3 ms·
Police swoop on Stop Brexit Man under new anti-protest law
- josh_fyi 4y agoThis is good. If all protestors could use amplifying equipment without limit, the right-wing fanatics, left-wing fanatics, and every other type of fanatics would be shaking the earth with competing loudspeakers. (And no one would be heard.) It is essential, however, that the restrictions and enforcement be absolutely neutral with respect to content.
- wolverine876 4y agoIt's obvious government can use this to suppress disagreement and fundamental human rights. Freedom includes, most importantly, freedom to protest, and people have been doing to for centuries. If the people are free and have self-determination, if it is a democracy, then government has no business here. > If all protestors could use amplifying equipment without limit, the right-wing fanatics, left-wing fanatics, and every other type of fanatics would be shaking the earth with competing loudspeakers. Protestors have been able to use amplifying equipment until now, and that hasn't happened.
- rossdavidh 4y agoHmmmm...I'm not from the U.K., but reading the article, it appears that he was told to stop using sound amplifying equipment. In fact, he says that he thinks protests should be "noisy and disruptive", which I suppose they often are, but if I lived or worked anywhere near there I'd be calling that harassment or unsafe working conditions (stress) if it went on day after day. Now, if they let people blast music day after day at that same spot, and don't let people use sound amplification equipment for protest, then I suppose there are grounds for complaint.
- bryanlarsen 4y agoMeanwhile in Canada, it took a week to stop the blasting of a 130 dB train horn at 3AM in a residential area.
- bediger4000 4y agoDoes this happen because England doesn't have a God Given First Amendment?