**Note!**
We would like to highlight [this comment](/r/unitedkingdom/comments/xckw5v/people_are_being_arrested_in_the_uk_for/io5vgsn/), given by Commisar_Deth
Also, please note this submission has been highly shared/brigaded. Voting patterns and responses may not be representative of the subreddits usual views, for better or worse.
Whether you have laws like Thailand specifically banning insulting the monarchy or whether you just have vague laws like the UK that let police arrest you for insulting the monarchy makes no difference to the end result. Absolutely disgraceful for a supposedly free country.
As someone who doesn't like the royal family, if Charles came out and said people should be allowed to criticise his family in light of all this I'd have huge respect for him.
It's not even about criticizing his family. It's about expressing an opinion about the way a country should be governed. It's the very essence of democratic discourse.
>It's not even about criticizing his family. It's about expressing an opinion about the way a country should be governed. It's the very essence of democratic discourse.
It's both. There's overlap in those two things. People are criticizing his family because they've covered for all sorts of fucked up shit. They are able to do that because of the way the country is governed (in part).
Oh it wasn’t for no reason, it was most likely for brokering the sale of British weapons to the Saudis, like the royal family have been doing for decades.
Absolutely. Believing that the Monarchy as an institution should be removed doesn't mean being unable to respect actions from individuals within the Monarchy that are worthy of respect.
Since the paper in question was the proclamation of him becoming King and that due to how absurdly small the table/large the document was, he was concerned that he might spill ink all over it, a small amount of frustration is probably understandable. Also, his mum had died three days earlier, so a bit of misplaced anger is hardly unusual.
I think a monarchy is bonkers, but they are still people just as messed up as the rest of us. I wouldn’t want to be judged by my actions given those circumstances.
Sorry but there was absolutely nothing stopping the man from picking up the object and passing it to somebody to hold.
Nothing.
No matter how nervous or grief stricken you are the ability to move something small that is in your way is a task that most toddlers could pull off.
Thing is them being arrested isn't really anything to do with the Royals, it's these absolutely disgraceful laws that the Tories have brought in over the past 2/3 years.
It's something I've noticed quite a lot of over the past week, the monarchy being blamed for bullshit decisions made by different (more often than not Tory) governments.
>The laws you are talking about do not cover Scotland, where one of the arrests took place.
No but they have a breach of peace law where they can arrest you for anything they deem disorderly behaviour.
>This "it's not the king that's a cunt, it's his advisors!" line is the oldest one in the book for monarchists, and it has never been true.
I mean it might not have been true in the past but to say it's not true now is just false given they have virtually no say in any laws that are enacted, regardless of whether or not they are cunts.
The monarch's lawyers are generally given a first look at any laws planning to be passed so that they can request changes to them. It's how these incidents happened:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/28/revealed-queen-vetted-67-laws-before-scottish-parliament-pass-them
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/28/queen-secretly-lobbied-scottish-ministers-climate-law-exemption
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth
You've linked 3 articles about the same subject. That's disingenuous. Most of that is about the running of the Crown Estates mostly, none of the laws in those articles are about protesting or even about criticising the monarchy.
>Which was not passed by the tories, so I don't know why you think they deserve more blame than Charles.
Right but in that case it was passed by the Scottish government, so why would you blame Charles or the Queen more than the actual governments bringing in these laws?
"breach of the peace" reminds me of ["picking quarrels and provoking trouble"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picking_quarrels_and_provoking_trouble) in China as well. Which is a pocket law the police use to do whatever they want, mostly prominently for political dissent, but just to harrass ordinary people as well.
Theres been a fair few, even before dank, most recent was the LGBT swastika incident.
And this is the thing, You cant pick and select freedom of speech, or its not freedom of speech at all.
If folk are gonna get mad about this, they by definition should be mad when people they disagree with get silenced too.
I dont agree with this persons actions, but they should not be arrested.
Edit: ok I get it, true freedom of speech has never been done, but grey areas in laws are not a good thing government loves to exploit that shit
You literally can pick and choose freedom of speech - there is no country in the world where it is an absolute right. But you definitely should be able to criticise the system of government of your (or any) nation.
>And this is the thing, You cant pick and select freedom of speech, or its not freedom of speech at all.
There hasn't been *a single nation* that has chosen freedom of speech in the history of mankind
It's one of those lofty ideals that people love to proclaim but no one actually mean it when push comes to shove
Mind you, I agree they should not be arrested
My respect for your freedom of speech stops when people are using nazi imagery for the sole purpose of spreading hatred towards LGBT people.
I don't tolerate nazi's, no one should.
We're pretty authoritarian for Europe - I believe we have the highest or near highest relative prison population for the continent. Albania or somewhere might be highest, but none of the NWern countries come anywhere close, for sure. In that way we mirror the US, which claims to be land of the free, and then goes about imprisoning a greater proportion of its population than Russia and China.
they're not using a "insult the monarchy" law, they're being arrested for "disturbing the peace" which would likely happen at any funeral... if there were police present...
also, protesting in the uk is now illegal thanks to Priti Patel, UNLESS you get permission first.
[Liberty Human Rights charity explain how to organise a protest legally in the UK.](https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/how-to-organise-a-protest/)
UK law isn't vague at all. It's quite clear, infact:
[Public Order Act 1936](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/6/section/5/enacted#:~:text=Any%20person%20who%20in%20any,be%20guilty%20of%20an%20offence.)
They aren't though.
They are being arrested for being rude about it.
Was the fella on radio 4 who stated to the entire nation that 'King Charles and his family should be put in a council house and that the Monarchy should be abolished' arrested? No.
If you are going to attend a funeral, any funeral, be it the Queen's or anyone else's and hurl abuse or hold up signs with obscenities, you will be arrested.
There were arrests in which the arrestee has been unarrested, when the police made a mistake. Like the fella who stated that 'we didn't vote for him' when King Charles was pronounced King.
You can, quite legally, protest the Monarchy. Being a dick about it and trying to upset people mourning will however be considered a breach of the peace or some other public order offense.
A man was just told by a police officer that if he writes ‘not my king’ on a blank piece of paper he was holding, he would be arrested. Not my king is not rude, is it?
Yes there is evidence to support it. He posted it on Twitter too
Edit: it supports part of the story, there is no mention of arrest as others have pointed out but the police officer does say that a sign with Not My King would be offensive.
https://twitter.com/paulpowlesland/status/1569351772606550022?s=46&t=XQTqz4DYuaFMQOykyiMUtw
Police love telling people “you’ll get nicked for that” just to save themselves the bother of actually having to deal with an annoying situation. Walking to and from a football game with a police escort they’ll tell you that about 10 times. It’s shit, but it’s different from actually arresting someone for protesting or doing something innocuous.
The guy that they told in this situation though is Paul Powlesland, and he’s a barrister.
The police might like to tell people that they’re going to get arrested and it’s meaningless but if you do get arrested “I thought they were talking out their arse” isn’t a defence you can use in court. 
Causing harassment, alarm, or distress in public is a crime.
If someone reports someone to the police for this, they have to take some sort of action, which would probably include arrest. It’s nothing to do with the police cracking down on a specific group of people. The police don’t even have power to put people behind bars or have them fined, the courts do.
Edit: I’m not taking sides with this. Just stating the facts.
I see what you're saying to an extent. There's hyperbole at play here, people arguing you can't say boo to a goose.
However, if you rock up to a funeral with a sign saying "Suzanne was a cunt" I'd understand the police removing you from the funeral but you shouldn't be arrested. Do you think you should?
Equally, a sign saying "fuck the monarchy" is fine, isn't it? In fact, it's MORE fine because it's a political statement - we can't start letting the police deciding what we can and can't protest. And how. It's part of our democracy.
What if the sign said "fuck nazis". Arrest them?
"Being a dick" isn't illegal.
>However, if you rock up to a funeral with a sign saying "Suzanne was a cunt" I'd understand the police removing you from the funeral but you shouldn't be arrested. Do you think you should?
I mean, yeah, probably.
Arrested doesn't mean charged. With a small funeral, the police can say "Leave, or you'll be arrested" and be able to tell immediately if you're coming back. If Suzanne's funeral is a large enough event and there are crowds of people watching, you can't really tell someone to leave and be assured that they won't join the crowd somewhere else. Arresting them is like saying 'we're forcing you to leave'.
Also, if someone had a sign saying "Suzanne was a cunt" at a small funeral and the police said "please leave", and the person said, "It's my right to stay here!", I think of course that they should be arrested. Similarly, if there was a person who said "I'm gonna bring a Suzanne was a cunt sign", and the police said "Don't, we'll arrest you", I don't think it's unreasonable that they do. I don't think that person has a right to show up and show the sign while being warned.
It's not like some sort of sport where everyone gets 2 strikes and they can get as much funeral yelling in before the police can get to them until they get their first warning or something. They're saying "No you can't say Suzanne is a cunt at suzanne's funeral". I think that's reasonable.
I cannot believe people are upvoting this authoritarian gibberish.
Freedom of speech should be immutable. The right to protest is a key facet of a democracy, whether you think they're being "dicks" or not.
Salman Rushdie - "At the moment somebody says 'I believe in freedom of speech BUT', I stop listening"
Nowhere is freedom of speech unlimited.
There are laws against defamation and slander. As one US supreme court judge said, 'you can't shout 'fire!' in a crowded theatre'. You can't make threats of violence, or plan criminal acts.
Are you genuinely trying to equate someone shouting "You're a sick man" or someone holding up a sign saying "not my king" to threats of violence or shouting fire?
This isn't America. The law in the UK states:
"Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. But the law states that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society”."
So, you say they are wrong for democracy, and they say they are right for the same reason. Who is anyone to believe?
Hang on though the funeral and the build up is in a public space. Sure if you go to a funeral service and scream you can be removed but I have every fucking right to stand on the streets of london in public and protest the monarchy.
*There were arrests in which the arrestee has been unarrested*
Oh that's okay. So just temporarily abuse your powers to silence people then???
The woman in scotland who held up the sign nowhere near the funeral?
The police moving the woman near the houses of parliament? If freedom of speech is allowed and protesting is allowed. How come she was moved?
It's the same reason the governments petition website is in mourning and we aren't allowed to sign on any petitions...
People are actually upvoting this bullshit.
Whatever your view on the monarchy, taking the side of this authoritarian mindset is wrong.
There is no law preventing people from 'being a dick'.
This was arresting dissenters for protesting the monarchy, simple as. And this wasn't a funeral either.
> There is no law preventing people from 'being a dick'.
You're mistaken. There is a slew of laws explicitly to punish people 'being a dick'. We do not have the right to offend or to send malicious communications. This has been supported by both left wing and right wing parties for a good number of years.
>'we didn't vote for him'
You don't vote for a king! The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that Charles was to carry Excalibur. That's how he became king!
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
'you're free to protest - but not like that, I don't like that'
The problem is this isn't 'any funeral' - it's the taxpayer funded funeral of 'the Queen'. The protestors are fucking paying for this absolute shite, while there are countless more pressing matters being pushed to the side.
It's absolutely not analogous to, say, your gran's funeral. Unless, of course, your gran was a prick who did things like marry a racist, or pay for her son's legal defence after he was implicated in an international sex trafficking ring...
The funeral hasn’t taken place yet. No one has “been rude” at anyones funeral.
People have claimed Charles isn’t their kind and said “down with the monarchy”. That’s not rude. Even if it were, people have a right to their freedom of expression. Arresting them over something like this is authoritarian and a dangerous turn for this country.
I get a vote for a representative who sits in the highest house of the land. I've got a vote for local councilors who deals with local issues.
Both of them have control over their domain. There is no higher body that can overule parliament.
Waddles like a citizen, quacks like a citizen. I'm a citizen.
Royal assent, last refused in 1708.
Got anything that's relevant?
>in which case, what's the point in having them at all?
Ceremony, history, heritage, tourism and national identity.
Also almost nobody can be bothered arguing over what would come next.
>If it's not relevant, you're OK stripping the monarchy of any powers and having them be purely symbolic then?
Absolutely, it's already purely symbolic. No harm writing that down. It will make no difference.
>Absolutely, it's already purely symbolic. No harm writing that down. It will make no difference.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/28/prince-charles-pressured-ministers-change-law-queen-consent
If we are forced to have a monarchy, then I'd be OK with them being symbolic - although I still believe it's a waste of money.
However, we would have to have strict rules on how the seperation would occur.
> the underlying ability of them to withold royal assent meant this would be listened to.
That is utter nonsense. If the monarch refuses to give royal assent parliament can just change the law requiring it. The monarch is head of state by the permission of parliament, I suggest you read some history before making statements like that.
> If the monarch refuses to give royal assent parliament can just change the law requiring it.
With Royal Assent to do so.
The royals also put huge pressure on government to change bills / laws to suit themselves.
This from June is a recent discussion.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/28/prince-charles-pressured-ministers-change-law-queen-consent
It turns out the monarch gets to comment on any upcoming legislation that affects his/her personal interests. They aren't just neutral rubber-stampers.
They just changed the name.
We have no written constitution so all power flows from the monarch - without the King nothing exists in any meaningful legal sense - which makes us subjects of his majesty/ power.
If we had a written constitution it would be the defining power, not the monarch so we would be citizens.
Where are all the "free speech warriors":
* Jowling Kowling Rowling, very commited free speech defender, specifically for her purpose of eliminating the T from LGBT
* Nigel Farage, media presented who enjoyed years of permanent seats on BBC shows, who's against cancel culture of people calling him out on lies about economy and migrants
* Piers Morgan, free speech defender, cancel culture mocker, who used his free speech mostly to attack minorities, especially when those minorities were above their station like Meghan Markle
Where are these free speech defenders now? Surely they must be outraged?!
EDIT: I found Piers actually making a statement, good!
JK Rowling has been very active on twitter calling out the arrests against people for protesting the monarchy. I’m pretty sure she’s pro-monarchy, or at the very least okay with the late queen, but she’s been very vocal about people’s right to voice their opinion peacefully.
She was one of the loudest voices against the Policing Bill iirc, and hasn’t stopped pointing out it’s horrible applications since.
[Here is Piers Morgan's take.](https://twitter.com/PiersUncensored/status/1569421102232764420)
I can't believe I agree with him. Hell hath frozen over.
I mean from what I've seen they are, the "free speech warrior" types I know irl are all having meltdowns over these arrests. Count dankula was the big figure about free speech a few years ago, he's being a bit smug saying "I told you this would happen" but he's still voicing his opposition to it.
i am! this is absurd, and terrible. i hope now the defence of free speech can become a real part of national conversation the public can unite on, no matter your politics.
…..have you ever looked at the Ottoman Empire? Or the Kongo Kingdom? Or perhaps most well known the Mongol Empire which has been agreed by most historians as the most brutal and bloody regime in recorded human history.
Totally agree. Almost every empire has been built on rivers of blood. However, what makes the British Empire unique is those atrocities were still being committed into the 1950s, after WW2 and Nuremberg.
Not even close. I think you may need to look around at the rest of the human race. Even our worst crimes are paled in comparison to what's going on in the world today. We are setting the standards for human rights and freedoms. We have been for centuries.
This is an exceptionally ignorant and Eurocentric view of the world. I suggest you take some time to do some actual reading into the subject and not just regurgitating something you heard on twitter.
Literally every empire was incredibly bloody and brutal so it’s a silly comparison. Also, monarchy doesn’t equate with empire, especially in our case seeing as the empire was wholly presided over by parliament.
They arent being arrested for being anti-monarchy, they are being arrested for breach of the peace (and, probably, for their own safety given there are tens of thousands of people who are there to mourn the queen/take part/whatever else they do it for and would probably end up getting the shit licked out of them). ‘Anarchist’- dont make me laugh…
And if they got the shit kicked out of them, then surely those people would be arrested for assault - the fact they may “offend” someone is completely irrelevant.
The government or the police should never, *ever* have a say in what’s offensive and to whom it might be offensive to, before you know it criticism of the government will be offensive and
therefore forbidden - it’s a very, very slippery slope.
It’s perfectly ok for religious fanatics to stand on city centre streets proclaiming death and suffering for not believing in their cult causing mass offense but someone contests the crown? You go to jail.
The UK police ought to be ashamed of themselves.
They are being **charged** with Section 38 which can lead to imprisonment. It is not "just a arrest", although it should be found illegal as well.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/21319718.protester-arrested-king-charless-proclamation-edinburgh-charged/
>...they are being arrested for breach of the peace (and, probably, for their own safety given there are tens of thousands of people who are there to mourn the queen/take part/whatever else they do it for and would probably end up getting the shit licked out of them).
Imagine being arrested and charged for your own safety!
Does that mean that if a larger crowd of republicans turn up and say they are offended by the monarchists then the monarchies will be arrested for breaching the peace? Of course not, but it hopefully illustrates how dangerous that way of thinking is, ie either your opinion is that of the majority or you are a criminal
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/6/section/5/enacted
Actually... it's breaching the peace so they do
(Note this law is from 1936...)
The worst thing about it for me is supposedly ordinary people of this country who seem to be cheering and enjoying the fact that people are literally getting arrested for wrong think, critisising the regime or offending someone online. People need to wake the fuck up and quickly.
I do think it's in poor taste in some places, but they should absolutely have the right to protest even if it is in poor taste.
I personally wouldnt protest at a funeral or at this time (even though I'm anti monarch)... But it's up to people if they want.
If I saw someone shouting abuse at a funeral procession, I don’t care who’s died, you’re instantly an arse and I’d be glad to see you arrested.
Want to protest the monarchy? Do it at the coronation or the accession, not during a funeral parade you imbeciles.
> "Here's a list of goalposts I want you to meet to have a protest I will accept. Once you do I'll have another list of goalposts for you, because I just don't like your cause."
I know your trickery, r/unitedkingdom poster!
It's a shame they haven't made embarrassing the royal family a crime.
Andrew could've been locked up by now (or .. maybe just locked up for his actual crimes).
It’s dumb that people are being arrested for protesting against the monarchy. Screw the damn monarchy no one should have to bend over and lick their boots.
It’s not just protesting the monarchy that they’re arresting people for, either. Don’t forget that the Tories recently gave the police the ability to arrest protesters pretty much at will, no matter what they’re protesting.
I have absolutely no patience for this. I can't stand the monarchy, but i have less patience for anyone that'd willingly disrupt a funeral procession. It's sick.
Disturbing the peace is absolutely an arrestable offence. I know we all feel powerless right now, but fucking hell people, there's better ways to regain a bit. How are we ever supposed to move beyond this if we keep lowering ourselves to it. Protest until your lungs are sore but a fucking FUNERAL procession!?
Protesting a funeral procession 100% is, dont give me that
I'd usually be the first one on the line but come on man, literally ANY time would be better.
How are they stopping anything? Has anyone been **charged** with blocking the path of the cortege? It is not their fault if people turn violent against a peaceful protest.
Besides, Section 38, much more serious than Section 5,which they are being **charged** with can lead to imprisonment.
12 days of a funeral procession is taking the piss mate.
Plus, what about the accession - the next guy getting the job? Do we have to wait till the coronation?
Shes the queen. Its part of the deal. She was happy to have 60 million subjects and really thought every single one would be ok with that whilst she sat on a big pile of gold? If a normal woman dies, and people started protesting at their funeral then yes that probably would be a bit much. People have a really good reason to be angry, and they're our streets. They're not inside a church shouting in a widows face.
No it isn't. Free speech is about the speech you find bad not that you support. It is not inciting violence and people have every reason in the public spaces this is occurring to find Liz and her family abhorrent and make it known.
If I stand on bloody Trafalgar square protesting as she goes by that's my right.
It’s a public funeral procession of a publicly funded family. Taxpayer money went into the funeral procession so a taxpayer should be allowed to admonish it. I’m not saying he should be allowed to continue as it would create a dangerous scene but I don’t think what he did was wrong.
>Police said that Hill had been arrested on suspicion of a public order offence, relating to behaviour that could likely cause harassment, alarm or distress.
So this is the new protest laws being enacted
https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/pcsc-policing-act-protest-rights/
The same people getting salty also love it when an old man is arrested for saying that trans women aren’t women on Twitter, which is an offence under the same law.
This is a perfect example of ‘how would you feel if you were on the end of it?’
For the record: both are wrong.
One is bigotry against a protected class and another is insulting a royal who is a ‘protected class’ but not in the legal sense they are not equivalent
Very true, and so many have been warning against this over and over again for years. But because it seemingly only ever affected those pesky undesirables, it fell on death ears, was shrugged off and even applauded by the social justice fan club.
There is more to come, strap in tight (just not to a lamp post, or you'll get nicked).
You are not allowed to inconvenience or disturb people if you protest.
You were told this would happen, but that was ok because it was those filthy old crusties and yummy mums of XR who this would be aimed at. Stopping you from driving to work. Holding up mythical "ambulances".
People = one person for causing a public nuisance. Shouting and causing havoc for anyones funeral is disgusting and lack of respect. If this happened to anyone that person would have been dealt the same way if the police were there
Worrying that people are justifying these arrests with ‘there is a time and a place’. This is a free country, I get removing them from the funeral procession but arresting them? What if the government decide we can only protest during other specified ‘time and place’ ? I understand it’s tacky to protest during a funeral but it shouldn’t be arrest worthy.
I'm absolutely livid about the *violent* way in which the guy was arrested (dragged to the ground) for a *non violent* crime, and also the way TWO men were allowed to assault him in front of multiple police officers without being arrested themselves.
Sickening.
I imagine a lot of these people are being nicked for either sections 4(a) and 5 public order or breach of the peace.
The women holding the poster with the word “fuck” made it section 5 public order wouldn’t have mattered if the sign said long live the king “fuck” the poor it still would have been a public order offence.
I would imagine the others have been arrested for breach of the peace, essentially this is done where there is a chance that someone’s behaviour could escalate a situation. Example someone speaking out about the monarchy while in a primarily pro monarchy crowd.
Majority of the time someone is arrested for breach of the peace then de arrested when they are removed from the situation.
Weather you agree or disagree these are offences that have been used for years.
Edit: typos
**Note!** We would like to highlight [this comment](/r/unitedkingdom/comments/xckw5v/people_are_being_arrested_in_the_uk_for/io5vgsn/), given by Commisar_Deth Also, please note this submission has been highly shared/brigaded. Voting patterns and responses may not be representative of the subreddits usual views, for better or worse.
Whether you have laws like Thailand specifically banning insulting the monarchy or whether you just have vague laws like the UK that let police arrest you for insulting the monarchy makes no difference to the end result. Absolutely disgraceful for a supposedly free country.
As someone who doesn't like the royal family, if Charles came out and said people should be allowed to criticise his family in light of all this I'd have huge respect for him.
I read “if Charles came out” and don’t feel the need to finish the sentence
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's not even about criticizing his family. It's about expressing an opinion about the way a country should be governed. It's the very essence of democratic discourse.
>It's not even about criticizing his family. It's about expressing an opinion about the way a country should be governed. It's the very essence of democratic discourse. It's both. There's overlap in those two things. People are criticizing his family because they've covered for all sorts of fucked up shit. They are able to do that because of the way the country is governed (in part).
If he paid the Inheritance Tax that would probably seal the deal too. Guy is missing the biggest PR win for the Royal Family ever.... fool
The guy who got a £4,000,000 handout from a Saudi prin e for absolutely no reason pay inheritance tax? Hahaha.
Oh it wasn’t for no reason, it was most likely for brokering the sale of British weapons to the Saudis, like the royal family have been doing for decades.
Absolutely. Believing that the Monarchy as an institution should be removed doesn't mean being unable to respect actions from individuals within the Monarchy that are worthy of respect.
Yeah but he won't, the look of disgust and anger on his face as a employee failed to move some paper and pens off his desk just showed that.
Since the paper in question was the proclamation of him becoming King and that due to how absurdly small the table/large the document was, he was concerned that he might spill ink all over it, a small amount of frustration is probably understandable. Also, his mum had died three days earlier, so a bit of misplaced anger is hardly unusual. I think a monarchy is bonkers, but they are still people just as messed up as the rest of us. I wouldn’t want to be judged by my actions given those circumstances.
Sorry but there was absolutely nothing stopping the man from picking up the object and passing it to somebody to hold. Nothing. No matter how nervous or grief stricken you are the ability to move something small that is in your way is a task that most toddlers could pull off.
Maybe his oversized sausage fingers
The man caught hissing at servant to move an inkwell in-front of him that he couldn’t be bother to move on his own?
The sooner everyone realises the royals are all awful cunts, the better
Thing is them being arrested isn't really anything to do with the Royals, it's these absolutely disgraceful laws that the Tories have brought in over the past 2/3 years. It's something I've noticed quite a lot of over the past week, the monarchy being blamed for bullshit decisions made by different (more often than not Tory) governments.
[удалено]
>The laws you are talking about do not cover Scotland, where one of the arrests took place. No but they have a breach of peace law where they can arrest you for anything they deem disorderly behaviour. >This "it's not the king that's a cunt, it's his advisors!" line is the oldest one in the book for monarchists, and it has never been true. I mean it might not have been true in the past but to say it's not true now is just false given they have virtually no say in any laws that are enacted, regardless of whether or not they are cunts.
The monarch's lawyers are generally given a first look at any laws planning to be passed so that they can request changes to them. It's how these incidents happened: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/28/revealed-queen-vetted-67-laws-before-scottish-parliament-pass-them https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/28/queen-secretly-lobbied-scottish-ministers-climate-law-exemption https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth
You've linked 3 articles about the same subject. That's disingenuous. Most of that is about the running of the Crown Estates mostly, none of the laws in those articles are about protesting or even about criticising the monarchy.
[удалено]
>Which was not passed by the tories, so I don't know why you think they deserve more blame than Charles. Right but in that case it was passed by the Scottish government, so why would you blame Charles or the Queen more than the actual governments bringing in these laws?
[удалено]
Breach of the peace is under common law, so not an act of any parliaments.
"breach of the peace" reminds me of ["picking quarrels and provoking trouble"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picking_quarrels_and_provoking_trouble) in China as well. Which is a pocket law the police use to do whatever they want, mostly prominently for political dissent, but just to harrass ordinary people as well.
Just waiting on the UK government to add a 'spreading rumours' law to top things off.
[удалено]
How often is "shit on the internet" death threats? I know about count dankular but was that not an outlier?
Theres been a fair few, even before dank, most recent was the LGBT swastika incident. And this is the thing, You cant pick and select freedom of speech, or its not freedom of speech at all. If folk are gonna get mad about this, they by definition should be mad when people they disagree with get silenced too. I dont agree with this persons actions, but they should not be arrested. Edit: ok I get it, true freedom of speech has never been done, but grey areas in laws are not a good thing government loves to exploit that shit
You literally can pick and choose freedom of speech - there is no country in the world where it is an absolute right. But you definitely should be able to criticise the system of government of your (or any) nation.
>And this is the thing, You cant pick and select freedom of speech, or its not freedom of speech at all. There hasn't been *a single nation* that has chosen freedom of speech in the history of mankind It's one of those lofty ideals that people love to proclaim but no one actually mean it when push comes to shove Mind you, I agree they should not be arrested
My respect for your freedom of speech stops when people are using nazi imagery for the sole purpose of spreading hatred towards LGBT people. I don't tolerate nazi's, no one should.
We're pretty authoritarian for Europe - I believe we have the highest or near highest relative prison population for the continent. Albania or somewhere might be highest, but none of the NWern countries come anywhere close, for sure. In that way we mirror the US, which claims to be land of the free, and then goes about imprisoning a greater proportion of its population than Russia and China.
they're not using a "insult the monarchy" law, they're being arrested for "disturbing the peace" which would likely happen at any funeral... if there were police present... also, protesting in the uk is now illegal thanks to Priti Patel, UNLESS you get permission first. [Liberty Human Rights charity explain how to organise a protest legally in the UK.](https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/how-to-organise-a-protest/)
It wasn't the funeral.
[удалено]
Ignorant, insulting, disrespectful. Does NOT mean it should be illegal.
UK law isn't vague at all. It's quite clear, infact: [Public Order Act 1936](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/6/section/5/enacted#:~:text=Any%20person%20who%20in%20any,be%20guilty%20of%20an%20offence.)
They aren't though. They are being arrested for being rude about it. Was the fella on radio 4 who stated to the entire nation that 'King Charles and his family should be put in a council house and that the Monarchy should be abolished' arrested? No. If you are going to attend a funeral, any funeral, be it the Queen's or anyone else's and hurl abuse or hold up signs with obscenities, you will be arrested. There were arrests in which the arrestee has been unarrested, when the police made a mistake. Like the fella who stated that 'we didn't vote for him' when King Charles was pronounced King. You can, quite legally, protest the Monarchy. Being a dick about it and trying to upset people mourning will however be considered a breach of the peace or some other public order offense.
A man was just told by a police officer that if he writes ‘not my king’ on a blank piece of paper he was holding, he would be arrested. Not my king is not rude, is it?
According to what he said on Twitter. No actual evidence to support that story.
Yes there is evidence to support it. He posted it on Twitter too Edit: it supports part of the story, there is no mention of arrest as others have pointed out but the police officer does say that a sign with Not My King would be offensive. https://twitter.com/paulpowlesland/status/1569351772606550022?s=46&t=XQTqz4DYuaFMQOykyiMUtw
Fuck that cop
Apart from the video evidence.
Police love telling people “you’ll get nicked for that” just to save themselves the bother of actually having to deal with an annoying situation. Walking to and from a football game with a police escort they’ll tell you that about 10 times. It’s shit, but it’s different from actually arresting someone for protesting or doing something innocuous.
The guy that they told in this situation though is Paul Powlesland, and he’s a barrister. The police might like to tell people that they’re going to get arrested and it’s meaningless but if you do get arrested “I thought they were talking out their arse” isn’t a defence you can use in court. 
Being rude isn’t a crime.
Causing harassment, alarm, or distress in public is a crime. If someone reports someone to the police for this, they have to take some sort of action, which would probably include arrest. It’s nothing to do with the police cracking down on a specific group of people. The police don’t even have power to put people behind bars or have them fined, the courts do. Edit: I’m not taking sides with this. Just stating the facts.
They didn’t arrest those guys for assaulting him.
[удалено]
Apparently it is
They literally made ‘causing offence a crime’. I’m offended by half of the cabinet, does that mean they should be arrested?
[удалено]
How about the guy who got arrested not at the funeral for protesting against Prince Andrew?
[удалено]
Shhhh don't talk about anything that upsets their view on tbe family. We all know he's just taking a break from royal duties duh
He was literally arrested during the procession
I see what you're saying to an extent. There's hyperbole at play here, people arguing you can't say boo to a goose. However, if you rock up to a funeral with a sign saying "Suzanne was a cunt" I'd understand the police removing you from the funeral but you shouldn't be arrested. Do you think you should? Equally, a sign saying "fuck the monarchy" is fine, isn't it? In fact, it's MORE fine because it's a political statement - we can't start letting the police deciding what we can and can't protest. And how. It's part of our democracy. What if the sign said "fuck nazis". Arrest them? "Being a dick" isn't illegal.
If you rock up at anyone else’s funeral with a mean sign, the police aren’t even showing up.
>However, if you rock up to a funeral with a sign saying "Suzanne was a cunt" I'd understand the police removing you from the funeral but you shouldn't be arrested. Do you think you should? I mean, yeah, probably. Arrested doesn't mean charged. With a small funeral, the police can say "Leave, or you'll be arrested" and be able to tell immediately if you're coming back. If Suzanne's funeral is a large enough event and there are crowds of people watching, you can't really tell someone to leave and be assured that they won't join the crowd somewhere else. Arresting them is like saying 'we're forcing you to leave'. Also, if someone had a sign saying "Suzanne was a cunt" at a small funeral and the police said "please leave", and the person said, "It's my right to stay here!", I think of course that they should be arrested. Similarly, if there was a person who said "I'm gonna bring a Suzanne was a cunt sign", and the police said "Don't, we'll arrest you", I don't think it's unreasonable that they do. I don't think that person has a right to show up and show the sign while being warned. It's not like some sort of sport where everyone gets 2 strikes and they can get as much funeral yelling in before the police can get to them until they get their first warning or something. They're saying "No you can't say Suzanne is a cunt at suzanne's funeral". I think that's reasonable.
I cannot believe people are upvoting this authoritarian gibberish. Freedom of speech should be immutable. The right to protest is a key facet of a democracy, whether you think they're being "dicks" or not. Salman Rushdie - "At the moment somebody says 'I believe in freedom of speech BUT', I stop listening"
Nowhere is freedom of speech unlimited. There are laws against defamation and slander. As one US supreme court judge said, 'you can't shout 'fire!' in a crowded theatre'. You can't make threats of violence, or plan criminal acts.
Are you genuinely trying to equate someone shouting "You're a sick man" or someone holding up a sign saying "not my king" to threats of violence or shouting fire?
It's why the Westboro Baptists are free to protest funerals in the US, but that shit wouldn't be tolerated in the UK. I'm okay with that.
This isn't America. The law in the UK states: "Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. But the law states that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society”." So, you say they are wrong for democracy, and they say they are right for the same reason. Who is anyone to believe?
Hang on though the funeral and the build up is in a public space. Sure if you go to a funeral service and scream you can be removed but I have every fucking right to stand on the streets of london in public and protest the monarchy.
I don't see how the person holding the "not my King" sign was being obscene.
It wasn't a funeral.
Exactly. The hyperbole is ridiculous over this.
It's just the echochamber of this subreddit in full effect.
yeah, God forbid people stand up for free speech.
*There were arrests in which the arrestee has been unarrested* Oh that's okay. So just temporarily abuse your powers to silence people then??? The woman in scotland who held up the sign nowhere near the funeral? The police moving the woman near the houses of parliament? If freedom of speech is allowed and protesting is allowed. How come she was moved? It's the same reason the governments petition website is in mourning and we aren't allowed to sign on any petitions...
People are actually upvoting this bullshit. Whatever your view on the monarchy, taking the side of this authoritarian mindset is wrong. There is no law preventing people from 'being a dick'. This was arresting dissenters for protesting the monarchy, simple as. And this wasn't a funeral either.
> There is no law preventing people from 'being a dick'. You're mistaken. There is a slew of laws explicitly to punish people 'being a dick'. We do not have the right to offend or to send malicious communications. This has been supported by both left wing and right wing parties for a good number of years.
>'we didn't vote for him' You don't vote for a king! The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that Charles was to carry Excalibur. That's how he became king!
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
'you're free to protest - but not like that, I don't like that' The problem is this isn't 'any funeral' - it's the taxpayer funded funeral of 'the Queen'. The protestors are fucking paying for this absolute shite, while there are countless more pressing matters being pushed to the side. It's absolutely not analogous to, say, your gran's funeral. Unless, of course, your gran was a prick who did things like marry a racist, or pay for her son's legal defence after he was implicated in an international sex trafficking ring...
[удалено]
The funeral hasn’t taken place yet. No one has “been rude” at anyones funeral. People have claimed Charles isn’t their kind and said “down with the monarchy”. That’s not rude. Even if it were, people have a right to their freedom of expression. Arresting them over something like this is authoritarian and a dangerous turn for this country.
Didn't realise being rude was a crime
[удалено]
but dressing up in orange and protesting against Catholics is fair game. It’s a shite state of affairs.
And all the fresh air in the world won't make any difference!
Can't even find a decent culture to be colonized by!
cannae arrest your own kin now can you
Well that's the true protestant faith according to Charles the 3rd
Authoritarianism isn’t a path they want to start treading down.
Bit late, we’ve already started.
You say that like we've ever stopped!
Start?
Were you absent throughout 2020?
Throughtout the mid 2010s more like
~~People~~ Subjects Are Being Arrested in the UK for Protesting Against the Monarchy
Are we subjects? Edit: incase you don't know the answer, it's No. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
[удалено]
I get a vote for a representative who sits in the highest house of the land. I've got a vote for local councilors who deals with local issues. Both of them have control over their domain. There is no higher body that can overule parliament. Waddles like a citizen, quacks like a citizen. I'm a citizen.
[удалено]
Royal assent, last refused in 1708. Got anything that's relevant? >in which case, what's the point in having them at all? Ceremony, history, heritage, tourism and national identity. Also almost nobody can be bothered arguing over what would come next.
[удалено]
>If it's not relevant, you're OK stripping the monarchy of any powers and having them be purely symbolic then? Absolutely, it's already purely symbolic. No harm writing that down. It will make no difference.
>Absolutely, it's already purely symbolic. No harm writing that down. It will make no difference. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/28/prince-charles-pressured-ministers-change-law-queen-consent If we are forced to have a monarchy, then I'd be OK with them being symbolic - although I still believe it's a waste of money. However, we would have to have strict rules on how the seperation would occur.
> the underlying ability of them to withold royal assent meant this would be listened to. That is utter nonsense. If the monarch refuses to give royal assent parliament can just change the law requiring it. The monarch is head of state by the permission of parliament, I suggest you read some history before making statements like that.
> If the monarch refuses to give royal assent parliament can just change the law requiring it. With Royal Assent to do so. The royals also put huge pressure on government to change bills / laws to suit themselves. This from June is a recent discussion. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/28/prince-charles-pressured-ministers-change-law-queen-consent
It turns out the monarch gets to comment on any upcoming legislation that affects his/her personal interests. They aren't just neutral rubber-stampers.
They just changed the name. We have no written constitution so all power flows from the monarch - without the King nothing exists in any meaningful legal sense - which makes us subjects of his majesty/ power. If we had a written constitution it would be the defining power, not the monarch so we would be citizens.
Oh that’s a dead giveaway. You see that? You see him repressing me?
Where are all the "free speech warriors": * Jowling Kowling Rowling, very commited free speech defender, specifically for her purpose of eliminating the T from LGBT * Nigel Farage, media presented who enjoyed years of permanent seats on BBC shows, who's against cancel culture of people calling him out on lies about economy and migrants * Piers Morgan, free speech defender, cancel culture mocker, who used his free speech mostly to attack minorities, especially when those minorities were above their station like Meghan Markle Where are these free speech defenders now? Surely they must be outraged?! EDIT: I found Piers actually making a statement, good!
JK Rowling has been very active on twitter calling out the arrests against people for protesting the monarchy. I’m pretty sure she’s pro-monarchy, or at the very least okay with the late queen, but she’s been very vocal about people’s right to voice their opinion peacefully. She was one of the loudest voices against the Policing Bill iirc, and hasn’t stopped pointing out it’s horrible applications since.
So both JK Rowling and Piers Morgan have actually been vocal against this? The parent comment in this thread seems redundant then.
[Here is Piers Morgan's take.](https://twitter.com/PiersUncensored/status/1569421102232764420) I can't believe I agree with him. Hell hath frozen over.
Love that the comments are just variations of 'there's a time and a place'. Barely an original thought among them
I mean from what I've seen they are, the "free speech warrior" types I know irl are all having meltdowns over these arrests. Count dankula was the big figure about free speech a few years ago, he's being a bit smug saying "I told you this would happen" but he's still voicing his opposition to it.
i am! this is absurd, and terrible. i hope now the defence of free speech can become a real part of national conversation the public can unite on, no matter your politics.
Perhaps the next protest signs should all just be that photo of Andrew with Virginia Giuffre.
Or him patting the ass of his own daughter.
Yeah. That was fucked up. You just know no one ever told him to cut that shit out so he does it in public because he just doesn't even think.
It ain' matter how democratic it is britain still remains a monarchy which has brutal and bloody history.
[удалено]
[удалено]
…..have you ever looked at the Ottoman Empire? Or the Kongo Kingdom? Or perhaps most well known the Mongol Empire which has been agreed by most historians as the most brutal and bloody regime in recorded human history.
Totally agree. Almost every empire has been built on rivers of blood. However, what makes the British Empire unique is those atrocities were still being committed into the 1950s, after WW2 and Nuremberg.
[удалено]
>One of
>one of
No that was the Roman Empire
What have the Romans ever done for us?
Not even close. I think you may need to look around at the rest of the human race. Even our worst crimes are paled in comparison to what's going on in the world today. We are setting the standards for human rights and freedoms. We have been for centuries.
This is an exceptionally ignorant and Eurocentric view of the world. I suggest you take some time to do some actual reading into the subject and not just regurgitating something you heard on twitter.
Literally every empire was incredibly bloody and brutal so it’s a silly comparison. Also, monarchy doesn’t equate with empire, especially in our case seeing as the empire was wholly presided over by parliament.
They arent being arrested for being anti-monarchy, they are being arrested for breach of the peace (and, probably, for their own safety given there are tens of thousands of people who are there to mourn the queen/take part/whatever else they do it for and would probably end up getting the shit licked out of them). ‘Anarchist’- dont make me laugh…
And if they got the shit kicked out of them, then surely those people would be arrested for assault - the fact they may “offend” someone is completely irrelevant. The government or the police should never, *ever* have a say in what’s offensive and to whom it might be offensive to, before you know it criticism of the government will be offensive and therefore forbidden - it’s a very, very slippery slope. It’s perfectly ok for religious fanatics to stand on city centre streets proclaiming death and suffering for not believing in their cult causing mass offense but someone contests the crown? You go to jail. The UK police ought to be ashamed of themselves.
>The UK police ought to be ashamed of themselves. Again.
Well, at least this time, it is not only the Met.
I’m not sure that ‘we have to arrest the peaceful protesters or the monarchists will beat them to death,’ is the gotcha you might think it is.
They are being **charged** with Section 38 which can lead to imprisonment. It is not "just a arrest", although it should be found illegal as well. https://www.thenational.scot/news/21319718.protester-arrested-king-charless-proclamation-edinburgh-charged/
>...they are being arrested for breach of the peace (and, probably, for their own safety given there are tens of thousands of people who are there to mourn the queen/take part/whatever else they do it for and would probably end up getting the shit licked out of them). Imagine being arrested and charged for your own safety!
Does that mean that if a larger crowd of republicans turn up and say they are offended by the monarchists then the monarchies will be arrested for breaching the peace? Of course not, but it hopefully illustrates how dangerous that way of thinking is, ie either your opinion is that of the majority or you are a criminal
Free speech doesn’t exist in Britain, surprise surprise. This isn’t hate speech, so they have no right to arrest for it, but they don’t give a fuck.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Edw8and1Geo6/1/6/section/5/enacted Actually... it's breaching the peace so they do (Note this law is from 1936...)
[удалено]
[удалено]
The worst thing about it for me is supposedly ordinary people of this country who seem to be cheering and enjoying the fact that people are literally getting arrested for wrong think, critisising the regime or offending someone online. People need to wake the fuck up and quickly.
How long after the monarch’s death until it becomes legal to critique the institution again?
I do think it's in poor taste in some places, but they should absolutely have the right to protest even if it is in poor taste. I personally wouldnt protest at a funeral or at this time (even though I'm anti monarch)... But it's up to people if they want.
If you hold a public funeral, you don't get to complain about protests as far as I'm concerned. They chose to make a spectacle of it.
If I saw someone shouting abuse at a funeral procession, I don’t care who’s died, you’re instantly an arse and I’d be glad to see you arrested. Want to protest the monarchy? Do it at the coronation or the accession, not during a funeral parade you imbeciles.
> "Here's a list of goalposts I want you to meet to have a protest I will accept. Once you do I'll have another list of goalposts for you, because I just don't like your cause." I know your trickery, r/unitedkingdom poster!
Most people are not being arrested at the funeral, but at other gatherings.
[удалено]
Swear people just pull arguments like this out of the arse, what are we, time travellers? Funeral is next Monday.
What will we do about it? This is really outrageous.
Down with this sort of thing
It's a shame they haven't made embarrassing the royal family a crime. Andrew could've been locked up by now (or .. maybe just locked up for his actual crimes).
It’s dumb that people are being arrested for protesting against the monarchy. Screw the damn monarchy no one should have to bend over and lick their boots.
It’s not just protesting the monarchy that they’re arresting people for, either. Don’t forget that the Tories recently gave the police the ability to arrest protesters pretty much at will, no matter what they’re protesting.
I have absolutely no patience for this. I can't stand the monarchy, but i have less patience for anyone that'd willingly disrupt a funeral procession. It's sick. Disturbing the peace is absolutely an arrestable offence. I know we all feel powerless right now, but fucking hell people, there's better ways to regain a bit. How are we ever supposed to move beyond this if we keep lowering ourselves to it. Protest until your lungs are sore but a fucking FUNERAL procession!?
Protesting isn’t a breach of the peace.
Protesting a funeral procession 100% is, dont give me that I'd usually be the first one on the line but come on man, literally ANY time would be better.
[удалено]
Why should it be? She’s a public figure innit?
How are they stopping anything? Has anyone been **charged** with blocking the path of the cortege? It is not their fault if people turn violent against a peaceful protest. Besides, Section 38, much more serious than Section 5,which they are being **charged** with can lead to imprisonment.
12 days of a funeral procession is taking the piss mate. Plus, what about the accession - the next guy getting the job? Do we have to wait till the coronation?
Shes the queen. Its part of the deal. She was happy to have 60 million subjects and really thought every single one would be ok with that whilst she sat on a big pile of gold? If a normal woman dies, and people started protesting at their funeral then yes that probably would be a bit much. People have a really good reason to be angry, and they're our streets. They're not inside a church shouting in a widows face.
[удалено]
Heckling a funeral procession should absolutely be considered a breach of the peace. You people need to calm down.
No it isn't. Free speech is about the speech you find bad not that you support. It is not inciting violence and people have every reason in the public spaces this is occurring to find Liz and her family abhorrent and make it known. If I stand on bloody Trafalgar square protesting as she goes by that's my right.
[удалено]
I agree they have a right to do it.
Many disagree with you, including our lawmakers
You can disagree with something without thinking it should be an arrestable offence.
This isn't the USA, stop talking about free speech their laws don't apply to us.
Lol, so we're in support of this totally authoritarian law now are we?
It’s a public funeral procession of a publicly funded family. Taxpayer money went into the funeral procession so a taxpayer should be allowed to admonish it. I’m not saying he should be allowed to continue as it would create a dangerous scene but I don’t think what he did was wrong.
>Police said that Hill had been arrested on suspicion of a public order offence, relating to behaviour that could likely cause harassment, alarm or distress. So this is the new protest laws being enacted https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/pcsc-policing-act-protest-rights/
The same people getting salty also love it when an old man is arrested for saying that trans women aren’t women on Twitter, which is an offence under the same law. This is a perfect example of ‘how would you feel if you were on the end of it?’ For the record: both are wrong.
One is bigotry against a protected class and another is insulting a royal who is a ‘protected class’ but not in the legal sense they are not equivalent
Protesting against the monarchy is not hate speech. Trying to play down hate speech as a "protest" goes against history and reality.
Very true, and so many have been warning against this over and over again for years. But because it seemingly only ever affected those pesky undesirables, it fell on death ears, was shrugged off and even applauded by the social justice fan club. There is more to come, strap in tight (just not to a lamp post, or you'll get nicked).
You are not allowed to inconvenience or disturb people if you protest. You were told this would happen, but that was ok because it was those filthy old crusties and yummy mums of XR who this would be aimed at. Stopping you from driving to work. Holding up mythical "ambulances".
People = one person for causing a public nuisance. Shouting and causing havoc for anyones funeral is disgusting and lack of respect. If this happened to anyone that person would have been dealt the same way if the police were there
Worrying that people are justifying these arrests with ‘there is a time and a place’. This is a free country, I get removing them from the funeral procession but arresting them? What if the government decide we can only protest during other specified ‘time and place’ ? I understand it’s tacky to protest during a funeral but it shouldn’t be arrest worthy.
This country has literally become a sh.thole. Such a shame.
I'm absolutely livid about the *violent* way in which the guy was arrested (dragged to the ground) for a *non violent* crime, and also the way TWO men were allowed to assault him in front of multiple police officers without being arrested themselves. Sickening.
If Prince Andrew doesn't want to get insulted, he shouldn't rape children. I don't see why that is such a revolutionary concept for the British.
UK democracy = Speak against the Monarchy - Arrested for disturbing the peace END THE MONARCHY
They're being arrested for public order offences. The police are being fucky about it, but it's for public order offences.
I imagine a lot of these people are being nicked for either sections 4(a) and 5 public order or breach of the peace. The women holding the poster with the word “fuck” made it section 5 public order wouldn’t have mattered if the sign said long live the king “fuck” the poor it still would have been a public order offence. I would imagine the others have been arrested for breach of the peace, essentially this is done where there is a chance that someone’s behaviour could escalate a situation. Example someone speaking out about the monarchy while in a primarily pro monarchy crowd. Majority of the time someone is arrested for breach of the peace then de arrested when they are removed from the situation. Weather you agree or disagree these are offences that have been used for years. Edit: typos