6 ms·

Well, there’s also people getting arrested for memes ;) But I do agree somewhat, if what you’re saying is true. People should be able to hold a funeral in pea

by robswc 4y ago

Well, there’s also people getting arrested for memes ;) But I do agree somewhat, if what you’re saying is true. People should be able to hold a funeral in peace.

pessimizer 4y ago
And this is something you want enforced by the state? What other unenumerated rights should be enforced by security forces? In North Korea, security forces have the responsibility of making sure that people express the appropriate amount of worry and fear when a Kim might be ill, and the appropriate amount of rage when a Kim has been insulted by a foreign leader.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  Let's say it is your mom's funeral. One person, probably not invited, makes a scene, shouts a bunch of stuff. Perhaps they have a mental illness, perhaps they had a grudge against your mom - she might have been a judge or a teacher. Are you just going to ignore it? Would you expect some security to remove that person so that you and others can have a peaceful funeral?
  - lamontcg 4y ago
    > Let's say it is your mom's funeral. False equivalence. This is the accession to the throne of a monarch wrapped around a funeral. That doesn't happen when anyone else's mom dies. And the people being arrested were in public places.
    - wizofaus 4y ago
      > the people being arrested were in public places. Funerals are reasonably often held at public cemeteries. FWIW I disagree the arrests were justifiable unless the protestors refused to be non-violently lead away from the scene, assuming they presented a genuine risk of provoking a violent response from the mourners etc.
      - lamontcg 4y ago
        Were any of the arrests at a cemetery?
        wizofaus 4y ago
        In this case no, but the question remains to the GP as to whether having the police remove the man from the crowd would have been justifiable if it were a cemetery. (To be clear, I don't especially have a problem with the police taking Prince Andrew's heckler away, if nothing else for his own safety given members of the public were also manhandling him. I do have an issue with him being arrested and expected to face court.)
        pessimizer 4y ago
        > as to whether having the police remove the man from the crowd would have been justifiable if it were a cemetery. Of course it would be wrong for the police to arrest people for being disrespectful in a cemetery. What would be alright is if the owners of that cemetery wanted them to leave the property, they refused, and the police were called. That's why all of the photos of Westboro protesting at funerals were them on the sidewalk facing a cemetery.
        wizofaus 4y ago
        So if I choose to hold my mother's funeral at a public cemetery owned and administered by a governmental body and our gathering is interrupted by an unruly mob of hooligans determined to disrupt proceedings as much as possible barring physical violence, you're saying I should have no right to request that the police escort them from the scene? (We have "public nuisance" common law in Australia exactly to deal with that sort of scenario, which allows that "The action endangered the life, health, property, morale or comfort of the public". Surprisingly it can be treated as a criminal offense, though I'm not sure how often it really is).
        pessimizer 4y ago
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    > Let's say it is your mom's funeral. This is extremely compatible with Juche thought. Let's say that the Kim family is the mother of North Korea.
  - nobody9999 4y ago
    >Are you just going to ignore it? Would you expect some security to remove that person so that you and others can have a peaceful funeral? Having someone removed for being loud and obnoxious is a much different thing than being arrested and potentially incarcerated for same.
  - tekknik 4y ago
    Someone’s mothers funeral is a private event. Is this not a public event? Does it seem fair to compare the funeral of an individual citizen to that of a “royal”?
  - torstenvl 4y ago
    You would be right to find saying such things offensive and deeply vile. But it's far more offensive and far more vile to suggest that the State has any right to regulate public speech based on its content. If you want to control what is said at the funeral, don't have the funeral in public. End of.
    - wizofaus 4y ago
      The risk is that if the state have no power to forcibly remove someone causing such a disturbance then those present may lose faith in institutions such as the police who they may not unreasonably see as being responsible for "keeping the peace" and worse, take matters into their own hands (in fact it very much looked like this was likely in one such case in Edinburgh). As long it's not considered criminal and the only "punishment" is being physically denied access to the scene in question I wouldn't be overly concerned about it being an overreach of the government. None of which is to say I accept the police did everything right in this particular occasion.
    - dahart 4y ago
      > But it's far more offensive and far more vile to suggest that the State has any right to regulate public speech based on its content. Why? Offensive to whom? There seems to be general agreement that some speech crosses lines that are not okay and should be regulated. This is why all countries that have freedom of speech protections also have a list of exceptions. In the US, certain things like ads, pornography, slander, sedition, and lies are generally not considered protected speech. It depends on the specifics in any given case, but I’m not offended at all by the suggestion that the State should be allowed to regulate these kinds of speech when they cause harm.
  - danaris 4y ago
    Queen Elizabeth is not just "somebody's mom". She was the head of state who presided over genocides, resisted the independence many dozens of British colonies, got carveouts in laws to shield her personal possessions from scrutiny for stolen antiquities... I could go on. Public figures in general, and heads of state in particular, lose the right to be treated as "just somebody's mom". They get treated by the public based, at least in part, on their treatment of the public. And even apart from all that, this funeral, at a time when many, many UK residents are facing skyrocketing costs for everything from food to electricity to heat—as in, increases of 5-10x, not just a few percent—is projected to cost upwards of half a billion pounds, from what I've heard. So no, let's not "say it is your mom's funeral".
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      > She was the head of state who presided over genocides, resisted the independence many dozens of British colonies, got carveouts in laws to shield her personal possessions from scrutiny for stolen antiquities... Then it is pretty damning that not almost everyone is shouting! I'll go even further, then it is outrageous that people around the world mostly, including in the US, are saying what a great person she was. So I wonder why is that? Also, my understanding is that the person who got arrested for heckling was doing so because Andrew had sex with a 17 year old. So he was more upset about that than the queen overseeing genocides. And if people really think she was evil, why wait until death? Why not speak up very loudly while the person is alive in order to affect change. Weird priorities, or misdirection.
- robswc 4y ago
  Well, I think I would have to think on it more but it seems like not having a funeral disrupted is a reasonable request. I would say this for _anyone_, today it just happens to be a famous person.
  - tut-urut-utut 4y ago
    A public funeral is, well, public. Everyone can come to the “celebration” and “celebrate” however they want. If the family wanted to control the show, they should organize a private event with only invited guests who signed a code of conduct.
    - robswc 4y ago
      Fair enough. I have no idea the laws or customs of the UK.
lamontcg 4y ago
> People should be able to hold a funeral in peace. This very obviously isn't "just a funeral". Anyone else dies and they don't cancel the EPL for the weekend.
- robswc 4y ago
  I honestly have 0 idea what is going on over there, or what the EPL is, so I have to take everyone at their word :) I assumed based on what OP said, it was akin to a funeral being disrupted. That’s a big “if” though.
tut-urut-utut 4y ago
"God save the queen, the fascist regime, make you a moron, potential H-bomb, ..." Unlike in the 80-es, singing that today would make you arrested. Maybe the song is now more true than then, maybe the regime really became more fascist?

by robswc 4y ago

Well, there’s also people getting arrested for memes ;) But I do agree somewhat, if what you’re saying is true. People should be able to hold a funeral in peace.

pessimizer 4y ago

And this is something you want enforced by the state? What other unenumerated rights should be enforced by security forces? In North Korea, security forces have the responsibility of making sure that people express the appropriate amount of worry and fear when a Kim might be ill, and the appropriate amount of rage when a Kim has been insulted by a foreign leader.

andsoitis 4y ago
Let's say it is your mom's funeral. One person, probably not invited, makes a scene, shouts a bunch of stuff. Perhaps they have a mental illness, perhaps they had a grudge against your mom - she might have been a judge or a teacher. Are you just going to ignore it? Would you expect some security to remove that person so that you and others can have a peaceful funeral?
- lamontcg 4y ago
  > Let's say it is your mom's funeral. False equivalence. This is the accession to the throne of a monarch wrapped around a funeral. That doesn't happen when anyone else's mom dies. And the people being arrested were in public places.
  - wizofaus 4y ago
    > the people being arrested were in public places. Funerals are reasonably often held at public cemeteries. FWIW I disagree the arrests were justifiable unless the protestors refused to be non-violently lead away from the scene, assuming they presented a genuine risk of provoking a violent response from the mourners etc.
    - lamontcg 4y ago
      Were any of the arrests at a cemetery?
      - wizofaus 4y ago
        In this case no, but the question remains to the GP as to whether having the police remove the man from the crowd would have been justifiable if it were a cemetery. (To be clear, I don't especially have a problem with the police taking Prince Andrew's heckler away, if nothing else for his own safety given members of the public were also manhandling him. I do have an issue with him being arrested and expected to face court.)
        pessimizer 4y ago
        > as to whether having the police remove the man from the crowd would have been justifiable if it were a cemetery. Of course it would be wrong for the police to arrest people for being disrespectful in a cemetery. What would be alright is if the owners of that cemetery wanted them to leave the property, they refused, and the police were called. That's why all of the photos of Westboro protesting at funerals were them on the sidewalk facing a cemetery.
        wizofaus 4y ago
        So if I choose to hold my mother's funeral at a public cemetery owned and administered by a governmental body and our gathering is interrupted by an unruly mob of hooligans determined to disrupt proceedings as much as possible barring physical violence, you're saying I should have no right to request that the police escort them from the scene? (We have "public nuisance" common law in Australia exactly to deal with that sort of scenario, which allows that "The action endangered the life, health, property, morale or comfort of the public". Surprisingly it can be treated as a criminal offense, though I'm not sure how often it really is).
        pessimizer 4y ago
- pessimizer 4y ago
  > Let's say it is your mom's funeral. This is extremely compatible with Juche thought. Let's say that the Kim family is the mother of North Korea.
- nobody9999 4y ago
  >Are you just going to ignore it? Would you expect some security to remove that person so that you and others can have a peaceful funeral? Having someone removed for being loud and obnoxious is a much different thing than being arrested and potentially incarcerated for same.
- tekknik 4y ago
  Someone’s mothers funeral is a private event. Is this not a public event? Does it seem fair to compare the funeral of an individual citizen to that of a “royal”?
- torstenvl 4y ago
  You would be right to find saying such things offensive and deeply vile. But it's far more offensive and far more vile to suggest that the State has any right to regulate public speech based on its content. If you want to control what is said at the funeral, don't have the funeral in public. End of.
  - wizofaus 4y ago
    The risk is that if the state have no power to forcibly remove someone causing such a disturbance then those present may lose faith in institutions such as the police who they may not unreasonably see as being responsible for "keeping the peace" and worse, take matters into their own hands (in fact it very much looked like this was likely in one such case in Edinburgh). As long it's not considered criminal and the only "punishment" is being physically denied access to the scene in question I wouldn't be overly concerned about it being an overreach of the government. None of which is to say I accept the police did everything right in this particular occasion.
  - dahart 4y ago
    > But it's far more offensive and far more vile to suggest that the State has any right to regulate public speech based on its content. Why? Offensive to whom? There seems to be general agreement that some speech crosses lines that are not okay and should be regulated. This is why all countries that have freedom of speech protections also have a list of exceptions. In the US, certain things like ads, pornography, slander, sedition, and lies are generally not considered protected speech. It depends on the specifics in any given case, but I’m not offended at all by the suggestion that the State should be allowed to regulate these kinds of speech when they cause harm.
- danaris 4y ago
  Queen Elizabeth is not just "somebody's mom". She was the head of state who presided over genocides, resisted the independence many dozens of British colonies, got carveouts in laws to shield her personal possessions from scrutiny for stolen antiquities... I could go on. Public figures in general, and heads of state in particular, lose the right to be treated as "just somebody's mom". They get treated by the public based, at least in part, on their treatment of the public. And even apart from all that, this funeral, at a time when many, many UK residents are facing skyrocketing costs for everything from food to electricity to heat—as in, increases of 5-10x, not just a few percent—is projected to cost upwards of half a billion pounds, from what I've heard. So no, let's not "say it is your mom's funeral".
  - andsoitis 4y ago
    > She was the head of state who presided over genocides, resisted the independence many dozens of British colonies, got carveouts in laws to shield her personal possessions from scrutiny for stolen antiquities... Then it is pretty damning that not almost everyone is shouting! I'll go even further, then it is outrageous that people around the world mostly, including in the US, are saying what a great person she was. So I wonder why is that? Also, my understanding is that the person who got arrested for heckling was doing so because Andrew had sex with a 17 year old. So he was more upset about that than the queen overseeing genocides. And if people really think she was evil, why wait until death? Why not speak up very loudly while the person is alive in order to affect change. Weird priorities, or misdirection.
robswc 4y ago
Well, I think I would have to think on it more but it seems like not having a funeral disrupted is a reasonable request. I would say this for _anyone_, today it just happens to be a famous person.
- tut-urut-utut 4y ago
  A public funeral is, well, public. Everyone can come to the “celebration” and “celebrate” however they want. If the family wanted to control the show, they should organize a private event with only invited guests who signed a code of conduct.
  - robswc 4y ago
    Fair enough. I have no idea the laws or customs of the UK.

lamontcg 4y ago

> People should be able to hold a funeral in peace. This very obviously isn't "just a funeral". Anyone else dies and they don't cancel the EPL for the weekend.

robswc 4y ago
I honestly have 0 idea what is going on over there, or what the EPL is, so I have to take everyone at their word :) I assumed based on what OP said, it was akin to a funeral being disrupted. That’s a big “if” though.

tut-urut-utut 4y ago

"God save the queen, the fascist regime, make you a moron, potential H-bomb, ..." Unlike in the 80-es, singing that today would make you arrested. Maybe the song is now more true than then, maybe the regime really became more fascist?