And it looks like the kind of people favouring the gang patch ban are also the same kind of people lambasting hate-speech law as thought crime.
Heh. In explaining their support for the patch ban, Hyde waffles on about being a libertarian and how it was the state's fundamental role to protect our freedoms. Yet he concludes that "the wearing of a patch on a jacket is intimidation of law-abiding citizens".
Yet with hate speech - which surely is often intimidating - they say (my emphasis): "Freedom of Speech is not a tool. It's a right of free people. Free Speech is not a tool of attack. It's a means of communication and critical debate. We shouldn't risk punishment for the way others feel."
Trotter's reference to WW2 history seems to ignore that part of its lessons.
And even on his own terms, I fail to see how imposing a dress code on the brownshirts (or Mosley's fascists, according to someone in the comments) made them any less toxic. And if we really want to Godwin the argument, it's fair to point out that in very short order the Nazis saved the German people from "intimidation" by Communists, trade unions and other nasty radical elements. All, of course, in the interests of public safety and good order.
But of course, Laws' Law is just "the first step", which makes me wonder how arbitrary and extensive Police powers have to become before Trotter decides Ben Franklin has a point after all when he wrote: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
I fail to see how imposing a dress code on the brownshirts (or Mosley's fascists, according to someone in the comments) made them any less toxic.
Quite. Historical results somewhat undermine his argument.
Time seems right to link to the Kiwipolitico topic about the demise of public intellectuals in our fair land.
Meanwhile, Lhaws makes the front page of the online version of the UK Guardian.
Well, fuck me with a dildo and call me a meat popsicle. I do hope Mike's next vanity Google isn't going to give him any ideas from down Doncaster way.
Thanks for that, Linley. Where shall I send my therapist's bill?
His kids should be calling the eeevil CYPFS if they're getting washed in Daddy's self-love on a daily purpose. That's just wrong.
A year with no patches on the streets of Whanganui, how's that working out?
No discernible decrease in violent crime, burglaries, vandalism, vehicle thefts or, indeed, any statistic used as an indicator of criminal gang behaviour.
So my right to wear what I please took a hit for what?
I hope this post gets published before my right to express what I please takes a hit because some elected nutter wants to ride the censorship issue to garner some publicity.
After reading through your posts on a wide range of topics, I am not displeased that you think me a fool. I would be concerned if someone with your views found me otherwise.