David Mcharg Charged for political dissidence (abusive behaviour)

Well it appears Britain has finally fell into the depths of political oppression at the hands of a totalitarian regime aka the Conservative party!

David Mcharg - the herald

David Mcharg - Anti tory poster

So it appears that the government can now use legislation to silence the voices of UK citizens who only wish to express their opinion as is their right to do so and stop them from expressing their opinion on political matters

What I find hard to believe is that a "political party" can be deemed to have suffered abuse like an actual living breathing person!

So now we as citizens of the UK need to choose our words carefully ! as "# off you tory #s " is now deemed as a crime !

How can this be , this mans rights have been violated

the tory party are abusing the justice system to silence political dissidents who appose the conservative party!

How is this any different from a person putting a anti ISIS slogan in their window , or an anti labour slogan

who feels they were abused by this slogan ?

a reply to: sapien82

I have since written a letter to Stewart MacDonald my MSP to champion this case and raise it for discussion in Holyrood and Westminster , this is a gross violation of that mans rights and also a violation of our own democracy!

Since when can the police silence someones political opinion, because they chose to use colourful language!


Does this paint a pretty picture of life in the UK under the tory government ?
When everyone starts hating on the tory party even more through Brexit , are we all going to get locked up!

a reply to: sapien82

I've been worried about this trend since the advent of post early 2000`s western terrorism surveillance laws.

Terrorism is nothing new, both the UK and US experienced a great deal in the decades leading up to 2000. Yet both take a very aggressive stance in reforming surveillance laws that at least in the US's case, go against our constitutional rights.

We've seen growing evidence in the US of abuse with the government going after our journalists. The case of Reality Winner shows that even if it benefits the country as a whole, the government is taking a hard line against whistle blowers.

Journalism is supposed to be the watchdog of our governments, and freedom of speech is the only thing that separates us from totalitarianism.

This isn't a partisan issue either, I've seen offenses made by all sides.

Sadly, the road we're going down doesn't seem to end. And once these basic rights are taken away and that action "justified", I don't see a way back.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I whole haertedly agree, whilst the UK is thrown into a state of Moral indignation at what is happening across the sea in the US with regards to the treatment of detainee children , they prosecute and set precedent for "political dissidence"
and so usher in a new era of totalitarianism!

and you are 100% correct, there is no going back , unless you want to spill some blood , because they wont so easily relinquish that power back to the people they so easily stripped it from.

We need to vote these Tory scum bastards out.

Reminds me a little of this
trump protest

Will be interesting to see if our freedoms of speech will be permitted during the impending Trump visit in July....or will the protestor's freedoms be curtailed by the cops ...if they happen to use language that may be offensive to some ?

I think there is a place for such language ...sometimes no other words will suffice when making a point about Tories or Trump for example. If we display these words on a T shirt..or a poster in our own window...should we have to be concerned that we can be arrrested ? For displaying words ? Of course not.

It is dystopian.
We are in it.
And I don't think you get free of it without a fight.

Edit
Clicking the link on this post may result in hearing /seeing descriptive words that some may find offensive.

a reply to: sapien82
Written abusive language presented in a public place would probably be penalised whether it was political or not.
Intolerance of obscene words is not exactly a new thing, so it's not reasonable for people to get hysterically excited about it as if it were a new development.
To illustrate my point- ATS is not the Conservative party, yet linking to that image might still be deemed a breach of terms and conditions.

a reply to: testingtesting

LOCK UP THE HERETIC! BURN THE WITCH!

OFF WITH HIS HEAD! TREASON!

careful mate , thats a crime round these parts

a reply to: DISRAELI

the point raised by the whole case , was that the social media teams and newspapers had posted the very same image all over the internet throughout the UK , yet somehow they are free from the same charges!

language whilst maybe foul , is not in any way directed at an individual !

So how can a entity ,such as a political party be abused , if no names are used ?
plus when was it a crime to use foul language in public , who suffered at the hands of the statement
where is the injury , loss or harm to an individuals rights , or property ?

there was no crime !

how is it any different to me singing "# the police " by NWA in a public place

a reply to: DISRAELI

there is no such legislation about the "foul language act"

foul language whilst frowned upon , is still legal , the two most offensive words in the english language "#" and "'n-word'" are still pretty much legal and used frequently across the planet and also in the UK
yet somehow when it relates to a political party which happens to be in power its not on!

if they dont like his A4 sign then they wont like what comes next

a reply to: sapien82

When the Tories have suffered the loss of tens of thousands of their supporters, as a result of the policies of the people and the manner of their expression of freedom of speech, then they can complain.

Until they are under the level of threat from us, that the people are from them, they can stow it.

originally posted by: sapien82
there is no such legislation about the "foul language act" foul language whilst frowned upon , is still legal

Traditionally, the use of obscene language in public places has been illegal. It wasn't just a question of offending the supposed target; in principle, anyone who heard the words or saw them was being offended.
In A.P. Herbert story, "Is a golfer a gentleman?", the golfer Albert Haddock was being fined for the large number of oaths he made on a tricky hole. He did not dispute the charge; he just pleaded against being fined at the higher rate imposed on gentlemen. Of course this was parody, but parody has to be based on things that are really happening. A few decades back, it would at least have been expensive to swear at a policeman.

So the statement that bad language is "still legal" gets things the wrong way round. It was illegal, in public, but modern culture has eroded respect for that law to such an extent that it becomes difficult to enforce. But putting up something like that in a poster is still asking for trouble.

Think about it; if no such legislation exists, how do you think he got convicted? Whatever you may think of British courts, they are not prone to convict people on imaginary laws, if only because defence lawyers are trained to spot that kind of thing.

a reply to: DISRAELI

he got convicted because some how now the laws of the UK are based entirely on subjectivity

and not objective facts

yes he used foul language, but where I ask , was the injury loss or harm involved

corpus delicti !

, well what are the tory party going to do about the torrent of foul language about to be dropped on them the nation wide
bout time those graffiti writers turned their attention to the tory party!

how will they react to 40ft high letters 200 ft long saying "tory #s # off"

Again it is not a crime to use abusive language to express your opinion !

this along with all the other "hate speech" crimes are ridiculous , fallacies and mockery of the judicial and democratic systems we supposedly have !

originally posted by: sapien82
yes he used foul language, but where I ask , was the injury loss or harm involved

We were discussing whether the law about abusive language exists.
The above point is about a different issue, viz. whether the law ought to exist.
Now whatever law was used to convict him in court obviously does exist- or else legal procedure could not have convicted him.
If people want to argue that deliberately brutalising language and behaviour is a good thing and they ought to be allowed to do it whenever they like, then they need to campaign for a change in the law on that basis.

P.S. www.abovetopsecret.com...
What is it about political self-righteousness that makes people want to be brutal and uncivilised and downright fascist?

thank the liberals

a reply to: DISRAELI

the legislation of abuse is not centered around the language used, its centered around whether a "victim" felt as though they were "abused" or that the particular statement was "abusive" or "hateful"
In this case though , who was the abuse felt by ?
It was a poltical entity which makes up a group of people who are politicians , civil servants etc.
The State has obviously decided that based on the complaints made someone was "abused"
which is absolute bollocks because its based on a subjective state of consciousness
what is considered abuse by one person is not the same as another
one nations cultural practices may seem morally abhorrent to another but doesnt make them illegal
the very fact the state has determined "abuse" by using a legislation and a subjective state to prove that a crime has been committed , when again , there is no loss, injury , or harm to the tory party or anyone in the tory party or its members or voters since that man put the sign in his window.

Yet how many people have recently suffered injury, loss or harm as a direct result of the conservative party or their policies !

Its a #ing facist regime! we may as well call the polis the gestapo , well we already do up on scotland!
have ye noticed all these freedom of expression cases just so happen to be in Scotland !

Marcus Meechan and David Mcharg both freedom of expression cases , fought by the tory government to the detriment of the Scottish people if precedent is set !

Our devolution wont save us , and nothing will save you either as long as they keep manipulating the law to their agenda whilst they are in power!

a reply to: DISRAELI

as for the peter fonda!

Im not a fan of harassing people in general , but I can see his point , these people are just doing their jobs , but their jobs entail creating chaos and causing heartbreak just so they follow orders from the top and just so they can feed their own, but there are jobs better than that!
So obviously these people do take some form of pride in their work , I have no idea how !
I couldnt look those people in the face if I was to take their child away from them just for a pay cheque.
As for protesting outside their houses, its America as far as I am aware its completely legal
and to think about it , these people working these jobs are a part of the system which feeds the rich and punishes the working class !
So they are not willing to admit they themselves are supporting a system of corruption. Just like those who support the conservatives in the faith that somehow their policies will directly benefit them , yet it doesnt, it only benefits their circle of friends in the party!

Theresa May and her Husband with shares in medicinal cannabis for example. They are the only ones to make money from that medicine in the UK , thus creating a monopoly on suffering.

That system is corrupt, and its the same system you are talking about and the legislation that supports it.
Its being used to silence people , voting people !

a reply to: snarfbot

Why? We have conservatives in power.

a reply to: sapien82

I think free expression should be universal and not regulated or determined by any nation or law.


In the US we are also losing our rights and censorship is rampant by organizations other than government but share a political ideology with factions within the government.


I'm sorry that our cousins have lost a most fundamental right.