First arrests under the New Police Act preventing freedom of speech

I have no issue with people not wanting the monarchy and protesting when Charles is going to the ceremony to be proclaimed King. What I think is inappropriate is the placards during the funeral procession. Protests all have the time and place . I think it may be why people are being arrested - to save a backlash which could become violent .

The whole point of free speech is just that, anytime, anywhere.

GrammyGrammy

Whilst freedom is something I bang on about all the time, there can be no freedom at all to hurl abuse in public at a man who is walking behind his dead mothers coffin. There never has been freedom to do this. In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too. Four hundred years ago he would have had a widow's scold put on him. Now he gets knocked to the ground by a right minded person. If he gets charged with a breach of the peace then quite right too. Scum of the earth protesting a dead woman. They get no protections from me for that.

In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too.

Do you not understand that for some individuals, passions and emotions run high - the same intensity of emotion that you feel for the Queen or the institution of monarchy is the same emotion that propels them against it? They may have good reason - they may have none but are nevertheless driven by some force that makes them unable or unwilling to rationalise their emotions. They may, even, be mentally unstable, suffering some form of mental health issues.

And you think it's quite right that they should be "immediately killed"?

In 1913, Emily Davison threw herself under the King's horse at Epsom.

Whilst she was unconscious in hospital Queen Alexandra, the Queen Mother, had someone send a telegram to the jockey; "Queen Alexandra was very sorry indeed to hear of your sad accident caused through the abominable conduct of a brutal lunatic woman".

Many viewed her with the same disdain you feel for the "scum of the earth" who protested against Andrew.

And yet because of her and those like her, we are able to vote and our opinions are given credence.

I would not do what this man did and I don't think my republican friends would either. Partly because I believe a family have the right to grieve a death in peace - albeit that family has to do it under the glare of the public gaze - and partly because I'm not inclined to intemperate behaviour. I've no idea what was going through the man's mind - though his target was specific. Being arrested and charged with causing a breach of the peace is sufficient punishment, knocking him to the ground, putting him in a widow's scold or, indeed, killing him seems to me excessive.

Katie59

Now is not the time for republicans to voice their opposition to the monarchy, the result activism quite likely to result in violence towards them.

Plenty of opportunity for free speech later although I don’t expect to see a republic this century.

So basically if they protest and get hurt its their own fault? Nice little bit of (potential) victim blaming.

People can and will protest when they want (so far)

Whether or not there were concerns for these individuals safety or not, is beside the point.

Formerly, any state that attempted to curtail citizens' rights to protest, as long as their protests were neither constituting a breach of the peace, or a violation of public decency, was rightly branded as tolitarian.

Not the UK has brought in a law that apparently dictates what opinions citizens may express in public.

This is the point OP would like to discuss, so could we please try and stick to it?

And no, you can not be arrested in any democracy I have ever heard of "For your own good". You can be arrested for committing a crime, or if you give rise to grave suspicions that you intend to commit one, the police may ask to speak to you, but they cannot and should not be able to charge or arrest you for something you have not yet actually done!

Scary - getting like North Korea when it comes to free speech and adoration of ‘monarchs’. Utterly shocking to think your details can be demanded for holding a piece of blank card and for saying ‘who elected you’! Andrew wasn’t arrested for his behaviour but a man was for shouting a not unreasonable comment!
As for arresting people ‘for their own safety’ ……,funny how you can even get police to respond if you are burgled!

Free speech is only permissible if the time and place is right? Have I read this properly? Who decides when it's the right time and place? If you can't question the monarchy at the time it changes hands then when can you? We used to have the right to say what we believed in. Now it seems we have to wait until the time is right. This is the thin edge of the wedge. Start off by picking out those who say something that is unpopular and the public will accept it. That makes it easier to pick out the next group, and the next, and the next, until it's too late and we are too scared to say what we think. You think it couldn't happen. Well just think about this.

^First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.^

—Martin Niemöller
"

I remarked at least a year ago that we are sleepwalking into a fascist dictatorship. Nothing that happens nowadays give me cause to review that opinion.

Ahh well, prob good news for some eh ?

So if "the woke" object to sayings which are racist, homophobic, sexist or otherwise offensive, they're "snowflakes" trying to suppress free speech. However, if it's someone who doesn't show sufficient respect to authority figures, it's fine for them to be assaulted by other people and/or arrested.

And it's not just about timing. The same outrage is expressed if anyone dares to criticise other establishment figures such as Churchill, despite the fact that he has been dead for decades and is long past caring about what people say.

As for this not being the right time to talk about republicanism - when is the right time? Not when the Queen was alive, because that was disrespectful to someone who had represented the country for 70 years. Not now she has died, as it is disrespectful to the bereaved. Not when the King takes up the normal royal duties, as that's disrespectful to an elderly man learning how to be the monarch... Basically it's never the right time.

It’s getting warm ?! ?

And Judgement Day is on its way.

Come Judgement Day, as long as I end up in a different place from people who think like you, I'll be happy.

Is it getting warm in here or is it just me? ?

OK, fair enough. Alleged criminal.

Are war heroes to be let off from suspicion of abusing trafficked women then?

Anyway, to say that it was quite right that the protestor would have been killed in the past is beyond the pale. A line's been crossed there.

Whitewavemark2

GrammyGrammy

Whilst freedom is something I bang on about all the time, there can be no freedom at all to hurl abuse in public at a man who is walking behind his dead mothers coffin. There never has been freedom to do this. In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too. Four hundred years ago he would have had a widow's scold put on him. Now he gets knocked to the ground by a right minded person. If he gets charged with a breach of the peace then quite right too. Scum of the earth protesting a dead woman. They get no protections from me for that.

So in your authoritarian, fascistic world

Violence = good

Free speech = bad?

I'm describing the past- hundreds of years ago and what people felt was appropriate. These things are not dealt with in these ways nowadays. Nonetheless they are still wrong behaviours. And Judgement Day is on its way.

volver

GrammyGrammy

volver

In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too.

Christ on a bike.

So would you for your blasphemous mouth. And quite right too.

Yeah, well, I'm an atheist. But I don't believe in killing people for shouting at criminals. Just this little humanist quirk that I have.

I don't believe in shouting accusations and abuse at men walking following their dead mothers coffin- criminal or otherwise. And Prince Andrew is NOT a criminal but a war hero.

GrammyGrammy

Whilst freedom is something I bang on about all the time, there can be no freedom at all to hurl abuse in public at a man who is walking behind his dead mothers coffin. There never has been freedom to do this. In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too. Four hundred years ago he would have had a widow's scold put on him. Now he gets knocked to the ground by a right minded person. If he gets charged with a breach of the peace then quite right too. Scum of the earth protesting a dead woman. They get no protections from me for that.

So in your authoritarian, fascistic world

Violence = good

Free speech = bad?

GrammyGrammy

volver

In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too.

Christ on a bike.

So would you for your blasphemous mouth. And quite right too.

Yeah, well, I'm an atheist. But I don't believe in killing people for shouting at criminals. Just this little humanist quirk that I have.

volver

^In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too.^

Christ on a bike.

I’m with you there Volver !

volver

^In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too.^

Christ on a bike.

So would you for your blasphemous mouth. And quite right too.

GrannyGravy13

With free speech comes responsibility, it does not give one the right to insult or offend others.

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

Absolutely, but because you can and do you should not expect to get arrested in a free democratic society,

Rosina

I can detect an aroma of MaryEliza on this thread...anyone remember her?

No I don’t Rosina.
Please enlighten me ?
Who was she ?

In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too.

Christ on a bike.

Whilst freedom is something I bang on about all the time, there can be no freedom at all to hurl abuse in public at a man who is walking behind his dead mothers coffin. There never has been freedom to do this. In the past he would have been immediately killed and quite right too. Four hundred years ago he would have had a widow's scold put on him. Now he gets knocked to the ground by a right minded person. If he gets charged with a breach of the peace then quite right too. Scum of the earth protesting a dead woman. They get no protections from me for that.

I can detect an aroma of MaryEliza on this thread...anyone remember her?

I'd drop it now Juggernaut.

If you are in a hole stop digging.