The official Boris pm cluster-fuck thread

[git-intae-thum]

It always amuses me when British nationalists go on about Holyrood being filled with wasters.

Most folk elected to Holyrood have had a pretty successful professional life in whatever capacity beforehand.

There are at least 10 times as many wasters that sit in the commons.

That's before we start with the posh inbreds, business/political failures, sponging sycophants and decrepit that turn up for five minutes every day to trough their ounce of taxpayers gold in the house of "lord's."

 

[Sherrif John Bunnell]

I don't think British Nationalists should be slating the ability of MSPs in the same week that Liz Truss and Nadine Dorries have been appointed to two of the highest offices in the land.

[sophia]

5 hours ago, Sherrif John Bunnell said:

I don't think British Nationalists should be slating the ability of MSPs in the same week that Liz Truss and Nadine Dorries have been appointed to two of the highest offices in the land.

Careful with that language.

We should always use stock phrases such as "great offices of state". This will serve to protect the self aggrandising and exceptionalism of the system that makes us Brits so proud.

[Arch Stanton]

 

 

[Billy Jean King]

So despite just about every major food processor in the UK coming out today and saying CO2 supplies are literally 2-3 days away from impacting majorly on the supply chain, UK govt ministers insist there is "nothing to see here" and insist there is no risk to supply available to the consumer. It's akin to the band playing on the Titanic this week or more accurately the scene in Carry on up the Khyber where they feast as the shells rain down on the dining room.

[GNU_Linux]

Government says discrimination against black people and Travellers ‘objectively justified’ with new laws
 

Quote

Documents defend disproportionate impact of Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill
 
Discrimination against black people and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities in a controversial suite of new laws is “objectively justified”, the government has claimed.
 
Home Office documents published on Monday admitted that different groups would be disproportionately impacted by measures in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Bill.
 
They include enhanced stop and search powers and the criminalisation of “residing on land without consent in a vehicle”.    

The Home Office admitted that proposed Serious Violence Reduction Orders (SVROs), which would allow police to stop and search people based on their previous offending history without the “reasonable grounds” currently required, would disproportionately affect black people.
 
But its equalities impact assessment added: “Any indirect difference on treatment on the grounds of race is anticipated to be potentially positive and objectively justified as a proportionate means of achieving our legitimate aim of reducing serious violence and preventing crime.”
 
The Home Office cited 2018 statistics showing that murder rates were four times higher for black victims rather than white victims, and that the proposals aimed to reduce “violence amongst those most likely to be involved”.
 
“If the benefits of the policy were to outweigh the costs, as currently estimated, this policy would have an overall positive impact and be objectively justified,” the document added.  

Several criminal justice organisations and charities raised concerns about SVROs in an official consultation, and police figures show that black people are already nine times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people.
 
Liberty said the law “effectively creates an individualised, suspicionless stop and search power, entirely untethered to a specific and objectively verifiable threat” and would “compound discrimination”.
 
Government proposals state that courts will be able to impose SVROs after any offence “in which a knife or an offensive weapon has been involved”, regardless of whether it was wielded by that person.

The Lammy Review drew attention to the racial impact of “joint enterprise” prosecutions, which can see several people jailed over a stabbing carried out by one attacker.

The Criminal Justice Alliance group said there was “inadequate evidence of effectiveness” of SVROs, warning that they could disrupt rehabilitation and damage trust in the police.

They are one of several measures in the PCSC Bill that have met widespread opposition on human rights and discrimination grounds, although it passed all stages in the House of Commons unamended and will be debated in the Lords on Tuesday.

Several clauses target Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, by creating a new criminal offence of “residing on land without consent in a vehicle”, and broadening police powers to seize caravans and other property.

The government’s equalities impact statement said: “There is no direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act as the law will apply equally, regardless of any protected characteristic … any discriminatory impact for those of a particular race or ethnicity will be indirect.”

The document admitted the policy “may place those from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities at a particular disadvantage”, but added: “It is our view that any indirect discrimination towards the above communities can be objectively justified.”

The government claimed it recognised the right to follow a nomadic way of life but said the proposed laws would “apply to anyone who resides or intends to reside on land illegally”.

It said the plans were a “proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of prevention and investigation of crime and the protection of the rights of others, notably those of the occupier and the local community”.

The document said the use of the powers would be “discretionary and an operational matter for the police”.

Earlier this year Martin Hewitt, chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), said police leaders had not requested a change to the law and believed current powers to be sufficient.

He told a parliamentary committee: “The fundamental problem is that there is an insufficient provision of sites for Gypsy Travellers to occupy. That is what then causes the relatively small percentage where they end up in unlawful encampments.”

Mr Hewitt said police leaders had concerns about the proposed powers, and how they could draw police further into “very difficult situations”.

In response to the equalities impact statements, the Liberty charity said the government’s plans would criminalise Gypsies and Travellers and cause the “harassment” of black people and other groups.

Jun Pang, policy and campaigns officer, told The Independent: “The government’s attempt to justify proposals it admits are discriminatory is an insult to the millions of people who will be affected by the policing bill.

“The government admission that these proposals are discriminatory means they shouldn’t see the light of day, let alone be made into law. With the bill in the House of Lords this week, Peers must protect our rights and reject this bill.”

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2021 by GNU_Linux

[Dawson Park Boy]

1 hour ago, GNU_Linux said:

Government says discrimination against black people and Travellers ‘objectively justified’ with new laws
 

 

Completely justified.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

[Melanius Mullarkey]

Discrimination against minority races justified, says racists.

[oneteaminglasgow]

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Completely justified.

You’re such a fucking c**t. 

[Theroadlesstravelled]

On 17/09/2021 at 03:35, Arch Stanton said:

 

 

 

Unfortunately it will be lost on Brexit voters. They don’t eat fruit and vegetables.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

10 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Completely justified.

Imagine being this desperate for negative attention 

[O'Kelly Isley III]

13 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

So despite just about every major food processor in the UK coming out today and saying CO2 supplies are literally 2-3 days away from impacting majorly on the supply chain, UK govt ministers insist there is "nothing to see here" and insist there is no risk to supply available to the consumer. It's akin to the band playing on the Titanic this week or more accurately the scene in Carry on up the Khyber where they feast as the shells rain down on the dining room.
 

I've just watched an interview with Johnson on BBC Breakfast.  This growing crisis has the potential to quickly and massively impact both the national food supply and household income but his response appears to be trademark flannel and wishful thinking.  If the situation escalates he may regret flying off to the US for six days.

[Dawson Park Boy]

9 hours ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

You’re such a fucking c**t. 

Don’t you think the law should apply equally to everyone?

[oneteaminglasgow]

15 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Don’t you think the law should apply equally to everyone?

It’s been pointed out before, but you’re either a troll or a genuine moron.

Read the thing you’ve quoted. Why do you think that proposals which even the Government who are bringing them in say discriminate against minority ethnic groups are “completely justified”? 

[Dawson Park Boy]

21 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

It’s been pointed out before, but you’re either a troll or a genuine moron.

Read the thing you’ve quoted. Why do you think that proposals which even the Government who are bringing them in say discriminate against minority ethnic groups are “completely justified”? 

In London most of the knife crime is carried out by and against black people.

Seems reasonable then that most stop and search should be carried out against that community.
‘If you do the crime, you should do the time’. Doesn’t matter what colour or race you are. Equality under the law.

If travellers set up an illegal camp near you and start committing crime and creating havoc then it is reasonable that the police and authorities take appropriate action against them. Just common sense.

At least you’ve started debating rather than abusing.

A big improvement!! Keep it up.

 

[oneteaminglasgow]

1 minute ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

In London most of the knife crime is carried out by and against black people.

Seems reasonable then that most stop and search should be carried out against that community.
‘If you do the crime, you should do the time’. Doesn’t matter what colour or race you are. Equality under the law.

If travellers set up an illegal camp near you and start committing crime and creating havoc then it is reasonable that the police and authorities take appropriate action against them. Just common sense.

At least you’ve started debating rather than abusing.

A big improvement!! Keep it up.

 

Right, so in your opinion ‘being black’ is enough of a reason to suspect someone of committing a crime? Got you. 

You’re a dreadful person and a massive racist, and given your horrendous quality of output to this forum, I’ll take absolutely no lectures from you. 

[Dawson Park Boy]

1 minute ago, oneteaminglasgow said:

Right, so in your opinion ‘being black’ is enough of a reason to suspect someone of committing a crime? Got you. 

You’re a dreadful person and a massive racist, and given your horrendous quality of output to this forum, I’ll take absolutely no lectures from you. 

You never answer the question.

You're obviously stuck in some Left wing Corbynite mindset that you don’t seem to realise that most of knife crime in particular areas are committed by the black community. Even Trevor Phillips acknowledges that it is a huge problem.

Likewise the bulk of corporate fraud is carried out by white people.

You seem to be a truth denier.

Oh well. Back to your cave.

[oneteaminglasgow]

3 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

You never answer the question.

You're obviously stuck in some Left wing Corbynite mindset that you don’t seem to realise that most of knife crime in particular areas are committed by the black community. Even Trevor Phillips acknowledges that it is a huge problem.

Likewise the bulk of corporate fraud is carried out by white people.

You seem to be a truth denier.

Oh well. Back to your cave.

At no stage did you ask a question.

Citing renowned c**t Trevor Philips isn’t going to convince anyone that you’re not a massive racist, pal.

Just for what it’s worth, even if we accept that in London most knife crime is perpetrated by ‘the black community’, I don’t think that searching someone entirely on the basis that they are black is justified. Why do you believe that ‘most knife crime in particular areas are committed by the black community’? Like, what do you think the reasons for that are? 

[NotThePars]

If the end point of the thick c**t DPB trying to justify "racist stop and search policies are good" is every office in every financial district is raided daily for persistent cocaine use then maybe we're on to something