Arrested for posting pictures

Caporegime
Joined
26 Dec 2003
Posts
25,666
I'm not advocating a totalitarian state - I'm simply saying that the correct action was taken in this case. His behaviour would be morally repugnant to the majority of people in this country, and he is in clear breach of the Communications Act 2003.

This is known as "tyranny of the majority", haven't we evolved past acting like pack animals and punishing those who want to be individuals?
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
The modern day military is a career choice, I don't see why the public should worship it anymore than any other public service. In fact it's the most expensive under used public service, when was the last time the military directly protected UK civilians against a hostile act. I would argue that in the erosion of the state and globalisation will lead to a Europe single military force in 20 years, as with possible governments.

While I agree that the military is a career choice and deserves no more recognition than any other public service you are categorically wrong in the way you imply that the military doesn't routinely protect the citizens of the UK, either from direct or indirect attack, just because something is not reported or in the public eye doesn't mean that your safety and freedoms are not being protected. I also think you are living in the clouds if you think that a federal Europe will come about in the next two decades or anything resembling a unified European Armed Forces.

As far as the arrest of the kid goes, I didn't join the forces so that kids like that could be arrested for expressing themselves in such a way. Burning a poppy may be disrespectful in the context of the Armistice, but the whole point of remembrance is that these people died to protect that kids right to express himself, so I don't know which I find more offensive, the poppy burning or the arrest itself.
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Feb 2007
Posts
8,519
Funny, oh... wait...

At least they have somewhere to work from, even if it is disregarded at times

I wasn't trying to be funny, they have a constitution and it doesn't help them on iota. And anyway we've already got the EU human rights carp and that doesn't seem to do anything other than protect the guilty.
 
Permabanned
Joined
31 Dec 2007
Posts
10,034
While I agree that the military is a career choice and deserves no more recognition than any other public service you are categorically wrong in the way you imply that the military doesn't routinely protect the citizens of the UK, either from direct or indirect attack, just because something is not reported or in the public eye doesn't mean that your safety and freedoms are not being protected. I also think you are living in the clouds if you think that a federal Europe will come about in the next two decades or anything resembling a unified European Armed Forces.

As far as the arrest of the kid goes, I didn't join the forces so that kids like that could be arrested for expressing themselves in such a way. Burning a poppy may be disrespectful in the context of the Armistice, but the whole point of remembrance is that these people died to protect that kids right to express himself, so I don't know which I find more offensive, the poppy burning or the arrest itself.

it is disrespectful and I agree, but its a dangerous precedence and could send us down a slippery slope of being gagged by the police if this guy is charged.

Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost, all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat. We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.

The main reason I dislike remembrance day is that its no longer about remembrance, its about glorifying warfare and soldier worship, its no longer about the young men who died to protect western europe from fascists, because there was no choice. The more recent conflicts have been political tools of western leaders. Even the falklands was about Thatcher proving she had testicles.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
29 Dec 2006
Posts
1,682
Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost, all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat. We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.
you mean like james bond?
 
Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
it is disrespectful and I agree, but its a dangerous precedence and could send us down a slippery slope of being gagged by the police if this guy is charged.

I have said that he should be allowed to say what he wants.

Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost,

At what cost if they didn't is more the point.

all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat.

No disrespect, but are you at all qualified to judge the level or nature of any current or future threat to the interests of the UK and its public and the type of response we would be required to apply to any such threat should it arise, not to mention the very real advantage of simply having a visible and effective deterrent.

We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.

Again, you have no idea what a future threat would consist of or the nature of the response to such threats, these small states you speak of, such as shall we say Pakistan, or Iran..are on a par with us or larger in size and one of them had demonstrable Nuclear Capability and another is well on it's way if some people are to be believed...the point being that you can dismiss Nuclear Weapons if you want, but then that would leave us reliant upon the United States for a deterrent to rogue states that acquire a nuclear weapon or to current Nuclear States that are foreseeably unstable.

The main reason I dislike remembrance day is that its no longer about remembrance, its about glorifying warfare and soldier worship, its no longer about the young men who died to protect western europe from fascists, because there was no choice. The more recent conflicts have been political tools of western leaders. Even the falklands was about Thatcher proving she had testicles.

I don't know what services you are attending, but that is completely the opposite experience than I have.
 
Associate
Joined
25 Sep 2007
Posts
753
Location
Scotland
My emotions tell me he is a complete an utter disrespectful douche bag that deserves everything he gets, my logical side says he should have the right to express his opinions in this country without the police getting involved.

Anyway im sure there is loads the military do but at what cost, all I see is a massively outdated organisation compared to the level of threat. We dont need nuclear weapons or 100,000s of troops. Modern threats involve terrorists and small states, these threats could be tackled with smaller more specialised forces without the big expensive tanks etc. Bigger investments in intelligence and special forces would be sufficient to protect this tiny country instead of billions on trident.

I totally disagree. We have by no means the largest army in the world. Having a nuclear deterrent is even more important for a country this small, and you don't know what tomorrow lies. Of course, in the ideal world, there would be no nuclear weapons, no wars etc but that isn't going to happen any time soon.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Feb 2012
Posts
4,409
the way i see it is, we dont like the fact that the guy burned poppies as its massivley disrespectful but we also dont like the fact you can get arrested for it.

so what do we do? we dont want people doing things that offend us but when the police do somthing to stop it happening people jump on their back over being too harsh.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Mar 2004
Posts
1,987
Location
Warwickshire
we dont want people doing things that offend us but when the police do somthing to stop it happening people jump on their back over being too harsh.

Nope i'm fine with people doing things that offend me. I 100% respect their right to do it, and i'd hope they would respect my right to do something they find offensive in return.
I don't think the police should have been involved in this at all, but admittedly i've only skimmed the headlines :p
 
Soldato
Joined
23 May 2011
Posts
10,200
Not completely related but people have been getting all ****y (Including Clarkson) over the Top Gear twitter team posting a message (Supposedly automated) during the 2 minutes silence. Seriously, is getting offended the Nation's newest pass time? Ill-timed maybe but for Christ's sake get over it.
 
Back
Top Bottom