Police forces record thousands of hate incidents each year even though they accept they are not crimes

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • So you don't think he employs people? The majority of rich people own companies, or are company directors. These people are the backbone of our society.

    Do tell us how many he employs and which companies he started to provide jobs

  • Ah, the serfs and peasants

    No, I meant real jobs

    Getting paid to carry out work is a real job. On your reckoning, gardeners, cleaners, and chefs, don't have real jobs. Strange theory you have

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • Getting paid to carry out work is a real job. On your reckoning, gardeners, cleaners, and chefs, don't have real jobs. Strange theory you have

    Not if you are basically paid to be a slave with minimum wage docked to include your rent for your "free accommodation"

  • Not if you are basically paid to be a slave with minimum wage docked to include your rent for your "free accommodation"

    Minimum wage and free accommodation, that sounds pretty good to me.

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • Do you seriously think it is right for someone to be able to spout freely hatred against say "brown skinned people", "homosexuals", "the monarchy", and anybody that they choose to vent their bile at?

    I prefer the present laws that deal with such bigots

    Hatred expressed against anyone or any section of the community should be treated in the same way.

    The law also needs to be proportionate and applied only where the hatred expressed is designed to provoke violence or used in a threatening manner.

    Snowflakes should undertake therapy to toughen them up! ?

  • Well violence is an act not words. Even if someone else says something with the intention of provoking, just as politicians do to each then it's not a crime. But if someome else then acts on that then they are committing the crime.

  • Do you seriously think it is right for someone to be able to spout freely hatred against say "brown skinned people", "homosexuals", "the monarchy", and anybody that they choose to vent their bile at?

    I prefer the present laws that deal with such bigots

    Absolutely. Having an opinion that is different to the liberal ideal doesn't make someone a bigot. Peoples opinions are formed by their experiences and environment. If you were born and bread in an area predominantly occupied by indigenous people, then over a matter of a decade the area predominantly became Asian (for example), and your experiences along the way were negative, you will in turn end up disliking Asian people (for example). That doesn't mean you necessarily dislike all Asian people, but in general you may not find them nice to be around. It is then your right to tell anyone you wish of your experiences and give your opinions. Hang on a minute, or is it? Over the last few decades our liberal lead society has decreed people are no longer permitted to hold an opinion that is opposed to the liberal ideal. People now have to like and be open to people of all nations and all sexual preferences, and if you dare say anything to the contrary, you are a bigot and guilty of committing a hate crime. This may shock you, there are people from varying nations I like more than others, and whilst I don't have a problem with gay people, I believe there are only two genders, and they are determined by anatomy. FACT, I haven't met a liberal who isn't a fascist. You now probably need to go and sit down and have a cup of sweet tea.

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • That doesn't mean you necessarily dislike all Asian people, but in general you may not find them nice to be around. It is then your right to tell anyone you wish of your experiences and give your opinions. Hang on a minute, or is it?

    No problem with any of that, it is you that is inventing a problem

  • No problem with any of that, it is you that is inventing a problem

    But I'm not. The example I gave was of Tommy Robinson's experiences, who I would guess you dislike immensely.

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • But I'm not. The example I gave was of Tommy Robinson's experiences, who I would guess you dislike immensely.

    Not another of his disciples ..Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese

    We had enough from out late hopefully departed "friend"

  • Not another of his disciples ..Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese

    We had enough from out late hopefully departed "friend"

    LOL. I was having a chat the other day with some friends. If global warming doesn't end up killing us all, the country at some stage will become a Muslim state. Fortunately enough I will be dead either way, and thank God for that :)

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • It's their job to investigate what they suspect maybe a crime, gather the evidence, arrest the person and provide the evidence to CPS to decide whether that person can be charged or not, taken to court or where they should go from there. It's not the job of police to play judge and jury and decide whether someone is guilty or not. It's their job to uphold the law not create it. We can't have the police force deciding who is guilty or not and then putting a black mark on someone's record that in affect is making them guilty and classing them as a criminal. On their own personal records yeh they can keep lists on who they suspect to be involved with criminal activity for internal investigations but they should not be putting this on public records accessible to a DBS check. People are getting blackmarked on hearsay.

    Spot on, Norra. I can't remember the name of the senior police officer who said that allegations made about a suspected sex offender were "Credible and true" but he not only made comments that were outside of his remit, but were also later found to have no credibility and were conspicuously untrue.

    As for taxation not keeping pace with the increase in population, there are a number of factors involved in that situation. Just a few of them would include:

    a) If the population is increasing because of birth rate (as distinct from migration), then the babies born would not come onto the adult workforce - and therefore pay tax - for at least sixteen years. Such an expansion of the population is exponential in as much as more babies becoming adults would produce greater numbers of children of their own as they mature and so it goes on and on and on.... with every generation.

    b) At the other end of the demographic, a successful health service leads to greater longevity which in turn places a greater demand on the budget for healthcare and pensions.

    c) Governments who place low taxation at the fore of their political doctrine inevitably have to cut services. Less taxation = reduced services. That's a no-brainer. The people cannot complain about the state being unable to afford public services (eg; police, prisons, etc) if they vote for low taxation for selfish reasons. The phrase "cake and eat it" comes to mind.

    d) Policies that impoverish people will inevitably lead to a higher crime rate. If a person can't feed their family by honest means they will revert to criminal methods.

    A factor that can influence d) is.....

    e) Business de-regulation leads to a free market "Devil Take The Hindmost" culture whereby businesses cut costs to the bone to be competitive. Such strategies invariably lead to low wages which in the current climate is a major factor in the In Work Poverty that many people are suffering from at this time.

    Governments of the hard right argue that what is good for business is good for workers but this assumes that businesses will filter their profits down to their employees and we are seeing at this time that it simply isn't happening. In order to keep investors and shareholders happy (and therefore not take their money elsewhere), businesses are prioritising higher returns / dividends to shareholders over staff wages and benefits. In turn, low wages mean reduced tax income to the state, and so it goes on.

    We have passed a tipping point in Britain. Previous moderate governments of both left and right could always be relied on to find the nearest thing they could to a balance between what is good for business and the social welfare of the population.

    Today, our two main political parties have moved away from moderation and embraced extreme doctrines. Labour would destroy business with crippling taxation that would drive a lot of private investment away, and irresponsible borrowing which would create an unaffordable level of debt. The Conservatives have given up all pretence of giving a damn about ordinary people. They exist now only to serve the rich.

    As for infrastructure, again, political parties no longer care for long term projects that would saddle their government with enormous cost, and not show any result for a number of years by which time they may no longer be in power to claim the credit. Instead they woo the voters with populist soundbites and promises in the form of short-term fix-its that will sound good to voters.

    We need to return to moderate politics in Britain, run by governments that genuinely..... and I mean GENUINELY put the interest of the country first.

    At the present time, neither Labour or the Conservatives show any intention of doing that.

  • LOL. I was having a chat the other day with some friends. If global warming doesn't end up killing us all, the country at some stage will become a Muslim state. Fortunately enough I will be dead either way, and thank God for that :)

    The answer to that is spherical and in the plural.

  • We have passed a tipping point in Britain. Previous moderate governments of both left and right could always be relied on to find the nearest thing they could to a balance between what is good for business and the social welfare of the population.

    We have been there before. I think that politics follow the "equal and opposite reaction" theory and the extremes eventually balance each other out and the centre prevails

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!