Monday, November 27, 2006

Being offensive to be made illegal


Police are to demand new powers to arrest protesters for causing offence through the words they chant and the slogans on their placards and even headbands.

The country's biggest force, the Metropolitan police, is to lobby the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, because officers believe that large sections of the population have become increasingly politicised, and there is a growing sense that the current restrictions on demonstrations are too light.

The police want powers to proscribe protest chants and slogans on placards, banners and headbands.

If they make offending people illegal will we have any free speech? We still have a bit now but we won’t if this actually happens. Freedom of speech, above all is the right to offend.

Why should ‘Causing Offense’ be made a crime? It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever, but then when has this country ever made sense?

6 comments:

BFB said...

To many ethnics and lefties the Union Jack is 'offensive', is this proposal designed to criminalize flying the flag in public?

I find Mosques offensive, will they be pulled down?

I find Trevor Phillips offensive, will he be banned from appearing in public places?

This country gets worse by the hour.

Stan said...

It's madness. There are already plenty of laws in place to prevent "causing offence" from becoming "incitement to violence".

And it's not the job of the police to "lobby" for any law change - that way leads to a police state.

alanorei said...

Agreed.

They are aiming to ban the Union Flag and to prevent situations like BNP supporters shouting "Freedom!" at Mark and Nick's trial.

But the police establishment will insist that this is necssary to tackle incidents like the cartoon demo.

This is undoubtedly more EU-inspired subversion, where part of a takeover by a foreign power is lowering of the conquered country's flag.

youdontknowme said...

The thing is anything could be considered offensive and you can be sure they would use it to ban the BNP.

Anonymous said...

It is always different when the shoe is on the other foot, isn't it?
I'm not saying that free speech should be stifled but why does it only work one way? Political Correctness is nothing but a bunch of reverse discrimination. Why isn't what is good for the goose, good for the gander? If you do not wish to be muffled, then do not whine when others speak their minds.

Anonymous said...

I felt that I had better clarify myself a bit. I do not think the law would be a good thing. I've had a busy day and was not thinking clearly.

Here in the States some would use a law such as that against others, but when ever they wanted to shout their rants it should be just hunky dory. On the basis of discrimination for instance, they may be given the upper hand. Hell they already have it. *Sigh

Even though I do not always agree with protests that are held here. I do not wish to loose my freedoms in order to get them to shut up.