[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

... in which she is not specific at all, but is concerned about a 'paradigm shift' in what is considered criminal behaviour. Likewise, you were earlier not specific at all (unless you're referring to a post earlier than the one I previously replied to?)

Spurrier's submission is hardly bringing anything novel to the discussion in any case. New acts of parliament often bring activities that previously were not criminal into the purview of criminal law. That's sort of the whole point. People find new and inventive ways of imposing themselves on others; eventually the put-upon majority decides enough is enough and begins to demand action. Sooner or later, politicians hear the clamour, realise it's a popular issue, and act on it.

Some details on the new Public Order Bill:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...more-difficult

Here are the key provisions it includes:

New protest-related offences of “locking-on” – a protester attaching themselves to other people, objects or buildings to cause disruption – and “going equipped to lock-on”, as well as causing serious disruption by tunnelling, obstructing major transport works, and interfering with key national infrastructure. The penalties include unlimited fines and prison sentences of up to 12 months.

Serious disruption prevention orders, which will allow courts to bar an individual from associating with other activists, being in a specific place, having particular items like bike locks or superglue, or encouraging others to commit a protest-related offence. They may be enforced by the imposition of an electronic tag, and breaches could lead to six months in prison or an unlimited fine.

New stop and search powers for protest, which will allow police to intervene if they believe somebody has an object intended to help them to commit a protest-related offence like wilful obstruction of a highway – a category that could include the aforementioned bike locks but also posters or placards. Police will also be granted new powers to stop and search people attending a protest, even if they have no grounds for suspicion that they are carrying such an item, but think others in the area might be.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ection-protest

Under the public order bill, anyone who has protested in the previous five years, or has encouraged other people to protest, can be forced to “submit to … being fitted with, or the installation of, any necessary apparatus” to monitor their movements. In other words, if you attend or support any protest in which “serious disruption to two or more individuals or to an organisation” occurs, you can be forced to wear an electronic tag. “Serious disruption” was redefined by the 2022 Police Act to include noise.

---------- Post added at 17:21 ---------- Previous post was at 17:19 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

Please see my earlier comments re: debasement of references to fascism by mindless overuse.

Please see my earlier quote:

The road to fascism is lined with people telling you to stop overreacting