The police has apologised over the arrest of the republican group

The group I saw on the television news were not peaceful; they were chanting 'Not our king' as the state carriage passed by, punching the air with their fists in rhythm and their faces contorted with hate.
Disturbing, intimidating and reminiscent of Moseley's Blackshirts.

Foxygloves

I go along with the “damned if they do, and damned if they don’t”
There was a heavy handedness to their reaction but the potential consequences of the protests are terrifying.
Thinking of recent Stop Oil and XR protesters’ actions- what if protestors had employed these so-called” peaceful” methods such as-
Glueing themselves to the road in front of the processions
“Slow walking” in front of the horses/troops
Throwing paint
Obstructing access to the Abbey

It’s no longer a case of waving a few placards and banners or shouting slogans. There might have been worse than eggs thrown and it’s too late to shake your head after the event.
Factor in the very much more sinister and deadly risks of terrorist action lurking behind genuine posters and it is clear that the security measures involved must have been a nightmare

But none of that was going to happen for heavens sake.

The police knew it. They had, had months of talks with Republic and everything had been agreed and understood.

It is nonsense to suggest otherwise, and the police have said that they recognise this.

The legislation is badly written and anti-democratic.

eazybee

The group I saw on the television news were not peaceful; they were chanting 'Not our king' as the state carriage passed by, punching the air with their fists in rhythm and their faces contorted with hate.
Disturbing, intimidating and reminiscent of Moseley's Blackshirts.

Oh, for heaven's sake. 'Peaceful' has never meant 'silent'.

Thank you for the summary WWM.

If you were a "terrorist" of course you wouldn't arrive with megaphones and placards announcing yourselves.

You'd dress as if you were celebrating the event and remain concealed until your planned action took place.

We are walking onto the future asleep and full of whatiffereies, as this new law could curtail all peaceful protest. Step one towards a tyrannical state.

As previously stated we'll never know what might have happened had they been allowed their 'peaceful protest'. The police had to make decisions based on a huge number of 'what ifs'. I'm glad that the coronation and all that it involved went ahead smoothly.
I'm horrified that some posters can't see how nuanced a situation it was.

I’m horrifies that you support such an anti-democratic and authoritarian piece of legislation.

All down to rubbish legislation
Whitemark - as I said, the law.

Wyllow3
We are walking onto the future asleep and full of whatiffereies, as this new law could curtail all peaceful protest. Step one towards a tyrannical state.

Yes. The Agenda.
If people think it wont affect them, whatever side of things they are on. then they are mistaken.

MaizieD
There was never any intention for the protest to be anything but peaceful.

The road is paved with good intentions. Or some such phrase.
That of course, could never be guaranteed. Whatever anyone says or thinks.

At the time of the arrests, the group's leader told the BBC that the police had mistaken leather straps necessary to the banners (?) for lock on devices.

Now it is said that there were only a couple of innocent padlocks. The re-writing of "truth" becomes daily more Orwellian.

There was never any intention for the protest to be anything but peaceful.
Peaceful = free from disturbance; tranquil
No protest is peaceful.
Peaceful protest is an oxymoron.
The protestors aim was to disrupt proceedings by shouting and waving placards wasn’t it? I certainly saw them shouting and waving their placards!
I’ve no idea why the original arrests were made, but I do agree the police were damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

Right of assembly to protest is a human right.

Protest is generally noisy - nothing wrong with that.

The police job was simply to ensure it didn’t get out of hand.

It was badly done, because the police were unclear how to interpret

Bad legislation

MaizieD.. Yes, I've read the Police apology, and I still see what they did it as a case of "fail safe" under the most extreme pressure. As for rape alarms, the fact that the Met had received intelligence about a plot to use them was widely reported, and not just by right wing media. Also. one of those arrested with them allegedly has links to Extinction Rebellion, so "fail safe" yet again. Bottom line for me, is that despite the controversy surrounding the arrests, the security services did an amazing job, faced with the most complex challenge that they have faced in decades. Well worth a few ruffled feathers, and no, I don't see what happened as some sinister threat to the democratic process. Merely a tiny blemish in the bottom left hand corner of the bigger picture, which was rightly focussed on public safety.

I agree with 'damned if they did and damned if they didn't'. One of the horses was skittish and took some controlling despite its extensive training and the calm atmosphere.

Sadly protests that are organised and publicised in advance have attracted those who don't support the cause but are simply looking for trouble. It would have been terrible if this group had been infiltrated by trouble makers where so many had gathered, many with children.

What was the actual point of Republic’s protest?
I am very sympathetic to their cause, but I really can’t see what their intention was.

Labour should repeal Braverman's repressive legislation when in power.

Yes Smileless, I hate to use such a Littlejohn-esque phrase but you do always get those ‘rentamob’ types.
I’ve known a few of them in my time

As I understand it, no arrests were made under the new law, but under previous laws.
I absolutely agree, Foxygloves, Aveline, Mollygo, Smileless and NanaDana.

Germanshepherdsmum

As I understand it, no arrests were made under the new law, but under previous laws.
I absolutely agree, Foxygloves, Aveline, Mollygo, Smileless and NanaDana.

I also agree with those posters.

I too agree with them GrannyGravy

The police are always likely to “over react” because they get blamed if injury or disruption is caused. There was as credible risk that trouble, even risk to life was likely on coronation day so probably 10000 police were deployed to protect everyone.

As it happened there was no serious problem and only 60 arrests were made, so they were successful. The protesters are free to demonstrate today or in the future. There has to be limits on the disruption that demonstrations are allowed to cause, do we really want all our motorways closed by big oil protesters doing a peaceful sit in, I don’t think so.

Katie59

The police are always likely to “over react” because they get blamed if injury or disruption is caused. There was as credible risk that trouble, even risk to life was likely on coronation day so probably 10000 police were deployed to protect everyone.

As it happened there was no serious problem and only 60 arrests were made, so they were successful. The protesters are free to demonstrate today or in the future. There has to be limits on the disruption that demonstrations are allowed to cause, do we really want all our motorways closed by big oil protesters doing a peaceful sit in, I don’t think so.

All are free to protest.

I have a problem when protests cause disruption and sometimes fear in others.

That’s when the police on the ground are forced into playing a game of Top Trumps of rights.

Germanshepherdsmum

As I understand it, no arrests were made under the new law, but under previous laws.
I absolutely agree, Foxygloves, Aveline, Mollygo, Smileless and NanaDana.

Yes, so do I.

The police prevented what could have been a catastrophe had the horses been spooked.
Even well-trained horses can become unnerved.

Surely carrying a placard advocating chopping off of heads is inciting violence? Or is that 'peaceful protest'?

The appearance of chanting, placard-waving republicans amongst crowds who had turned out to cheer the king and queen could easily have turned very ugly - but the republicans would have insisted they were simply exercising their right to protest peacefully, albeit in a deliberately inflammatory manner. It’s not what I call ‘peaceful’ by any stretch of the imagination - nor is deliberately preventing people from going about their everyday business including paramedics and doctors on life-saving missions.

I agree with Foxygloves, Aveline, Mollygo, Smileless and NanaDana.GrannyGravy13 Anniebach Katie59 Callistemon21 Germanshepherdsmum
Security for all those gathered for the coronation - surely the most tempting target for any terrorist ever - as well as the principals was a massive headache for the horrendously overstretched public services, not just the police, not forgetting the massive presence of all those armed forces personnel. I feel they had little choice but actively to suppress any suggestion of 'rebellion'. I am not being naive; am no apologist for this government and have read all the negative publicity about the police, but I am a former public servant having worked for local authorities as well as the MOD and am well used to the epithet: 'damned if you do (act) and damned if you don't. Whenever assessing risk I asked myself "if I let this pass what might happen to these folk if I've got it wrong?...." Have we forgotten 2007 and 2017 so soon....?

Prevention is better than cure.

I am not saying that a protestor is a potential terrorist, of course not, but the mood could have turned ugly and the consequences could have been terrible.

I don’t believe them