The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #124618   Message #2754400
Posted By: GUEST,Teribus
28-Oct-09 - 06:53 PM
Thread Name: BS: UK: Police State
Subject: RE: BS: UK: Police State
"Thanks folks - I note the question I asked went unanswered"
As did mine to you"

I went back to your post and found this:

"Since when have legally held political demonstrations and protests been subversive and subject to surveillence, or are you suggesting that our law-makers have it wrong and the police should decide what is or is not permissable?"

Which I suppose is the question you refer to, I must admit that in reading your original post I gave up on it when you went off thread ranting on about Maggie and the miners. I know that you would have far preferred it if a bunch of NUM Officials ran the country or dictated what could and what could not be done to the elected Government of the day but what the heck your version of democracy might differ a tad from mine.

Answers to your questions:

"Since when have legally held political demonstrations and protests been subversive and subject to surveillence"

Well it is quite within the bounds of possibility that legally held political demonstrations and protests can be subversive. It is also definitely within the bounds of commonsense and safety that all legally held political demonstrations, protests, football matches, mass rallies, pop concerts, in fact any event where large crowds gather will be subject to police surveillence - you see it happens to be their job, at the same events tucked away somewhere you will find representatives of all the other emergency services - it happens to fall under their job description as well to be present.

"are you suggesting that our law-makers have it wrong and the police should decide what is or is not permissable?"

Our law-makers are as fallible as the rest of humanity, but on any given day the law of the land is exactly that and that is what must be upheld. The only thing that the police decide upon is whether or not any law has been broken, or whether or not there is any risk to life or property - now you can only do that if you are present and watching (surveillence). If at any stage they believe that point has been reached then they are compelled to act in order to enforce the law, save life, or prevent loss of life or injury and protect property.

At these legally held political demonstrations and protests there is also a responsibility on those organising them to ensure that those attending stay within the law - true??

Now when are you going to answer my question, without recourse to Maggie and the miners, my political beliefs of which you actually know nothing - or do we want to revisit the practice that you find so estimable of dipping hat-pins in shit then sticking them into Police Horses as practiced on the picket-lines by your good friend and singing companion B Pugh.