//It has also emerged that the police arrested members of a long-standing women’s safety group who distribute rape alarms among other things…//
Yes I read that. It’s regrettable but I have to say that, bearing in mind it was well publicised that there may be an attempt to spook horses using rape alarms, it was somewhat foolish of the group to roam around Westminster in the early hours with those devices on their person.
// peaceful enjoyment is a right you have at home not in places that are shared by the public//
That is not correct. The public has a right to go about its lawful activities and not have them interrupted. The reason you don’t hear too much about these rights being claimed is that (a) they are, in the main, mostly respected and (b)when they are infringed “the public” does not usually go wailing to the media about it. The police have to maintain a balance. It is quite obvious that the overwhelming majority of people present on the Coronation route wanted to be there to enjoy the occasion and not interrupt it. The right to protest is not unlimited and on occasions it has to be qualified; last Saturday was one of those occasions.
//all under the powers grants by the conservatives’ despicable public order bill which came into effect last week
i do hope that everyone who endorsed this fascist law are pleased because everyone else certainly is not//
I would suggest you have no idea how many people are happy with the new Bill and how many are not. It is quite clear from a number of surveys that events of the last year or so, where protesters have caused serious disruption to roads, transport and infrastructure, that there is widespread disquiet among the public at the way the police have been forced to deal with them. The new Bill attempts to address those problems. It is aimed mainly at preventing disruption to major works or on key national infrastructure and addresses things such as “locking on” and illegal tunnelling. The extensions to stop and search are mainly associated with these activities.
We need to be clear: no other country would permit the kind of disruption seen here over the last year; nowhere else would protesters be permitted to glue themselves to the road or to trains and remain there whilst the police asked if there was anything they could do for them to make them more comfortable. Only here, in the UK, a country which you ludicrously suggest is now living under Fascist legislation, does this happen because of the extremely one-sided attitude to disruption that has developed. So engrained is this attitude that both you and Graham Smith have been laundered with the idea that the right to protest is paramount and sacrosanct. Everybody else must “put up with” disruptive activities so long as it is in furtherance of a cause (with which the victims of the disruption may or may not agree).
Before you talk about “Fascist” laws I suggest that you look at why the new Bill was necessary, examine what it aims to address and how it will address it. Then look up the dictionary definition of “Fascist” and compare.