Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Latest snowflake outrage

"
Endangering safety at aerodromes.
(1)It is an offence for any person by means of any device, substance or weapon intentionally to commit at an aerodrome serving international civil aviation any act of violence which—
(a)causes or is likely to cause death or serious personal injury, and
(b)endangers or is likely to endanger the safe operation of the aerodrome or the safety of persons at the aerodrome.
(2)It is also, subject to subsection (4) below, an offence for any person by means of any device, substance or weapon unlawfully and intentionally—
(a)to destroy or seriously to damage—
(i)property used for the provision of any facilities at an aerodrome serving international civil aviation (including any apparatus or equipment so used), or
(ii)any aircraft which is at such an aerodrome but is not in service, or
(b)to disrupt the services of such an aerodrome,
in such a way as to endanger or be likely to endanger the safe operation of the aerodrome or the safety of persons at the aerodrome.
"

None of which looks particularly like what they actually did....

also note

"Proceedings for an offence under this section shall not be instituted—
in England and Wales, except by, or with the consent of, the Attorney General"

So in this case a political appointee gets to decide whether to throw the book at people posing a direct challenge to a flagship government policy. I note that the reasons for the AG's decision were not disclosed to the defence.

As I understand it what would have taken about 15 minutes in a magistrates court. "Cut a fence and behaved like cnuts your worship"..."did they the guilty bastards.. right... fines costs and victim supplements..... next guilty bastard..." got strung into a nine week trial which seems mostly consisted of the prosecution building an indirect and tenuous logical link between what actually occurred and the offences stated in the act. What has been left is the impression that a political decision was made to frighten political dissenters by seeking the harshest possible penalty. I would rather that had not happened, it risks bringing the justice system into disrepute.

Reading the above I think building a tripod and sitting on it so that if the engines start you are brown bread probably comes under part 1, a & b (offence for any person by means of any device). The fact that it is your suicide is not the issue, you have committed an action that can cause injury of death. We can split hairs over the possible long term effects of putting your hands in a tub filled with expanding foam which could also be covered by part 1.

I do think that @beardyProf had the right idea about going down the H&S route, it would have been a much simpler conviction and taken the heat out of the freedom speech. It would have also provided a precedent for the conviction of other numpties who think about doing the same think in future. Those muppets who jump onto truck to stop them or invade work sites to stop work should also be charged under H&S. The organisation they belong to should get the good news about rise assessments and keeping records. It's a long time since I did my NEBOSH but the penalties must have gone up by now.
 
Last edited:
Reading the above I think building a tripod and sitting on it so that if the engines start you are brown bread probably comes under part 1, a & b (offence for any person by means of any device). The fact that it is your suicide is not the issue, you have committed an action that can cause injury of death. We can split hairs over the possible long term effects of putting your hands in a tub filled with expanding foam which could also be covered by part 1.

I do think that @beardyProf had the right idea about going down the H&S route, it would have been a much simpler conviction and taken the heat out of the freedom speech. It would have also provided a president for the conviction of other numpties who think about doing the same think in future. Those muppets who jump onto truck to stop them or invade work sites to stop work should also be charged under H&S. The organisation they belong to should get the good news about rise assessments and keeping records. It's a long time since I did my NEBOSH but the penalties must have gone up by now.
Was your post interesting. I couldn't be be bothered to read it?
 
Reading the above I think building a tripod and sitting on it so that if the engines start you are brown bread probably comes under part 1, a & b (offence for any person by means of any device). The fact that it is your suicide is not the issue, you have committed an action that can cause injury of death. We can split hairs over the possible long term effects of putting your hands in a tub filled with expanding foam which could also be covered by part 1.

I do think that @beardyProf had the right idea about going down the H&S route, it would have been a much simpler conviction and taken the heat out of the freedom speech. It would have also provided a president for the conviction of other numpties who think about doing the same think in future. Those muppets who jump onto truck to stop them or invade work sites to stop work should also be charged under H&S. The organisation they belong to should get the good news about rise assessments and keeping records. It's a long time since I did my NEBOSH but the penalties must have gone up by now.

Who is providing the president.
 
Don't you just love the Students Union!!
Just before I joined up in 76, I was at a Technical Collage. I new the leader of the union, as soon as she found out I was going in the Army. Well that was it... I might as well have been a mass murderer. I got spat on sworn at.... In the end, I had to leave what happened to her nothing. The Head was almost as bad. Left wing twats the pair of them.
 
Don't you just love the Students Union!!
Just before I joined up in 76, I was at a Technical Collage. I new the leader of the union, as soon as she found out I was going in the Army. Well that was it... I might as well have been a mass murderer. I got spat on sworn at.... In the end, I had to leave what happened to her nothing. The Head was almost as bad. Left wing twats the pair of them.

Only happened once to me in all my years, I was spat on for being ex Army. I got spat on, the hippy cnut spitter got his nose shape rearranged.
 
Several years ago some comedians, including Louis CK and Patrick O'Neal played a charity gig to help women who'd been victims of violence.
Some of the sponsors were so offended by their routines they withdrew their funding to the cause.

They loved the irony of it that these sponsors felt their sensibilities to jokes were of more importance than women being physically beaten.
 

New posts

Top