It never ceases to amaze me, Roger, how you manage to produce a masterpiece of circumlocution which boils down, on examination, to saying nothing at all.

The only sentence that has any bearing on the subject was the last in your post.

I had already said that it was existing law that was being broken, and needed to be enforced. I did not advocate new law, as that is not germane to the issue.

Your response did not address any of the points I raised.

Is it your contention that it is in the wider public interest that the intimidation of sections of the public should pass not only unpunished, but unhindered by the legal authorities?

If so, you are a part of the problem IMO.

Don T.