Protesting

[IvanV]

When, in France, a union - be it the farmers or the transport workers or the teachers or whoever - holds the country to ransom by causing massive blockages or shutdowns or something, and so may force the government to accede to their particular demand of the moment, which might quite narrowly benefit their particular union interest, we tend to think, we are grateful that kind of thing doesn't happen here. And whilst I am aware of that kind of massive disruption caused by such protest action going on in France, I'm not aware that it goes on in other countries, particularly. Though there might well be quite large societal disagreements in such other countries.

Do we?

I don't. I wonder why the British are incapable of protesting actual injustices.

Do we indeed, that's why I wrote like that. It is often asserted in a lot of journalism, but do we really believe it?

A lot of the things that people close France down for seem to me to be about the narrow interests of that group, rather than terrible injustices. When the transport drivers closed Britain down, to a degree, because they thought petrol cost too much, and that was damaging their livelihood, was that an injustice? I certainly don't think so. I think petrol has to get more expensive. But they made a lot of noise, certainly caused a lot of mess, and got the politicians to accede to them.

And in general, narrow vested interests being able to impose their views on the rest of us is not good governance.

Can we really have laws on protest that distinguish how much of an injustice it is that is being protested about, and use that to grade how much societal disruption/property damage/etc it is reasonable for a protest on that subject to cause? Or do, in reality, our laws have to be blind to the subject of the protest, because many people believe many different things with different intensities? And so determine what is the reasonable extent of protest in the absence of a consideration of what is being protested about? This supposedly being a democracy and all?

[Gfamily]

There are reports that the record of the judge involved in other cases looks 'interesting'.

[Sciolus]

And in general, narrow vested interests being able to impose their views on the rest of us is not good governance.

Is stopping climate change a narrow vested interest?

[Stranger Mouse]

There are reports that the record of the judge involved in other cases looks 'interesting'.

Do you mean this thread by Media TellThe Truth XR?
https://x.com/tttmediaxr/status/1813965 ... 85149?s=61

I haven’t followed all the links but as I wouldn’t treat this account seriously I wondered if you could direct us to the particular reporting you think is at issue here.

[Tristan]

And in general, narrow vested interests being able to impose their views on the rest of us is not good governance.

Is stopping climate change a narrow vested interest?

Actually, you’re right. And I’m so relieved that after their 4 days of disruption climate change has been stopped. It was actually worth it.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Just curious what people think the point of protesting is

[Stranger Mouse]

And in general, narrow vested interests being able to impose their views on the rest of us is not good governance.

Is stopping climate change a narrow vested interest?

I think “stopping climate change” is a distraction because the protest didn’t and couldn’t do anything to stop or mitigate climate change. It could only attempt to raise media attention in the hope that someone else down the line could stop or mitigate climate change. Therefore it can be treated the same as if a bunch of Tory activists did exactly the same thing to try and raise awareness that we should, in their opinion, leave the ECHR. I don’t think we can give them lenient treatment just because we think they have a valid cause.

I am concerned that these sentences are loo long but I try to remember that if there isn’t some form of deterrent on this type of behaviour it will be impossible for the country to function. A lack of serious deterrent (and once again I think these sentences may be too long) would mean that any five randos could cause massive disruption to the lives of tens of thousands of people (not just those who were using the motorway) and endanger lives for any random cause.

My caree had (I think) This Morning on today and there was a guy (I think) from Just Stop Oil on. He was saying that the reason that they don’t do legal civil protest instead of this is because they would be ignored if they did. So the sentences are actually part of why the guy managed to get on the TV although it turned mostly into a conversation about unjust prison sentences rather than ….errr….climate change.

With a bit of luck the sentences will be reduced on appeal and they should only have to serve half of them anyway. Of all of them I feel most sorry for the 22 year old because at that age it is easy to misjudge the potential consequences of your actions (no matter how many times you are advised) but they are a Cambridge student so I’m guessing they have the privilege to minimise the impact in a way that would not be open to a window cleaner who decided to do the same thing.

[Stranger Mouse]

Good

Sorry, no. Non violent protesters locked up for 5 years is draconian.

Bear in mind, they weren't convicted of protesting, they were convicted of "conspiracy to cause a public nuisance" because they were holding a zoom meeting to plan direct actions on the M25. They hadn't even got to the point of non-violently protesting.

While the sentences may be too harsh it is not at all unusual for conspiracy to result serious legal consequences. If a bunch of old lags gather around a table in a cafe to plan the murder of their erstwhile friend Jimmy The Finger Ravioli they don’t actually have to get to the point of knocking Jimmy off in order to be prosecuted.

[Tristan]

Good

Sorry, no. Non violent protesters locked up for 5 years is draconian.

Bear in mind, they weren't convicted of protesting, they were convicted of "conspiracy to cause a public nuisance" because they were holding a zoom meeting to plan direct actions on the M25. They hadn't even got to the point of non-violently protesting.

What? They shut down parts of the M25 for 4 days causing massive disruption. They had gone way past just planning.

[dyqik]

Factors stated as being included in their sentencing include things like someone not being able to get to a medical appointment and having to wait two months for another one.

Which is someone that happens everyday due to too many people driving cars, and is in fact the direct fault of the government for letting the NHS collapse.

Other factors include "people being late to work". As if that never happens on the M25 due to crashes, where this is never taken into account when sentencing dangerous drivers.

[Gfamily]

It seems that non violent direct action can be more severely punished than violence.
Is this what the country wants or needs?

[discovolante]

Factors stated as being included in their sentencing include things like someone not being able to get to a medical appointment and having to wait two months for another one.

Which is someone that happens everyday due to too many people driving cars, and is in fact the direct fault of the government for letting the NHS collapse.

Other factors include "people being late to work". As if that never happens on the M25 due to crashes, where this is never taken into account when sentencing dangerous drivers.

I think these are hard cases tbh. You are arguably weighing up the impact on that individual to, say, the impact on someone who missed a medical appointment because their town got flooded. Of course it doesn't automatically follow that JSO's protests lead or contribute to to a reduction in the amount of climate changed induced flooding. There are plenty of discussions to be had about the effectiveness of different types of protests in different contexts of course, and no doubt a fair bit of research into it. (As an aside, the opinions of people who decide that anyone who protests is the scum of the earth who deserves everything they get aren't completely irrelevant I'm sure, but I don't think there's any reason to assume they're an important factor unless there's decent evidence that they are.) However the fact that you can't easily point to an individual, identifiable person who has directly benefited from the protests isn't in itself, I don't think, a reason to completely dismiss them.

[Stranger Mouse]

Factors stated as being included in their sentencing include things like someone not being able to get to a medical appointment and having to wait two months for another one.

Which is someone that happens everyday due to too many people driving cars, and is in fact the direct fault of the government for letting the NHS collapse.

Other factors include "people being late to work". As if that never happens on the M25 due to crashes, where this is never taken into account when sentencing dangerous drivers.

https://www.mylondon.news/news/uk-world ... t-29571489

They also allegedly caused more than 50,000 hours of vehicle delay, affecting more than 700,000 vehicles, and left the M25 "compromised" for more than 120 hours.

A police officer suffered concussion and bruising after being knocked off his motorbike in traffic caused by one of the protests on November 9 2022, prosecutor Jocelyn Ledward KC said at the sentencing hearing at Southwark Crown Court on Thursday.

I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean that the number of people affected would easily run into millions. And we were lucky that nobody died.

And it was caused by ha handful of people who were unelected, unappointed and unaccountable unless through the courts.

Let’s cut to the quick. Do you think they should have got a prison sentence at all? And if not (as fines and suspended sentences don’t seem to do the trick) what would stop them from continually organising regular protests disrupting and sabotaging every major road in the UK every week because those 5 unelected, unappointed and unaccountable people decided their opinion was all that mattered and the other 66 million people in the country didn’t matter?

[dyqik]

Factors stated as being included in their sentencing include things like someone not being able to get to a medical appointment and having to wait two months for another one.

Which is someone that happens everyday due to too many people driving cars, and is in fact the direct fault of the government for letting the NHS collapse.

Other factors include "people being late to work". As if that never happens on the M25 due to crashes, where this is never taken into account when sentencing dangerous drivers.

https://www.mylondon.news/news/uk-world ... t-29571489

They also allegedly caused more than 50,000 hours of vehicle delay, affecting more than 700,000 vehicles, and left the M25 "compromised" for more than 120 hours.

A police officer suffered concussion and bruising after being knocked off his motorbike in traffic caused by one of the protests on November 9 2022, prosecutor Jocelyn Ledward KC said at the sentencing hearing at Southwark Crown Court on Thursday.

I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean that the number of people affected would easily run into millions. And we were lucky that nobody died.

You've invented an argument that I am not making. My point is that a two month wait for a replacement medical appointment is not the result of the protestors actions. It is due to a deliberate choice by the government to underfund the NHS.

But if 700,000 vehicles are catastrophically affected by a protest by a few people, then the government has failed to provide a robust transport system. The reliance on cars on a single road is a failure of government.

[Stranger Mouse]

It seems that non violent direct action can be more severely punished than violence.
Is this what the country wants or needs?

This was a case with a massive impact on potentially millions of people which was carried out purely to get publicity (albeit for something I think requires attention). Suspended sentences and the like have had f.ck all effect. I can’t speak for what the country needs or wants only myself. For myself, I would like you to explain what level of punishment (if any) you think this specific offence deserved.

With regards to your question about sentences for other offences including violent ones I would certainly be interested in having a discussion on a dedicated thread about prison reform and sentencing.

[Tristan]

Factors stated as being included in their sentencing include things like someone not being able to get to a medical appointment and having to wait two months for another one.

Which is someone that happens everyday due to too many people driving cars, and is in fact the direct fault of the government for letting the NHS collapse.

Other factors include "people being late to work". As if that never happens on the M25 due to crashes, where this is never taken into account when sentencing dangerous drivers.

449447325_10168771131840573_7017956422217562759_n.jpg (222.79 KiB) Viewed 2153 times

Someone missing an appointment can mean a lot of things. The context of that example is relevant here.

There's a big difference between whether bad things happen accidentally or are caused to happen either through negligence or through purposeful actions. These kinds of things should have been entirely foreseeable by the people planning them. It's only right that they're considered in the sentencing.

[Gfamily]

I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean...

... an average of less than 4½ minutes per vehicle.

[Stranger Mouse]

Factors stated as being included in their sentencing include things like someone not being able to get to a medical appointment and having to wait two months for another one.

Which is someone that happens everyday due to too many people driving cars, and is in fact the direct fault of the government for letting the NHS collapse.

Other factors include "people being late to work". As if that never happens on the M25 due to crashes, where this is never taken into account when sentencing dangerous drivers.

https://www.mylondon.news/news/uk-world ... t-29571489

They also allegedly caused more than 50,000 hours of vehicle delay, affecting more than 700,000 vehicles, and left the M25 "compromised" for more than 120 hours.

A police officer suffered concussion and bruising after being knocked off his motorbike in traffic caused by one of the protests on November 9 2022, prosecutor Jocelyn Ledward KC said at the sentencing hearing at Southwark Crown Court on Thursday.

I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean that the number of people affected would easily run into millions. And we were lucky that nobody died.

You've invented an argument that I am not making. My point is that a two month wait for a replacement medical appointment is not the result of the protestors actions. It is due to a deliberate choice by the government to underfund the NHS.

But if 700,000 vehicles are catastrophically affected by a protest by a few people, then the government has failed to provide a robust transport system. The reliance on cars on a single road is a failure of government.

I haven’t invented anything.

Your position appears to be that any system should be able absorb any attempt at sabotage by committed saboteurs and if it doesn’t it is entirely the government’s fault not the sabateurs.

You edited the part out where I asked you about whether you thought any prison sentence at all was appropriate and if not whether any punishment at all was appropriate.

[Stranger Mouse]

I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean...

... an average of less than 4½ minutes per vehicle.

Yes I can work out averages too. I don’t know how many of those delays were under a minute and how many were more than an hour and I don’t know how many resulted in missed funerals and two month delays for medical appointments. And I don’t think if if did know it would be particularly enlightening.

What I would like to know (and I’ve asked you once separately to dyqik but not got a reply) is what prison sentence or other punishment would you consider appropriate. Or don’t you think they should have been punished at all?

I also asked you about your references to “reporting” that the judge’s history was “interesting”. I don’t seem to have received a reply. I don’t want to miss any relevant information so perhaps you could clarify exactly which reporting you were talking about just so we are all on the same page.

[Gfamily]

I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean...

... an average of less than 4½ minutes per vehicle.

Yes I can work out averages too.

I wonder why you brought it up then.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Like lpm said, the M25 is a motorway so used to tailbacks - not least by roadworks - that the "omg think of the inpatients" feels trite as an argument to me. If I was to try to visit my parents in law, there's currently a 40 minute delay to do so on the M25, just because of traffic.

Protest is disruptive. It has to be, in order to have a purpose. Maybe, as Ivan suggests, there should be a limit to the level of disruption allowed, although I'm curious how quantifiable that is, how provable, without a certain level of subjectivity that a government less taken with the concept of civil liberties might decide to exploit.

As things stand, in my view these sentences are draconian, and the law which allows them is a monstrous piece of legislation imposed by one of the worst home secretaries we've ever had. The curtailing of civil liberties it allows is something we should all be upset about. If you agree with Priti Patel and Suella Braverman, you really need to ask yourself what's gone wrong.

[Stranger Mouse]

... an average of less than 4½ minutes per vehicle.

Yes I can work out averages too.

I wonder why you brought it up then.

I’m sure you do.

I am wondering why you are not answering the question which I’ll ask for the third time. What punishment do you think would have been appropriate or do you think they shouldn’t have been punished at all? Surely that’s not a difficult question to answer at least in general terms.

Also for the third time which “reporting” are you referring to about the judges’s history is “interesting”. You seem to think it is relevant to the sentences that have been handed out so I’m sure we would all find it “interesting” if you could provide a link.

[Stranger Mouse]

Like lpm said, the M25 is a motorway so used to tailbacks - not least by roadworks - that the "omg think of the inpatients" feels trite as an argument to me. If I was to try to visit my parents in law, there's currently a 40 minute delay to do so on the M25, just because of traffic.

Protest is disruptive. It has to be, in order to have a purpose. Maybe, as Ivan suggests, there should be a limit to the level of disruption allowed, although I'm curious how quantifiable that is, how provable, without a certain level of subjectivity that a government less taken with the concept of civil liberties might decide to exploit.

As things stand, in my view these sentences are draconian, and the law which allows them is a monstrous piece of legislation imposed by one of the worst home secretaries we've ever had. The curtailing of civil liberties it allows is something we should all be upset about. If you agree with Priti Patel and Suella Braverman, you really need to ask yourself what's gone wrong.

The great news is I can confirm I don’t agree with Priti Patel or Suella Braverman on anything.

[dyqik]

https://www.mylondon.news/news/uk-world ... t-29571489



I don’t think you are particularly helping your argument by minimising the impact of the protests. If the 700,000 vehicles figure is anywhere near correct that would mean that the number of people affected would easily run into millions. And we were lucky that nobody died.

You've invented an argument that I am not making. My point is that a two month wait for a replacement medical appointment is not the result of the protestors actions. It is due to a deliberate choice by the government to underfund the NHS.

But if 700,000 vehicles are catastrophically affected by a protest by a few people, then the government has failed to provide a robust transport system. The reliance on cars on a single road is a failure of government.

I haven’t invented anything.

Your position appears to be that any system should be able absorb any attempt at sabotage by committed saboteurs and if it doesn’t it is entirely the government’s fault not the sabateurs.

If a country cannot absorb a single act of protest, then it is a house of cards waiting to collapse. This applies not only to single acts of protest, but also single accidents, natural disasters, terrorism and acts of war. Characterizing this as sabotage is a stretch, by the way - AIUI there was no attempt to seriously damage infrastructure, merely to disrupt operation.

Remember, this country was the target of a sustained terrorism campaign until 27 years ago, and has been targeted by other terrorist groups and foreign nations since then. Natural disasters and accidents are always a hazard, and the aging of infrastructure makes disruption more likely.

If it turns out that a single truck bomb or significant bridge strike under a flyover can cause disruption of the level blamed on these protestors, but lasting potentially for months (see e.g. Baltimore for details), then there's been a failure of government to recognize and act on the potential single point failures in the country's infrastructure. The upcoming closure of a large portion of the M25 for bridge maintenance work, with no realistic alternative routes, is another case of this.

A major road tunnel in Boston is closed for a month at the moment. But there's alternative routes and public transit options in place to mitigate that, so it's not a massive deal. The Crowdstrike outage this morning is far more significant in terms of distribution.

You edited the part out where I asked you about whether you thought any prison sentence at all was appropriate and if not whether any punishment at all was appropriate.

I have not read the full sentencing document, so I do not have an opinion. It appears that many of the protesters were on bail or probation, which does significantly change sentences.

[Stranger Mouse]

You don’t have an opinion?

Of course you don’t. How silly of me.

Anyway I’m getting bored and I have things to do so I’ll leave you all to it for a while to put the world to rights.