There is no such thing as a hate crime, hatred is a natural human emotion. It is not illegal to say I hate this or that! What next... love crime? Ridiculous!
Three points: 1. A communication is not what the communicator said, it is what the recipient understood. The fact that Allison Pearson understood it to be a non-crime incident is a miscommunication by the police. 2. How serious was the alleged crime that Essex police have now dropped the case? Just a 'fishing' expedition, methinks. 3. Most of the public know what crime they want investigated, crimes against the person and theft. Why aren't PCCs ensuring the police carry out the wishes of the public? That is what we elected them for.
These non hate crime incidents need scrapping makes no sense that people have police turn up because someone didn't like a comment you posted even if it was not hateful in anyway or they disagreed with something
Anyone would think Kier doesn't know what Article 10 of his precious ECHR is. Here's a reminder: Article 10 protects your right to hold your own opinions and to express them freely without government interference. This includes the right to express your views aloud (for example through public protest and demonstrations) or through: published articles, books or leaflets. television or radio broadcasting.
I can never remember if it's ' Non-crime hate ' or ' Non-hate crime '. If it's the former , and not a crime , why waste Police time on it ? Thin end of the wedge with some people agitating for a Blasphemy law....in other words they want to make these kind of things into crimes and we'll all be in trouble if we say we hate something or someone, no matter with what justification...
You are NOT addressing the problem. There should be no such thing as a "non crime hate incident" it straight out of 1984. I hate many things and I want the freedom to say so. If someone hates me for my views or my religion or my skin or my occupation then so be it. Rudeness should not be a crime. Physical assault or SPECIFIC provable, material threats should be a crime. All adult citizens should be treated the same, no specific groups should be treated differently. The College of Policing has lost the plot and is a significant cause of the present slump in law and order and respect for police in general and needs immediate overhaul. We need leaders, would you please stir the pot and get things done before it is too late.
Do these people need to be reminded that the UK does not have blasphemy laws? We are a country of free speech and should stay that way. Even if I don't like what others might say, I stand next to them for that right to agree or disagree.
I wonder whether Lisa would have felt differently if she had not been reported herself? I think the analysis of the subject in hand, as put forward by the interviewees, is lacking, and actually - potentially- is quite worrying at its core. Please stop applying any law to human speech. Please stop weaponising the Equality Act. Speech has to be 100% free for everybody.
Similar view. The start of the conversation did make quite clear her negative opinion on a matter of a non-crime by someone she despises. If it was a crime, the CPS would have let the police have their way. Indeed we all know that Essex police wanted to drag her to jail. Spare police officers on a Sunday morning? Remembrance day?
This is caused by politicians who fail to deal with serious misconduct. Police can only operate independently within the framework set by Parliament. Police have no authority to redefine words like "hate" (i.e. An extreme dislike) to include a simple dislike of a person or group. Or to choose which laws that they enforce. Or to interfere in a person's right to free speech when that person remains within the law. Or to enforce the law in a partisan manner. Or to affiliate with political groups (E.g. Stonewall). Our politicians need to step in and remove senior police officers who ignore their mandate.
I hope the thousands of people who have been harassed, humiliated, shamed and had their lives disrupted! because of the police crimes against them ... take up prosecutions against the police. The police service have shamed themselves sitting at desks looking for what ''THEY'' deem hurty words and NOT instead being on the streets to catch real criminals with real prospects of charges and HELPING the nation they're supposed to serve.
Hypothetically speaking, I should be free to 'hate' any thing, person, race, religion or anything else you can think of, without interference by the state. For example, as an avowed atheist I dislike all religions, to a greater or lesser extent. It might even be true to say that I find some religions hateful. That is my prerogative, just as it is the prerogative of those practising those religions to do so. What would be the reaction, I wonder, of the police if I was to report the practising of a religion as being hateful and causing me great distress? The dichotomy is that what I might find hateful and distressing can bring joy and happiness to others. All emotions are subjective and to instruct the police to act on somebody's emotions is quite ridiculous.
There is no such thing as a hate crime, hatred is a natural human emotion. It is not illegal to say I hate this or that! What next... love crime? Ridiculous!
Precisely.
It is a thought crime from 1984
Three points:
1. A communication is not what the communicator said, it is what the recipient understood. The fact that Allison Pearson understood it to be a non-crime incident is a miscommunication by the police.
2. How serious was the alleged crime that Essex police have now dropped the case? Just a 'fishing' expedition, methinks.
3. Most of the public know what crime they want investigated, crimes against the person and theft. Why aren't PCCs ensuring the police carry out the wishes of the public? That is what we elected them for.
The CPS told Essex to back off. They were wrong, it was not a crime.
These non hate crime incidents need scrapping makes no sense that people have police turn up because someone didn't like a comment you posted even if it was not hateful in anyway or they disagreed with something
Police should be able to rule something to be a non incident and forget it.
@stevenrix7024 exactly they are wasting resources and time
Anyone would think Kier doesn't know what Article 10 of his precious ECHR is. Here's a reminder: Article 10 protects your right to hold your own opinions and to express them freely without government interference. This includes the right to express your views aloud (for example through public protest and demonstrations) or through: published articles, books or leaflets. television or radio broadcasting.
Awesome channel - more of these discussions please.
Hurting someone's feelings isn't illegal. It's about time the police went back to tackling real crimes instead of imaginary ones.
Doing what they're paid for.
No comment about Ed Balls' wife's instruction that 13,000 recordings of non-crime incidents a year is not enough.
I can never remember if it's ' Non-crime hate ' or ' Non-hate crime '. If it's the former , and not a crime , why waste Police time on it ? Thin end of the wedge with some people agitating for a Blasphemy law....in other words they want to make these kind of things into crimes and we'll all be in trouble if we say we hate something or someone, no matter with what justification...
You are NOT addressing the problem. There should be no such thing as a "non crime hate incident" it straight out of 1984. I hate many things and I want the freedom to say so. If someone hates me for my views or my religion or my skin or my occupation then so be it. Rudeness should not be a crime. Physical assault or SPECIFIC provable, material threats should be a crime. All adult citizens should be treated the same, no specific groups should be treated differently. The College of Policing has lost the plot and is a significant cause of the present slump in law and order and respect for police in general and needs immediate overhaul. We need leaders, would you please stir the pot and get things done before it is too late.
Do these people need to be reminded that the UK does not have blasphemy laws? We are a country of free speech and should stay that way. Even if I don't like what others might say, I stand next to them for that right to agree or disagree.
I wonder whether Lisa would have felt differently if she had not been reported herself? I think the analysis of the subject in hand, as put forward by the interviewees, is lacking, and actually - potentially- is quite worrying at its core. Please stop applying any law to human speech. Please stop weaponising the Equality Act. Speech has to be 100% free for everybody.
Similar view. The start of the conversation did make quite clear her negative opinion on a matter of a non-crime by someone she despises. If it was a crime, the CPS would have let the police have their way. Indeed we all know that Essex police wanted to drag her to jail. Spare police officers on a Sunday morning? Remembrance day?
They weren’t brought in after Stephen Lawrence
This is caused by politicians who fail to deal with serious misconduct. Police can only operate independently within the framework set by Parliament. Police have no authority to redefine words like "hate" (i.e. An extreme dislike) to include a simple dislike of a person or group. Or to choose which laws that they enforce. Or to interfere in a person's right to free speech when that person remains within the law. Or to enforce the law in a partisan manner. Or to affiliate with political groups (E.g. Stonewall). Our politicians need to step in and remove senior police officers who ignore their mandate.
I hope the thousands of people who have been harassed, humiliated, shamed and had their lives disrupted! because of the police crimes against them ... take up prosecutions against the police.
The police service have shamed themselves sitting at desks looking for what ''THEY'' deem hurty words and NOT instead being on the streets to catch real criminals with real prospects of charges and HELPING the nation they're supposed to serve.
Hypothetically speaking, I should be free to 'hate' any thing, person, race, religion or anything else you can think of, without interference by the state. For example, as an avowed atheist I dislike all religions, to a greater or lesser extent. It might even be true to say that I find some religions hateful. That is my prerogative, just as it is the prerogative of those practising those religions to do so. What would be the reaction, I wonder, of the police if I was to report the practising of a religion as being hateful and causing me great distress? The dichotomy is that what I might find hateful and distressing can bring joy and happiness to others. All emotions are subjective and to instruct the police to act on somebody's emotions is quite ridiculous.
Er humm er wostit thingy majig
It wasn't so bad under the Tories.
We didn't get incarcerated for tweeting.?
Hear hear. Nice to hear some common sense on this subject. Can we get it trickled down through to IMU please?
You people involved in discharging the law have allowed this topic to be used as a vendetta, it's ridiculous and a crime in itself...shame on you all.