Interesting little snippet i found whilst watching Manure getting stuffed on MOTD. Involves our beloved & revered MET chief of plod

[Link]

I'm a blind man, i'm a blind man, now my room is cold,
When a blind man cries, Lord, he feels it from his soul.
[Link]

I'm doing nothing of the sort.
I do think that the act you refer to is a foolish law because it separates one form of abuse from another, which is clearly absurd and politically motivated.

The laws as they stood were perfectly adequate. It is another example of mass immigration affecting the fundamental nature of our society.
The fact that the police are now obliged to enforce this at a football match in those circumstances is a perfect example of how stupid that kind of distinction is. Had the fans used any other form of abuse, there would have been no story.
What is most ridiculous is that lived in a Britain where the race related antagonisms of the past had all but disappeared, and now those that Wish to appear woke and virtuous have made it headlines virtually every day.

It is all driven by money and political expediency.

Exactly ask anyone who has been burgled or had their car stolen. Ask the shopkeepers about shoplifters. Walk down some high streets and people are openly smoking cannabis.

The police pick and choose which crimes they act on look at the number of illegal electric scooters, cyclists who break the law etc. etc.

Edited by Badger11 (17 Oct 2021 12.52pm)

One more point

What's worse, the n word at a black man or homophobic abuse at a gay man.

The point is that they are and were both laws and the point was different people feel differently about them.

What you consider a law against 'racist abuse' is in fact a law against the perception of racist abuse just as much as it is against actual abuse. There was never a requirement to make a law involving race when the abuse law was already on the books.

I consider these bad laws, any 'protected characteristic' law regarding speech is a bad law.

I have no problem with people pointing out spelling or grammatical mistakes, just as long as they are also fine with their own being highlighted.

Edited by Stirlingsays (17 Oct 2021 4.46pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The day previous you said you support the snuffing out of any discussion of homosexuality in schools via the re-introduction of what you call 'highly sensible laws' like section 28. This certainly suggests that you're more than happy to support laws that prevent speech as long as they protect the ideas that you prefer. Ultimately these laws attacking speech gave a green light to bullying because there were few avenues for defending a gay child against it.

As always in life noise at either extreme is amplified (here with activist types on one side not being happy unless a drag queen is barreling through the door, and on the other side holding a ludicrous view that relationships we can all see with our own eyes should legally not be allowed to be mentioned) and sensible, balanced compromises are drowned out.

We don't need to 'blot out' difference. It reminds me of how horrendous schools used to be at helping special needs kids by not acknowledging them and just letting them suffer bullying and confusion. Everyone has something to offer and we should attribute both recognistion and dignity to people, not shut them out due to ignorance.

With your wayward politics, both of these groups get what amounts to a predictable ignorant display from you, even when you acknowledge that others in your family have faced these challenges. Only when you are personally impacted by something, such as the aspsergers situation you've mentioned, do you suddenly acknowledge issues on a fair, human and practical level where you appreciate people for who they are rather than the usual bigoted, undignified farce you trot out.

Edited by BlueJay (17 Oct 2021 9.17pm)