‘#HateCrimeMatters’ and ‘#FreeThePride5’ are currently trending on Twitter and both the State and the Left are failing to see the stupidity of such frivolities.
I’ll start with the State as this story leads quite nicely into the next.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has revised its guidance for prosecutors, saying that tweeting abuse can be as “equally devastating” as shouting it. The Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, has said online abuse can fuel “dangerous hostility”.
The new guidance defines ‘hate crime’ as a range of criminal behaviour where the perpetrator is motivated by hostility or demonstrates hostility towards the victim’s disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity. A hate crime can include verbal abuse, intimidation, threats, harassment, assault and bullying, as well as damage to property.
The police and the CPS have agreed on the following definition for identifying and flagging hate crimes:
“Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person [emphasis mine], to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person’s disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.“
There is no legal definition of hostility so they use the everyday understanding of the word which includes “ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike”.
The Orwellian wording is contemptuous at best and tyrannical at worst. Victims need not genuinely exist now perceived victimhood reigns king. So long as the ‘victim’ disapproves of what they are in receipt of, they can prosecute. Or, if a person plays witness to an alleged crime, that too is enough to bring forth proceedings.
Words are violence.
Perceived victimhood is evidence.
Disliking is criminal.
But not all hate-crimes are equal in the eyes of the law. Earlier this year, Caroline Lucas mocked Philip Davies’ opinions as he is a “white, Anglo-Saxon male”. He does not have a minority opinion because of these traits. However, ‘Race’ and ‘Sex’ are defined as protected characteristics in the Equality Act of 2010 and her actions contravened sections 4A and 18 of the Public Order Act 1986 as well as sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10 of the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament. Despite video evidence of this behaviour and the contraventions being laid out perfectly clear for the Police and the House of Commons, neither decided to pursue any actions against Lucas. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
This new ruling will allow for more of the same, especially when we see the persons who are implementing and managing it. Take, for example, Sue Fish, the Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire who, in July of last year, made her force recognise ‘misogyny’ as a hate-crime (misandry is suspiciously ignored). Less than a year later, North Yorkshire introduced the same idea. I doubt we’ll ever see any successful convictions of perpetrators of hate-crimes against men or whites.
Such new rulings open up crimes to be over-exaggerated with the added baggage of hate. A simple mugging for someone’s wallet or purse could very easily become a hate-crime because the victim coincidentally has autism or maybe his/her skin colour doesn’t match that of the attacker. Such differences in identity will be used to needlessly slap additional charges onto a person.
Petty arguments will lead to convictions because Person A said to Person B “shut up, [insert childish indignation here]”.
This needless bureaucracy will levy more unwanted paperwork, further clogging our already asphyxiated justice system.
This extra layer of emotional cotton-wool, of mental polystyrene, will not protect supposed victims but will instead exacerbate weakness. People are antifragile, we become stronger when we are faced with difficulty and strain. This will not occur if a threat is removed rather than overcome. People will learn to be submissive rather than assertive.
Yet, this idiocy is promoted as progressive. Sigh.
Now for the Left. It’s actually hilarious how these two bits of news are so closely intertwined yet occurred separately.
‘#FreeThePride5’ is trending because over the weekend during Glasgow Pride five people were arrested for alleged breach of the peace with homophobic aggravation. According to the Free the Pride Five Facebook event, three of them are trans- activists and two are AntiFa (an anarcho-Communist organisation that has been declared a domestic terrorist group). Video of the parade can be found here.
They were arrested for attempting to block the march through town and for carrying signs that had homophobic slurs printed on them. They were blocking the march because this year there was a Police Float – apparently, Police aren’t welcome at Pride events. Details on the exact progression of events are hazy, I present them as best I can.
One of the five has since spoken out on Facebook about the arrest, detailing how he was part of the “red and black bloc” (an intimidation tactic used to conceal identities when perpetrating violence) and how the original altercation started when someone carrying a sign saying “these faggots fight fascists” was arrested.
As confessed by the poster, the owner of the sign was under arrest as a complaint had been lodged due to the use of the word “faggot”. As discussed earlier in the article, use of such a word is a hate-crime as sexuality is a protected characteristic. The threat of violence didn’t help their cause either. They’re idiots.
Whether you agree with their usage of the word or not (I think it’s stupid to arrest someone for words but, whatever), the Left has specifically made use of these words illegal because words are violence. However, they never did suspect their own laws would be used against them. I am therefore unsympathetic.
The author of the Facebook post then confesses (again) their involvement in these police proceedings, stating they were physically blocking the arrest. Despite claiming to be a ‘trained legal observer’, the author of the post seemed to be unaware that obstructing a police officer and thus attempting to pervert the course of justice is illegal. He was thus charged as such.
The paranoid disruptor has since uploaded to Facebook video and photographic evidence exonerating the officers and implicating the group of protestors. Be warned, the video is saturated with stomach-crushing cringe. The protestor with the megaphone screaming abuse has tweeted out video as well. I can only sigh so much.
Stick it to the man (can I say that or is it transphobic?)
But now this silly hashtag has started trending, with many blaming the officers. Again, I am unsympathetic to these protestors. This is the world they created, they can live in it.
If you go to a parade, attempt to physically block the procession, carry signs with words that have been made criminal by your allies and attempt to obstruct an officer in the line of duty then you will be arrested. I cannot see how this is difficult. Sure, being arrested for words is stupid but, disrupting a march and engaging in physical altercations with the police will result in your arrest.
Pride Glasgow have since put out a statement on their Facebook page stating they are “extremely disappointed in the actions of a small group of people that tried to target the Pride Glasgow Parade yesterday. Whilst Pride Glasgow promotes an Equality for all agenda and free speech the actions of this group jeopardised the safety of everyone attending the parade.” Many have written in the comments section defending the protestors. I give up on this world.