"Gang or Group"

[Guest Brumagem Phil]

I've been talking to a few lads tonight and a gang looks like the only way around it !!!!

 

Watch this space.....................

 

Ah right, one way to deal with the do-gooders I suppose, beat the sh*t out of em!

[mr motorola]

Ah right, one way to deal with the do-gooders I suppose, beat the sh*t out of em!

It won't do them any harm , a good kicking every now and then never hurt no one.

 

Or do you have any other great ideas?

[five bellies]

not just groups being gangs but a "group" or "gang" of two or more people can now be a "riot" read the riot act and arrested for no more reason than they have become more than one person in one place

 

 

I dont think the riot act needs to be read these days,

 

Used to be

 

 

1, Breach of the peace

 

2, Afray, two or more persons I think somone else other than a copper had to be in fear of their well being.

 

3, Rout, a minni riot but the act not being read.

 

4, Riot, what a rout becomes after the act was read by a police officer not under the rank of Inspector.

 

At this piont the inspector could order the use of pistols and swords to disperse the mob ( police swords used to look like navel cuttlasses would proberbley made me think twice before goin on a Gin fueled rampage)

 

 

Our Sovereign Lord the King/Queen chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the act made in the first year of King George, for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King/Queen.

Edited May 25, 2007 by five bellies

[chesters1]

they read the riot act at the meeting where the police "confined" those persons showing disproval of something or other in london a few years back.

although the riot act as such has gone its now called the public order act and is far more draconian than the act it replaced ,it gives the police powers just on them "thinking" an offense may occur rather than having to prove an offense will occur ,the 2 people i spoke about being a "group" can be arrested because the officer "thinks" they may have a "rave" whether or not they will have one is neither here nor there the fuzz only have to "think" they will.

"

(2) If, as respects any land in the open air, a police officer of at least the rank of superintendent reasonably believes thatâ€â€

 

(a) two or more persons are making preparations for the holding there of a gathering to which this section applies"

 

so if a policeman "thinks" you maybe going to hold a rave then you can be arrested,not just that but if you are going home and it happens to be in the direction of a "rave" (whether imagined or real) you can be arrested if you dont turn round and walk in the opposite direction.

 

" (4) If a person knowing that a direction under subsection (1) above has been given to him fails to comply with that direction, he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale."

 

along with the all compassing terrorism laws ,the public order act pretty much gives the police powers to arrest you whatever your doing merely because the police "think" you may commit an offence in the future ,what offence and how far in the future is up to the imagination of the police at the time and dont think sitting in front off the telly is safe.

 

place" includes any building or part of a building, any vehicle, vessel, aircraft or hovercraft and any other place whatsoever."

 

this means police can burst in and arrest you because you "may" commit an offence in the future ,pretty stitched up the law nowadays.

 

Strangely when someone commits a crime the police turn a blind eye saying they can arrest them because they haven't the power but can arrest anyone else for no particular reason when there not committing an offense ,crazy

Edited May 25, 2007 by chesters1

[five bellies]

they read the riot act at the meeting where the police "confined" those persons showing disproval of something or other in london a few years back.

although the riot act as such has gone its now called the public order act and is far more draconian than the act it replaced ,it gives the police powers just on them "thinking" an offense may occur rather than having to prove an offense will occur ,the 2 people i spoke about being a "group" can be arrested because the officer "thinks" they may have a "rave" whether or not they will have one is neither here nor there the fuzz only have to "think" they will.

"

(2) If, as respects any land in the open air, a police officer of at least the rank of superintendent reasonably believes thatâ€â€

 

(a) two or more persons are making preparations for the holding there of a gathering to which this section applies"

 

so if a policeman "thinks" you maybe going to hold a rave then you can be arrested,not just that but if you are going home and it happens to be in the direction of a "rave" (whether imagined or real) you can be arrested if you dont turn round and walk in the opposite direction.

 

" (4) If a person knowing that a direction under subsection (1) above has been given to him fails to comply with that direction, he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale."

 

along with the all compassing terrorism laws ,the public order act pretty much gives the police powers to arrest you whatever your doing merely because the police "think" you may commit an offence in the future ,what offence and how far in the future is up to the imagination of the police at the time and dont think sitting in front off the telly is safe.

 

place" includes any building or part of a building, any vehicle, vessel, aircraft or hovercraft and any other place whatsoever."

 

this means police can burst in and arrest you because you "may" commit an offence in the future ,pretty stitched up the law nowadays.

 

Strangely when someone commits a crime the police turn a blind eye saying they can arrest them because they haven't the power but can arrest anyone else for no particular reason when there not committing an offense ,crazy

 

With the old riot Act chesters, If you had a member of the clergy with you you wernt rioting, allso if as a public spirited indervidaul you decided to pitch in and help YE OLDE BILL if you happend to kill a few poeple that was OK because you where trying to help.

 

Things were so much simpler in those days

[chesters1]

this ones even more draconian

Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003

[Sportsman]

It is just a word.....Gang / group / Huddle...........whatever you wanna call it , but lets give these do-gooders a smack in the mouth for being so utterly pathetic in justifying their jobs!!!! I really am getting seriously p*ssed off with this do-good society.

 

Yeah, what have do-gooders ever done for us ?

apart from:

 

The Health service

Social housing

Pensions

Social benefits

The vote

The vote for women??

Democracy

Clean air

Safer work

The minimum wage

Ending slavery

Clean drinking water

Sewage systems

Roads and railways

Cleaner rivers and lakes to fish in

Public access and the right to roam

and 1001 other things I can't be ar5ed to think of at the moment !

 

Yeah, give em a smack in the mouth, the bar5steds

 

(apologies to Monty Python and the Romans )

[mr motorola]

So it's only me that thinks this country is gradually being turned into a sterile society then? Lets pick on the normal "working class" man , lets make him pay ridiculous ammounts of tax , with nothing given back to him. And all the while feed and pander to the white trash that can't be bothered to get themselves a job , but live off the back of a working man! And go and mug some poor old dear that has just collected her pension "but it's alright , she's probably got a couple of sons and daughters that will see her right"

 

It's well overdue that this country got it's prioritys sorted out !

[mr motorola]

Yeah, what have do-gooders ever done for us ?

apart from:

 

The Health service

Social housing

Pensions

Social benefits

The vote

The vote for women??

Democracy

Clean air

Safer work

The minimum wage

Ending slavery

Clean drinking water

Sewage systems

Roads and railways

Cleaner rivers and lakes to fish in

Public access and the right to roam

and 1001 other things I can't be ar5ed to think of at the moment !

 

Yeah, give em a smack in the mouth, the bar5steds

 

(apologies to Monty Python and the Romans )

Sportsman , most of the above i agree with , but they were sorted out to help us live a safer life

What the new breed of do-gooders are on with in this day and age is ludicrous ie the smoking ban......

I am self employed and work with one-other person , we work in a van (which we need) and both smoke , the new law states that we cannot smoke in our van , yet there is only us 2 who work in that van ever!!!! Wheres the sense in that???? We don't smoke in the customers houses simply because i think it is rude , but yet we won't be able to smoke in our own van once this pathetic ruling takes effect.............Well it's a big fat 2 fingered salute to the do-goody brigade from me!!!!

 

Don't get me wrong , smoking is a filthy habit , but i choose to do it. This is against my human right , being told i cannot smoke in my own property.

We are being rail-roaded and most people are blind to that fact.

 

Let's have a bit of good old common sense back in the country

[DavyR]

Mr M, I think that, in your eagerness to attack the "Do Gooders" who are ruining the country, you're in danger of not seeing the wood for the trees.

 

I can see why you interpret all this legislation as being nothing more than an attempt to curtail your individual freedom, but the real reason behind it, as with most things, is economic.

 

The anti-smoking legislation, as an example, is not a case of Nanny State telling you what is best for you. It's an attempt to prevent bar staff and others who work in smoke-filled environments from suing their employers for any ill-health they might suffer as a result. Any savings to the NHS from treating less smoking-related disease will be viewed as an additional bonus.

 

If we didn't have a "compensation culture", a lot of the legislation that has been introduced in the last few years would be unnecessary.

 

Similarly, any straw that can be grasped at that might keep youths of limited intelligence and opportunities from offending (and causing the taxpayer expense - even more so if or when arrested) will be considered by the authorities.