Offensive Behaviour at Football Act cave in.

[Ira Gaines]

vikingTON, on 17 May 2016 - 00:30, said:

Or in this particular case, the fact that the vast majority of the Scottish population back the legislation;

 

What's the evidence on this btw?

[vikingTON]

http://www.journalonline.co.uk/News/1020429.aspx#.Vzp0RvkrLIU

 

Of course in an ideal world you'd like to see more than one poll, but given that a) the question simply isn't asked very often but b) the level of support is well beyond the influence of any significant margin of error anyway, we can say with a good degree of confidence that the majority of the Scottish population supports both the intention to legislate football fan behaviour as well as the Act itself. That's something that isn't going to be appreciated in an echo chamber like this forum, because this is a political sub-section of a Scottish football forum. The majority of the Scottish population don't go to football games (but can still be on the receiving end of scumbag behaviour) and aren't desperately trying to posture over the 'injustice' of 'arbitrary!!!!1111!!!!' law. They just want something to be done about mouthbreathers engaging in disgusting, sectarian behaviour in the 21st Century, and feel that the Act is a reasonable means of doing so. 

 

Which takes me back to my original point: it's altogether curious to see that a measure so widely popular in Scottish society has apparently not one backer from the collection of washed up former MPs as well as entirely new political representatives on the opposition benches at Holyrood. Even with a small sample size of 60-odd members of the opposition, the chances of all of them entering Parliament holding a deeply rooted opposition to the Act is more than a little implausible. With Laebur enacting the Bain Principle which has served them terrifically so far and the Tories trying to turn themselves into a party for MISSUS BUNFIELD Unionists, all eyes will rightly or wrongly be on the Greens. 

[vikingTON]

Btw, can anyone think back to less than two weeks ago, when the opposition parties were feigning great concern that the apparently minor issue of the Scottish constitution was detracting from the Scottish Government dealing with 'real issues' like the economy, education, health care? Presumably all those issues have been cleared up then: seeing as not a peep has been heard from the losing opposition parties on those 'real issues', before they declared their intention to take up Parliamentary time defending the right of the Old Firm to have a sectarian sing-along just like in the good old days. 

 

Choosing to posture for purely political effect on a measure that is actually widely popular with the public as a whole - and yet they still wonder why they are trounced on a regular basis by the party that erm, chooses not to fall into that laughably obvious route to public contempt.  

Edited May 17, 2016 by vikingTON

[Carl Cort's Hamstring]

Still waiting for VT to explain exactly why the SG can't put pressure on the SFA to enforce their own rules. I've already listed several examples where governments have stepped in to deal with crowd disorder, and none of them were sanctioned by FIFA (who tend to frown upon violence and racism).

My way has been done elsewhere, and could actually combat the problem when thousands are guilty in stadiums (which everyone accepts the law cannot). I can only assume that your cheerleading of a gesture that is at best symbolic, and at worst deeply flawed and woefully ineffective is just more of your myopic SNP fanboying.

[RedRob72]

Genuinely can't understand the mentality of anyone who would sing the Billy boys. It's fukin absurd

Hullo Hullo

We are the Rangers Boys

Hullo Hullo

You'll know us by our noise

We'll give anything to see our team,

At Ibrox or away

For we are the Glasgow Rangers Boys

Never quite caught on despite the club's best efforts.

[strichener]

Still waiting for VT to explain exactly why the SG can't put pressure on the SFA to enforce their own rules. I've already listed several examples where governments have stepped in to deal with crowd disorder, and none of them were sanctioned by FIFA (who tend to frown upon violence and racism).

My way has been done elsewhere, and could actually combat the problem when thousands are guilty in stadiums (which everyone accepts the law cannot). I can only assume that your cheerleading of a gesture that is at best symbolic, and at worst deeply flawed and woefully ineffective is just more of your myopic SNP fanboying.

Surely that was what the Joint Action group that was setup in 2011 was supposed to achieve.  Failed than and it will fail again.  The SFA's commercial interests are aided by sectarianism, it really is that simple.

[HaikuHibee]

Still waiting for VT to explain exactly why the SG can't put pressure on the SFA to enforce their own rules. I've already listed several examples where governments have stepped in to deal with crowd disorder, and none of them were sanctioned by FIFA (who tend to frown upon violence and racism).

My way has been done elsewhere, and could actually combat the problem when thousands are guilty in stadiums (which everyone accepts the law cannot). I can only assume that your cheerleading of a gesture that is at best symbolic, and at worst deeply flawed and woefully ineffective is just more of your myopic SNP fanboying.

 

The SFA for decades have said it is a matter for the police whenever they put pressure on them. The police have been given responsibility. Rangers and Celtic are decrying it as completely unfair and you have a few Unionist party hardcore that are more than happy to play to the bigot crowd to get a few votes. You have people like Ad Lib now coming up with mad arguments because they are too stupid to come up with solutions.

 

We are actually in a terrible position now. We have Lib Dem candidate on here explaining why sectarianism is fine and any action against them constitutes fascism. We have had a parade of Unionists explaining why sectarianism is just lolz.

 

We will get back to a situation where once in a while a Labour MP can come on TV and shake his head at the camera about how shite it is there is still 'No Irish' pubs and go back to his constituency and pretend to be a civil rights campaigner. I will blame c***s like Ad Lib, who are young and stupid. Tying to chase votes no matter the repercussions. Pat a head on a bigot, and say "no-one understands you like I do, you're a victim in all of this" - the Unionist strategy.

Edited May 17, 2016 by HaikuHibee

[Dipped Flake]

There is only one reason to try and get this law repealed and that is for the opposition parties to give the SNP a bloody nose. I would say the need for this law is even greater as we now have sevco back in the top league along with their thousands of bigoted fans  

[bob the tank]

There is only one reason to try and get this law repealed and that is for the opposition parties to give the SNP a bloody nose. I would say the need for this law is even greater as we now have sevco back in the top league along with their thousands of bigoted fans

Exactly this

[strichener]

The SFA for decades have said it is a matter for the police whenever they put pressure on them. The police have been given responsibility. Rangers and Celtic are decrying it as completely unfair and you have a few Unionist party hardcore that are more than happy to play to the bigot crowd to get a few votes. You have people like Ad Lib now coming up with mad arguments because they are too stupid to come up with solutions.

 

We are actually in a terrible position now. We have Lib Dem candidate on here explaining why sectarianism is fine and any action against them constitutes fascism. We have had a parade of Unionists explaining why sectarianism is just lolz.

 

We will get back to a situation where once in a while a Labour MP can come on TV and shake his head at the camera about how shite it is there is still 'No Irish' pubs and go back to his constituency and pretend to be a civil rights campaigner. I will blame c***s like Ad Lib, who are young and stupid. Tying to chase votes no matter the repercussions. Pat a head on a bigot, and say "no-one understands you like I do, you're a victim in all of this" - the Unionist strategy.

Both Celtic and Rangers welcomed the introduction of the law at the time.

[Tory]

The last I checked we live in a democracy, and with democracy comes freedom of speech.  This law was passed simply to discriminate.  Not against bigots, not against sectarian chanting, but simply against football fans.  The idea football fans should be treated under a different law from the general public, is down right madness.  But more importantly this law was made to discriminate against freedom of speech.  It is my downright right to call someone a F**nan b*****d, the same way it is that persons right to call me an ***********, or whatever they wish to call me back.  It is Hamish's downright right to call Rob from Essex an English b*****d, the same way it is Robs downright right to call Rob a Scottish b*****d.  I would however like to point out the line is inflicting violence, causing someone physical harm is no-ones right and you should be punished for that.  This country has been through a lot to ensure it is a democracy and to ensure that freedom of speech should always be our right.  I expect a backlash for writing that, but guess what?  That's your right due to freedom of speech!

 

I'd like to point out aswell this act doesn't even cover sectarianism, it simply covers what one could find offensive at a football match, or the surrounding areas of a football match, to put it bluntly, calling the referee a w****r, the linesman a p***k, the opposition manager an arsehole, the other support ****, Jason Cummings a paedophile, singing a song about how much you hate the Old Firm, how you hate the pope and the Queen or calling Chick Charnley the dirty wee horrible b*****d that he was, is by this law, offensive.  Therefore you can be punished by this law.  That's why it is so ridiculous.  

 

I'd also like to bring up the Dundee Utd fans point on page four who said the following:

 

 

 

It only affects people who want to sing bigoted songs.

Its a good law that was badly needed, as ever the SNP are the first ones to ever attempt to actually try to make Scotland a better place and deal with our problems.

As ever, the unionist parties are perfectly happy to damage Scottish society and roll back laws that are good for Scotland in order to damage the SNP. 

The constitution really needs resolving we are in an absurd position of having the main opposition parties working against the interests of our entire country, the NPS is the same, the unionist parties will be perfectly happy to endanger the lives of Scottish children just to hurt the SNP. Disgraceful

 

What a load of absolute shite!  See if the SNP actually cared about the people of Scotland, it would accept the democratic will of its people when 55% of the country voted to remain within the United Kingdom, instead of repeatedly calling for a second referendum and attempting to break up more families and more friendships in Scottish society.  There is already a lot of hatred and animosity in Scotland over unionism and nationalism, and instead of being a party to try and build bridges, it's doing the opposite, it simply creates more divides.  It's not even a political party built to care for the people of Scotland, it's an independence at all costs party, f**k the damage it causes.   The comment about endanger the lives of Scottish children I had to laugh about aswell, because as I said this "party" is quite happy to do that by it's continuous beating of the independence drum. 

[Tory]

Also see if we're going down the route of having a go at bigots or bringing up sectarianism.  Let me tell you all something Scotland's problem goes far beyond Rangers or Celtic.  I had to laugh at the Hearts fan saying this should happen, or that should happen to clubs.  Let me tell you, that you're club would be first in line with Rangers and Celtic to be punished, along with your ugly championship sitting sisters from Leith.  To kid on sectarianism is an Old Firm problem is hilarous.

[strichener]

Also see if we're going down the route of having a go at bigots or bringing up sectarianism.  Let me tell you all something Scotland's problem goes far beyond Rangers or Celtic.  I had to laugh at the Hearts fan saying this should happen, or that should happen to clubs.  Let me tell you, that you're club would be first in line with Rangers and Celtic to be punished, along with your ugly championship sitting sisters from Leith.  To kid on sectarianism is an Old Firm problem is hilarous.

No but you are recognising that the problem is worse around football.  Perhaps you should revise your first post.

[Tory]

No but you are recognising that the problem is worse around football.  Perhaps you should revise your first post.

 

My original post stands, freedom of speech should also stand.  I simply pointed out the irony in someones post at trying to blame everything on two clubs.

[Mr Bairn]

Hiya RedRob, hiya pal!

[williemillersmoustache]

3 whole posts without a ban, will he try for 4? Stay tuned......

[Tory]

3 whole posts without a ban, will he try for 4? Stay tuned......

 

Banned for what exactly?  

[williemillersmoustache]

Banned for what exactly?  

 

This is a private forum, there is no free speech here. You can't use the language you used in your first post, in a similar way to how you can't use it at the football. And I think it's fair to say there is a strong suspicion that this is not your only account? Go on go for 5 posts, make hay while you can.

[John Lambies Doos]

My original post stands, freedom of speech should also stand. I simply pointed out the irony in someones post at trying to blame everything on two clubs.

And what about freedom of speech that incites hatred? What are your views on this?

[renton]

The last I checked we live in a democracy, and with democracy comes freedom of speech.  This law was passed simply to discriminate.  Not against bigots, not against sectarian chanting, but simply against football fans.  The idea football fans should be treated under a different law from the general public, is down right madness.  But more importantly this law was made to discriminate against freedom of speech.  It is my downright right to call someone a F**nan b*****d, the same way it is that persons right to call me an ***********, or whatever they wish to call me back.  It is Hamish's downright right to call Rob from Essex an English b*****d, the same way it is Robs downright right to call Rob a Scottish b*****d.  I would however like to point out the line is inflicting violence, causing someone physical harm is no-ones right and you should be punished for that.  This country has been through a lot to ensure it is a democracy and to ensure that freedom of speech should always be our right.  I expect a backlash for writing that, but guess what?  That's your right due to freedom of speech!

 

I'd like to point out aswell this act doesn't even cover sectarianism, it simply covers what one could find offensive at a football match, or the surrounding areas of a football match, to put it bluntly, calling the referee a w****r, the linesman a p***k, the opposition manager an arsehole, the other support ****, Jason Cummings a paedophile, singing a song about how much you hate the Old Firm, how you hate the pope and the Queen or calling Chick Charnley the dirty wee horrible b*****d that he was, is by this law, offensive.  Therefore you can be punished by this law.  That's why it is so ridiculous.  

 

I'd also like to bring up the Dundee Utd fans point on page four who said the following:

 

 

What a load of absolute shite!  See if the SNP actually cared about the people of Scotland, it would accept the democratic will of its people when 55% of the country voted to remain within the United Kingdom, instead of repeatedly calling for a second referendum and attempting to break up more families and more friendships in Scottish society.  There is already a lot of hatred and animosity in Scotland over unionism and nationalism, and instead of being a party to try and build bridges, it's doing the opposite, it simply creates more divides.  It's not even a political party built to care for the people of Scotland, it's an independence at all costs party, f**k the damage it causes.   The comment about endanger the lives of Scottish children I had to laugh about aswell, because as I said this "party" is quite happy to do that by it's continuous beating of the independence drum. 

 

1. Every society constrains freedom of speech in some way or another in terms of how people can express an opinion on another. You should not and cannot discriminate against someone based on race, religion, gender etc. Perjorative terminology for those classes is included here. That's because while freedom of speech is integral to a functioning free society, the bar should not be set at where folk are ghettoised and the threat (if not the reality) of violence is present. That's because a free society not only requires that people can have freedom of thought and expression but also that they should be free from violence for that expression. Only by mutual respect and consent can you get a truly free society, and therefore there will always be mandated limitations on certain expressions in order to create a space where mutual respect can flourish. Your god given right to insult someone on the basis of their religious sect can go f**k itself.

 

2. Given the unique history of each and every society it's the case that no two will ever be the same or formulate the same laws. Given the West of Scotland's unique historical ties with Northen irish politics as seen through the lens of football culture, it's inevitable that some focus will be given to that arena. Whatever you think of the law as it is today, sectarianism is an issue (though one that is thankfully less today than ever before) with very real consequences.

 

3. The irony of your comments about a 2nd referendum being that the people most banging on about a 2nd indy ref are your mob. Davidson couldn't help but mention it every second word in an attempt to rally hard core unionists to her cause, and to be fair it worked to an extent.

 

4. I really can't stand the whole 'divided family' argument. It's was an honest question, asked fairly. Anyone who ended up falling out with anyone else over it is a fucknugget and you can't really legislate for that. For the most part, people were able to debate their views honestly and openly (apart from that most vicious of battlegrounds, twitter)

 

5. Accepting the democratic will is one thing, and it was: after all Scotland is still a part of that benighted state. Still, they key to the democratic part of democratic will is the fact that people can change their minds and enough people keep voting for parties for whom Scottish sovereignty reposed in a Scottish state is a worthy cause. Thus the issue remains alive. Deal with it.