Bernard Thompson, in a piece for the pro-independence Scottish website Newsnet.scot, makes the case for repeal of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act of 2012: Offensive Behaviour: the case for the SNP repealing their own act.
He writes,
Opponents of the Act – none more so than the campaign group Fans Against Criminalisation – have been vociferous in their condemnation of the legislation.
And they have been joined by a host of academics and media figures. Human rights group Liberty have expressed concern that: “the broadly framed offences in this Act will unnecessarily sweep up individuals exercising their right to free speech who have no intention to commit or incite a criminal offence and in the event do not do so.”
And
The Act does not simply ban “the singing of sectarian songs” but also: – “other behaviour that a reasonable person would be likely to consider offensive…
“…behaviour [that] would be likely to incite public disorder”, even if ‘persons likely to be incited to public disorder are not present or are not present in sufficient numbers’.”
We can offer all sort of examples of behaviour that might offend a “reasonable person” but, for brevity, we may note that the Act banned Frankie Boyle (or recordings of his material) from being played wherever a tenuous connection to a football match could be established. Not so rugby matches.
In defending the Act, after someone wearing a tee-shirt supportive of Palestine drew police attention, SNP MSP John Mason even went so far as to say that wearing a Yes badge should be considered unacceptable while watching football.
“We should all know by now expressing political views is no longer acceptable at football matches.”
Mr Mason was apparently not questioned on whether wearing a poppy could be considered to be expressing a political view, and we can only speculate as to how objecting to a poppy might be viewed.
When reading that quote from John Mason MSP the old cliché about the “Nanny State” came alive again.
So has anyone at a Scottish football match sung God save the Queen, with the ‘alternative’ verses?, viz:
or, the Jacobite verse
Or is even humming that tune an offence in the MacReich?
I was once at St Jame’s Park and NUFC were playing Liverpool and Newcastle were 1-0 up and some geezer got on his seat and did a Harry Enfield Scousers “calm down” at the Merseysiders opposite with all the gestures. A cop had a word in his lug-hole and he calmed down. That is all it took. I have witnessed a pitch-invasion but she was seven and her Dad grabbed her back. That was at New Mills centenary match. I think among many there is still a view of football as a game for “plebs”.
Actually I might start following New Mills. It’s just down the road and it’s cheap (and easy to get a ticket) and the food is good and my wife is from there. Yeah, I’ll support them until Mike Ashley is hung from the Gallowgate End. By his own eviscerated bowels.
Offence is taken not given.
Thats the basics of it, and it should be treated as such.
People who whinge about being offended should be mocked ruthlessly until they learn that it doesnt matter what some “2 beer hero” says its how you react to it that matters.
Getting the state to police your feelings means you are willing to have someone shot every time you complain. (because thats the possible outcome of an escalation from complaint)
Socialism in a nutshell.
“… wearing a Yes badge should be considered unacceptable while watching football.”
I take it that football fans don’t like prog rock then?
Getting the state to police your feelings means you are willing to have someone shot every time you complain.
A pal of mine in London a few years back got rather cruelly dumped by his girlfriend via text message with little or no explanation. She then refused to answer his calls or reply to his messages, other than to say she wanted to be left alone. Unsurprisingly under the circumstances, he sent a series of rather emotional and rather distressing (for both parties) text messages to her, perhaps numbering 10-20 over the next 48 hours. He was rather surprised that a few days later the Metropolitan Police contacted him to question him about his “harassment” of this woman: their guidelines state that harassment can take the form of several communications in quick succession when the recipient has given a clear indication they do not wish to be contacted. Which is fine, provided the entire context is ignored (something the British police excel in). He even got cited for having sent flowers, this too being an act of harassment after she’d said she wanted to be left alone.
What I found so depressing is not so much this pathetic woman went to Plod, but that he actually took it seriously and initiated a response. Government really is turning into the Great Sugar Daddy.
Not a bug, a feature.
Camorgueron will do nothing. But any PM worth his salt would suspend the Scottish Socialist Assembly and make it very clear that none of the SNP’s shit is going to stand.
And then fine the Fish-Faced Hag and her MSP gang 1 years wages to rub their nose in it.
…and let’s not even get started on the SNP’s plan to appoint a personal Commissar for every child.
Creeping totalitarianism.
How about this as an attack on free speech?