Old time proper gangsters viewed arrest as occuptional hazard& didn't attack police for nicking them. Why can't fuckwit protesters do same?
@Peter_Kirkham On what basis were these people arrested Peter? I understand why gangsters might be, but less clear on 'fuckwit protestors'..
-
-
@C7RKY Protest is unlawful if it prevents others (including businesses) going about their lawful business. Which is exactly as it should be>Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@C7RKY >or we have anarchy & mob rule. Protest was limited as it was preventing lawful activity (s14 notices served earlier, so they knew)>Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@C7RKY >so that is one offence. Obstructing highway, obstructing police & assaulting police may also be committed if removal resisted. -
@Peter_Kirkham Except assaulting police (which is a whole subject on its own) all statute law then? I don't like the way we're going here. > -
@C7RKY Assaulting police is statute law too (s89 Police Act 1996). Not sure of why the fact its statute is a problem-most offences are! -
@Peter_Kirkham Isn't it also assault under common law? I'm starting to see statutes as 'man-made laws'. Some devised from vested interests. -
@C7RKY No. There are no common law assaults any more (except Murder & Manslaughter). Everything else is statute, most since 1861, the most>
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.