Peanuckle on 29/9/2011 at 08:58

---

(http://rt.com/news/uk-marching-ban-rights-343/)

"Through September, in six areas of London, anyone marching as thousands of people did last winter is liable to be arrested and fined, or even imprisoned.

The ban was prompted by plans by the anti-Muslim English Defence League to repeat their February protest in Luton by marching through Tower Hamlets, the area with the highest concentration of Muslims in the country.

But instead of banning one march on one day, the Home Office banned all marches in six boroughs for an entire month. Activist Richard Seymour sees a wider motive."

Alright, slippery slope to despotism here we go!

That's right folks, the nation responsible for the birth of liberalism, is giving up freedom for social stability.

The article talks about this setting a precedent, and what a precedent it is. Whenever there's a surge of public anger (which is the source for all change), the government will step in and say "no, you can't promote your ideas, you'll destabilize the region. Disperse and return to your homes!"

I'm calling it now: Within five years Britain will require people to purchase an Assembly License in order to meet in groups.

Aerothorn on 29/9/2011 at 17:11

---

If only we could ban one-sentence, drive-by dismissals that don't actually provide any solid criticism.

icemann on 29/9/2011 at 18:59

---

http://urolz12.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/v-for-vendetta-20060221085724795.jpg

Seemed fitting in this case.

Ghostly Apparition on 30/9/2011 at 00:08

---

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. --Benjamin Franklin

Mr. K. on 30/9/2011 at 06:22

---

Seeing the very partial coverage of any civil movement in the last years, the absolutely confused and shameful political responses (if any) and the police reaction (and subsequent blame games), I can only say that's putting in writing a de facto law.

Disgusting.