Rule of the Mob - Batley School

Yep. It's a stupid rule.

The right to peacefully protest should trump everything regardless of whether we agree with them or not.

Otherwise it's a slippery slope.

 

Jeez, sounds rough mate, good in a way though that you can get back to work, looking forward to your usual impartial(?) contributions on here...

 

My company (35 years ) offered me a derisory sum to take early retirement .
It was less than our CEO earns a month . I was rushed into hospital with breathing problems , then caught a secondary infection in the ICU ward ( not Covid thank god ) . I've given up arguing ( nearly ) because they resort to default setting IE :- Right wing racist / little inglander .

 

Does this also mean that you think we should have been allowed to mix together all throughout then?
Or does that train of thought only apply to protest groups?

 

Nice one, I'm off to protest with 15,000 others down at Valley Parade tomorrow about not being able to attend the football.

 

You know the difference between a proper protest and people taking the piss. Come on.

 

Two spectate questions there.

The important but though is that the right to genuinely protest should never be removed for whatever reason.

 

Yes... two separate questions and you answered neither mate.

 

Okay, let me try again.

I think we should have been allowed to mix more but that is irrelevant to the question. Its irrelevant.

On a broader scale the right to protest should never be lumped in with the rest of the restrictions. It should always be allowed.

That work?

 

Yep, I was taking the piss. Much like a good 3/4s of the "protesters" that were at the school. They were there for a day out and to have a go at the police because they had nothing better to do.

And once they've finished being all offended in the name of their religion I've no doubt that a good number jumped in their cars with their mates and went "cruising" while smoking illegal drugs.

 

Not even if their actions are genuinely putting other lives at risk?

 

Correct.

 

No doubt. But that's not the important bit.

 

Sorry Aaron but I couldn't disagree more strongly.

 

That's okay.

You're only push back against those in power is peaceful protest.

If you're happy for that to be taken away for whatever reason, including the safety of the public, then that's up to you.

 

I didn't say it should be taken away, I said that it shouldn't continue when it's genuinely putting lives at risk. I really don't see your angle in even arguing that point.

As for the protest, they had it, in the first day. Was there really a need to return and force the closure of the school or should there be a train of thought that the point was made and use it to open dialogue with the aim of resolving the issue?

 

My angle is simply that rights are never taken away without the spectre of a greater threat.

However my view is simply that it is a right above all others - including the right to safety- otherwise it can easily be the away by simply saying a threat over rules it.

 

The point you're trying to make is just nonsense in this context though. The protest could have been held and the relevant points made without the threat to safety, all it would have taken was some organisation.

 

That's not the point I'm trying to make though. I'm sorry if you're misunderstanding.

The right to protest shouldn't be taken away, even on the basis of public safety or if we disagree with the pont being made.

 

It's getting late Aaron and we're definitely not going to agree.

Enjoy the game tomorrow, here's hoping for 3 points