Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 4/3/2024 at 2:26 PM, RuamRudy said:

Positive political discourse is taking a stand. Making vexatious complaints to the police about wildly misrepresented occurrences is not. 

Expand  

 

Hear, hear! 

 

Oh - you mean the people who complained about the FM. I thought you meant the people complaining that they've had 'unkind' things said to them, or heard them said to someone else.

 

Vexatious complaints about wildly misrepresented occurrences cuts both ways and is exactly why this sort of legislation is so dangerous.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
  On 4/3/2024 at 2:26 PM, RuamRudy said:

 

Positive political discourse is taking a stand. Making vexatious complaints to the police about wildly misrepresented occurrences is not. 

Expand  

4000 complaints in the first 24 hours of this ridiculous new crime law and the police must investigate everyone, therefore leaving the police under manned to investigate real crimes is criminal in itself, the SNP has made Scotland a laughing stock and you just won't admit it, "Lead on McDuff" I will follow no matter how stupid this new law is!

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
  On 4/3/2024 at 2:02 AM, GarryP said:

You need to get your head out of this place and read more mainstream stuff.  

Expand  

The mainstream stuff in NZ is such biased rubbish that I don't read or watch it anymore.

 

I do watch Al Jazeera for my news of fact ( I doubt they have AI modifying the images they put on ), allowing for the obvious bias related to religion, and something that should cheer up some posters on here, they are IMO biased against Trump.

 

Amid the anti Trump dross on here there is actually some very good information being put out on AN, given us posters are a very broad demographic of western populations.

  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 4/3/2024 at 2:32 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

If Jonnyf used the same device whenever he mentioned anyone else who had a regional accent then that might make sense. I don't recall him being consistent on that though.

Expand  

I wasn't aware that you keep a log of the posts other posters make. Perhaps you meant that you never saw it on any of his posts that you read. Perhaps you have nothing to do except look at everything other posters say, but others have a life outside this forum and don't get to read everything.

Posted
  On 4/3/2024 at 3:22 PM, Wobblybob said:

4000 complaints in the first 24 hours of this ridiculous new crime law and the police must investigate everyone, therefore leaving the police under manned to investigate real crimes is criminal in itself, the SNP has made Scotland a laughing stock and you just won't admit it, "Lead on McDuff" I will follow no matter how stupid this new law is!

 

Expand  

 

Indeed, there is seemingly no limit to the idiocy of malicious, bigoted people. I think each one should be charged with wasting police time - but that would, of course, waste even more police time on these idiots.

Posted
  On 4/3/2024 at 9:57 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

I wasn't aware that you keep a log of the posts other posters make. 

Expand  

 

I don't keep a log on anyone's activities, but then again even if I was why would you be aware. Are you keeping a log on users' activities?

 

  On 4/3/2024 at 9:57 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps you meant that you never saw it on any of his posts that you read. Perhaps you have nothing to do except look at everything other posters say, but others have a life outside this forum and don't get to read everything.

Expand  

 

Based on this rant, i suspect it is you who needs to take the break.

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 12:13 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

Indeed, there is seemingly no limit to the idiocy of malicious, bigoted people. I think each one should be charged with wasting police time - but that would, of course, waste even more police time on these idiots.

Expand  

This is the reason this rediculous and unworkable law should have not been introduced in the first place, do not blame the people that are wasting police time...blame the idiotic SNP for giving them the ammunition to fire! 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 12:28 AM, Wobblybob said:

This is the reason this rediculous and unworkable law should have not been introduced in the first place, do not blame the people that are wasting police time...blame the idiotic SNP for giving them the ammunition to fire! 

Expand  

 

I disagree. All laws are open to abuse. Should we avoid passing any law because of a small number of people with malicious intent?

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 12:45 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

I disagree. All laws are open to abuse. Should we avoid passing any law because of a small number of people with malicious intent?

Expand  

There is no logic in you disagreeing with the blatantly obvious......when other more serious crimes have to be put on hold to facilitate this ill thought out whim of the SNP it is idiotic. Perhaps it's time for you to admit how ridiculous this new law is, you are doing yourself no favours by defending it!

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 12:56 AM, Wobblybob said:

There is no logic in you disagreeing with the blatantly obvious......when other more serious crimes have to be put on hold to facilitate this ill thought out whim of the SNP it is idiotic. Perhaps it's time for you to admit how ridiculous this new law is, you are doing yourself no favours by defending it!

Expand  

 

There are 2 different issues here. One is the intent of the law; the other is the abuse of it by those who object to it or the party that implemented it. 

 

Note that the SNP does not have a majority in the Scottish parliament. The law was passed with cross party support, 82 for, 34 against and 4 abstentions. This is not an SNP whim.

 

 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:09 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

There are 2 different issues here. One is the intent of the law; the other is the abuse of it by those who object to it or the party that implemented it. 

 

Note that the SNP does not have a majority in the Scottish parliament. The law was passed with cross party support, 82 for, 34 against and 4 abstentions. This is not an SNP whim.

 

 

Expand  

Spin it as much as you like but I suspect you know how ridiculous this law is.

Which brings me back to my initial post that the Scottish government is turning Scotland into a police state and you are complicit with your apathetic approach to the whole situation.

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:01 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Since when was English a phonetic language?

 

 

Expand  

 

A language does not need to be phonetic to have different accents.

 

If he can pronounce it as WHAITE, I can write it as whaite.

 

This law does certainly highlight the dangers of devolution. Like giving a gun to an 8 year old. Hopefully Scots will take this as a lesson in terms of what could happen if ever the SNP got their way and made Scotland their personal fiefdom with a vote for Independence. Be afraid Scotand, be very afraid. 

  • Heart-broken 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:28 AM, JonnyF said:

 

A language does not need to be phonetic to have different accents.

 

If he can pronounce it as WHAITE, I can write it as whaite.

 

This law does certainly highlight the dangers of devolution. Like giving a gun to an 8 year old. Hopefully Scots will take this as a lesson in terms of what could happen if ever the SNP got their way and made Scotland their personal fiefdom with a vote for Independence. Be afraid Scotand, be very afraid. 

Expand  

A language does need to be phonetic for any spelling of pronunciations to make sense.

 

You can misspell any word you like, but how that miss spelled word ‘reads’ is dependent upon the accent of the reader.


 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:43 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

A language does need to be phonetic for any spelling of pronunciations to make sense.

 

You can misspell any word you like, but how that miss spelled word ‘reads’ is dependent upon the accent of the reader.


 

Expand  

 

I cannae and winnae agree with that.

  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:43 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

A language does need to be phonetic for any spelling of pronunciations to make sense.

 

You can misspell any word you like, but how that miss spelled word ‘reads’ is dependent upon the accent of the reader.


 

Expand  

I think that if it's ok for Robert Burns to write phonetically it should be ok for JohnnyF.

Don't let lifes trivialities get to you, lifes too short!

  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 12:13 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

Indeed, there is seemingly no limit to the idiocy of malicious, bigoted people. I think each one should be charged with wasting police time - but that would, of course, waste even more police time on these idiots.

Expand  

 

Spot on - let's prosecute them all! The bigots on both sides. Thought crime legislation is just the ticket for fostering inclusivity and social harmony. Not. 

 

 

  On 4/4/2024 at 1:01 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Since when was English a phonetic language?

 

 

Expand  

 

It may be pedant's corner, but English spelling was certainly not standardised until the C19/20, thanks to the introduction of state mandated schooling in the late C19th. The printing press helped a great deal in standardising much spellingfrom the C16th onwards, but mass literacy is a comparatively recent phenomenon. And nowadays, with so much communication being by app, spelling is often all over the shop anyway.

 

Under this ridiculous new law, it's probably a hate crime to criticise someone's spelling ability, in case they are 'neuro-diverse' in some way or whatever. So spelling standards slip and language over-simplifies to be 'more inclusive'.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:09 AM, RuamRudy said:

One is the intent of the law; the other is the abuse of it by those who object to it or the party that implemented it. 

Expand  

Why is this law only 'abused' by people you say - or insist can only be - people who 'object' to it?

 

It's impossible that supporters of the law won't abuse it? Of course it isn't. It's open to abuse by all and sundry, depending on their motivations.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 1:23 AM, Wobblybob said:

Spin it as much as you like but I suspect you know how ridiculous this law is.

Which brings me back to my initial post that the Scottish government is turning Scotland into a police state and you are complicit with your apathetic approach to the whole situation.

Expand  

 

A genuine question - how do you feel about Sunak's attack on the right to protest?

 

"For holding a sign outside a courthouse reminding jurors of their right to acquit defendants, a retiree faces up to two years in prison. For hanging a banner reading "Just Stop Oil" off a bridge, an engineer got a three-year prison sentence. Just for walking slowly down the street, scores of people have been arrested."

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/world/the-right-to-protest-is-under-threat-in-britain-undermining-a-pillar-of-democracy

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:31 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

A genuine question - how do you feel about Sunak's attack on the right to protest?

 

"For holding a sign outside a courthouse reminding jurors of their right to acquit defendants, a retiree faces up to two years in prison. For hanging a banner reading "Just Stop Oil" off a bridge, an engineer got a three-year prison sentence. Just for walking slowly down the street, scores of people have been arrested."

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/world/the-right-to-protest-is-under-threat-in-britain-undermining-a-pillar-of-democracy

Expand  

I would say you are deliberately going off topic because you cannot and have not made any reasonable input to this topic which is disingenuous.

  • Agree 1
Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:34 AM, Wobblybob said:

I would say you are deliberately going off topic because you cannot and have not made any reasonable input to this topic which is disingenuous.

Expand  

 

Off topic? Are the parallels not obvious to you? Seriously? 

 

You called Scotland a police state yet you have no comment on the much worse situation across the UK? I would say that your position is not objective but political.

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:31 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

A genuine question - how do you feel about Sunak's attack on the right to protest?

 

"For holding a sign outside a courthouse reminding jurors of their right to acquit defendants, a retiree faces up to two years in prison. For hanging a banner reading "Just Stop Oil" off a bridge, an engineer got a three-year prison sentence. Just for walking slowly down the street, scores of people have been arrested."

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/world/the-right-to-protest-is-under-threat-in-britain-undermining-a-pillar-of-democracy

Expand  

 

Should someone be allowed to hang a "Buy Chevron Oil" banner over the "Just Stop Oil" banner? 

 

I do not think people should be allowed to hang banners off bridges or on any public property without permits. What happens when the banner blows down into traffic? Who should have to pay to have the banner taken down? Rights come with responsibilities. 

 

I think people should have the right to protest, but I do not think they have the right to leave a mess, or to interfere with other people's rights. People blocking vehicular or pedestrian traffic should be removed, forcibly if necessary.

 

 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:49 AM, Yellowtail said:

 

Should someone be allowed to hang a "Buy Chevron Oil" banner over the "Just Stop Oil" banner? 

 

I do not think people should be allowed to hang banners off bridges or on any public property without permits. What happens when the banner blows down into traffic? Who should have to pay to have the banner taken down? Rights come with responsibilities. 

 

I think people should have the right to protest, but I do not think they have the right to leave a mess, or to interfere with other people's rights. People blocking vehicular or pedestrian traffic should be removed, forcibly if necessary.

 

 

Expand  

 

3 years for hanging a banner off a bridge? That is not the sign of a healthy democracy.

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:00 AM, BKKBike09 said:

Why is this law only 'abused' by people you say - or insist can only be - people who 'object' to it?

 

It's impossible that supporters of the law won't abuse it? Of course it isn't. It's open to abuse by all and sundry, depending on their motivations.

 

 

 

Expand  

You can be sure that the TRAs (explanation of the term previously provided in this thread) are going to have a field day with this legislation. It going to be their new Twitter. 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:50 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

3 years for hanging a banner off a bridge? That is not the sign of a healthy democracy.

Expand  

Three years and five months for a protestor that ran around the Capital with a Viking hat on? 

 

I have no ideas what the details are surrounding the banner, do you? 

 

 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 3:34 AM, Yellowtail said:

Three years and five months for a protestor that ran around the Capital with a Viking hat on? 

 

I have no ideas what the details are surrounding the banner, do you? 

 

 

Expand  

 

Regardless of the details of his banner, 3 years for protesting is an outrage. I don't recall that law generating nearly so much umbrage on these boards.

 

Posted
  On 4/4/2024 at 2:50 AM, RuamRudy said:

 

3 years for hanging a banner off a bridge? That is not the sign of a healthy democracy.

Expand  

 

Sounds pretty irresponsible to me. What if it fell off onto a truck's windscreen or a motorcyclist going under the bridge in rush hour?

 

There are ways to protest without endangering the lives of innocent people. 

  • Heart-broken 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...