they don't care about liberties, but as soon as it affect them, something as slight as wearing a mask in a shop they are up in arms about having their liberties taken away. They are so transparent.

[Footballwipe]

47 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

So, all these Tories planning to vote against Covid restrictions on the grounds of infringement of civil liberties.

 

Can we assume they'll be voting against the govt's Human Rights reforms?

 

Thought not.

One might cost votes with core Tory support. The other will get waved through with consummate ease and the aforementioned core Tory support doesn't care about suppressing the right to protest.

 

Almost as if they're serving their own needs. Almost.

[Finnaldo]

17 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Now he just has to keep his nose infront for another 871 days

Thats a very good point. It’s time to prove why you’re a better leader whilst Boris is in the gutter, being a protest vote means naff all when the Tories inevitably bin Boris off and rebrand. 

[Górnik Leicester]

1 hour ago, Facecloth said:

Pretend they care about our civil liberties, whilst simultaneously trying to take many of them away. 

 

Faux libertarians. When it comes to people's civil liberties and rights they have no issue taking away people rights to live and work across Europe, or the crime and sentencing Bill, or the right to protest, your right to protest what the government are doing.

 

The reason they don't care is because these are changes to law that are unlikely to touch them and their family. They are unlikely to struggle to get a visa to work or travel abroad, they are unlikely to protest against the Tory government. When you talk about taking those rights off normal people they don't care about liberties, but as soon as it affect them, something as slight as wearing a mask in a shop they are up in arms about having their liberties taken away. They are so transparent.

Marcus Fysh MP is one who has been all over the media in regards to the so-called "vaccine passports", stating that "we are not a 'papers, please' society". Yet, he happily has voted for changes so that, in order for someone to vote, they'll need to be asked for "papers, please".

 

Never known such a hypocritical bunch.

[Facecloth]

1 minute ago, Górnik Leicester said:

Marcus Fysh MP is one who has been all over the media in regards to the so-called "vaccine passports", stating that "we are not a 'papers, please' society". Yet, he happily has voted for changes so that, in order for someone to vote, they'll need to be asked for "papers, please".

 

Never known such a hypocritical bunch.

Oh yeah, voters ID, forgot about that.

[leicsmac]

11 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Oh yeah, voters ID, forgot about that.

Taking a leaf from their more extreme counterparts across the pond on the finer methods of voter suppression.

[What the Fuchs?]

3 hours ago, Buce said:

 

So, all these Tories planning to vote against Covid restrictions on the grounds of infringement of civil liberties.

 

Can we assume they'll be voting against the govt's Human Rights reforms?

 

Thought not.

They are authoritarians, many of the bills and rhetoric they spew border on fascism with no exaggeration - this is why it scares me how so many people are blinded by the Tory supporting press enough to say “there’s no alternative”. We are literally having our rights and quality of life stripped away by an authoritarian populist government committed to removing accountability, modern freedoms and enriching themselves and their friends. We look more and more like we are governed by the Republicans in the US every day, and let’s face it a lot of the anti democratic, anti rights, anti immigrant bile is reminiscent of Germany in the early 1930s. Anyone who is still supportive of what this government has been doing to destroy your rights, never mind the corruption and ignoring of its own rules while laughing at you behind your back, is as bad as they are, because if they get their legislative way this country will become a one party police state, where all the power is at the top, none for you and me to protest against the government, or even to challenge the government in court. Everything they do they calculate as keeping themselves in power indefinitely, because if they’re not in power the gravy train might end. And that is no joke, unlike the funny hair of good old harmless, quirky, liberty loving Boris who has conned a large proportion of the population.

Edited 14 December 2021 by What the Fuchs?

[Sampson]

On 13/12/2021 at 17:12, Sampson said:

Tldr did a good video on the Police & Crime Bill, I hope they do one on the Borders and Nationality Bill too
 

 

They have done now.
 

 

[LVFox]

Not sure if it’s just me but thinks this. But far more embarrassing for Johnson that Labour saved him on the vote, than it would have been if it hadn’t gone through.

 

[Jon the Hat]

4 hours ago, Sampson said:

They have done now.
 

 

It’s a good summary, and I agree completely with David Davis on this one.

[Sampson]

8 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

It’s a good summary, and I agree completely with David Davis on this one.

I'm worried mostly about the bit that says you can get life imprisonment for helping someone get into the country. So if you see someone drowning in a dingy off the south coast, if you help drag them ashore to save their lives you can get life imprisonment?

So a taxi driver driving someone who has a visa to visit Ireland but not the UK from Dublin to Belfast can get life imprisonment?

And it's not mentioned there but I saw a lot of stuff in the Irish press recently about the UK following the US pre-entry clearance programme without consulting the Irish government, meaning we're essentially now creating a border on the island of Ireland by stealth by forcing non-Irish EU citizens who are legally allowed to work and live in Ireland having to always declare to go to Northern Ireland for a few hours? Surely anything like that has to be across the CTA as a whole else it's in violation of the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement if not legally in violation of it. 

Although it's pretty clear at this point the Tories only see Northern Ireland as a nuisance and don't care one jot about the island of Ireland.

Edited 15 December 2021 by Sampson

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

I'm worried mostly about the bit that says you can get life imprisonment for helping someone get into the country. So if you see someone drowning in a dingy off the south coast, if you help drag them ashore to save their lives you can get life imprisonment?
So a taxi driver driving someone who has a visa to visit Ireland but not the UK from Dublin to Belfast can get life imprisonment?

The point around taking away the "for gain" part is just weird.  Are they aiming to scare off charities who are assisting asylum seekers or something?

[StanSP]

 

 

 

[StanSP]

 

 

[UniFox21]

Boris catching himself before admitting he wasn't going to change 

[Izzy]

20 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Boris catching himself before admitting he wasn't going to change 

I'm a traditional Tory voter but we desperately need a change of leadership now.

 

He's doing my head in. I'm bored of his guff and lies and trotting out the same shit again and again.

 

I got pelters for sticking up for Theresa May back in the day but fvck me she was better than Boris surely.

 

Edited 15 December 2021 by Izzy

[HighPeakFox]

29 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I'm a traditional Tory voter but we desperately need a change of leadership now.

 

He's doing my head in. I'm bored of his guff and lies and trotting out the same shit again and again.

 

I got pelters for sticking up for Theresa May back in the day but fvck me she was better than Boris surely.

 

And I ask, kindly, when it was you fell in? Because millions of us knew the guy was a dangerous fraud many years ago. 

 

That whole party is just governed by rich con artists who don't give a crap about anything other than self gain. It saddens me that so many good people still auto vote for them. 

[Izzy]

3 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

And I ask, kindly, when it was you fell in? Because millions of us knew the guy was a dangerous fraud many years ago. 

 

That whole party is just governed by rich con artists who don't give a crap about anything other than self gain. It saddens me that so many good people still auto vote for them. 

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "fell in"?

 

Personally, I was quite happy with Teressa May as PM. I know she was 'robotic' and lacked a bit of empathy but I thought she was fine. I was never a Boris fan boy and I voted remain at the referendum.

 

I was intrigued to see what he'd bring to the role as PM but nothing more than that really.

 

As a trainer of leadership skills in the corporate world, I've not been impressed with his leadership skills at all.

 

As for your second sentence, I don't 'auto vote' Tory but have predominantly done so over the years. Maybe next time I won't....

 

[Tommy Fresh]

Not sure if this has been posted elsewhere

[Facecloth]

11 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "fell in"?

 

Personally, I was quite happy with Teressa May as PM. I know she was 'robotic' and lacked a bit of empathy but I thought she was fine. I was never a Boris fan boy and I voted remain at the referendum.

 

I was intrigued to see what he'd bring to the role as PM but nothing more than that really.

 

As a trainer of leadership skills in the corporate world, I've not been impressed with his leadership skills at all.

 

As for your second sentence, I don't 'auto vote' Tory but have predominantly done so over the years. Maybe next time I won't....

 

What strikes me is you come across as a very empathic person yourself. Only have to look at how you communicate with people on this forum, especially in the depression thread. And whilst I can understand people like some Tory policies, when it comes to their records on social care, welfare, diabled and vulnerable people, I don't understand how such a nice person aligns themselves with these people. You clearly care for your fellow man in a way the Tories don't.

[Izzy]

2 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

What strikes me is you come across as a very empathic person yourself. Only have to look at how you communicate with people on this forum, especially in the depression thread. And whilst I can understand people like some Tory policies, when it comes to their records on social care, welfare, diabled and vulnerable people, I don't understand how such a nice person aligns themselves with these people. You clearly care for your fellow man in a way the Tories don't.

Thanks (I think )

 

Whenever I've done any on-line 'tests' on politics, I've always come out pretty central. The main reasons I've voted Tory in the past have mainly been based on personal financial reasons. As someone who's self employed, I've always thought I was better off under the conservatives.

 

I've also relied heavily on the NHS over the years and have always had a fantastic experience - even under a Tory government. My sense is that this has possibly been down more to luck and my post code though, and I've no doubt Labour would do a better job of funding it.

 

As I get older (and less selfish) I do think more about the wider community and the welfare state, but I've always seen voting as a very personal thing (i.e. putting me and my families finances first). This may not be the 'right' reason to vote but I suspect many, many people also vote this way if they're honest with themselves.

 

However, I've also thrived under Labour governments and I've always said on here that I'll always play the hand I'm dealt and not complain.

 

I'm very much about personal responsibility and helping others at a 'local' level instead of relying on big government. I wouldn't say I'm 'aligned' with the Tories and there's every chance I'll vote differently next time (especially if Boris is still leader)

 

P.S. I don't post much on this thread as I'm not as 'passionate' about politics as others on here. It always ends in tears and falling out with posters I like in my previous experience.