Ross. Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Just now, Baxter Parp said: The SNP called for compromise and suggestions in 2016 and were ignored. You can't go pointing the finger at them when it's the opposition that have put us in this place. The SNP should have been calling for compromise and amendments when it was introduced and criticisms were being provided. They thought if they ignored them long enough, they would go away, and offered nothing. They only started talking about amendments when they realised it wasn't going to go away and the opposition had seen a weak point in the armour. The finger can be pointed directly at them for that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Ross. said: The SNP should have been calling for compromise and amendments when it was introduced and criticisms were being provided. They thought if they ignored them long enough, they would go away, and offered nothing. They only started talking about amendments when they realised it wasn't going to go away and the opposition had seen a weak point in the armour. The finger can be pointed directly at them for that. So where is the compromise from the opposition? Where are the proposed amendments? Where is the constructive criticism? The opposition have done absolutely nothing but propose repeal. If they had any intent to reform the bill they would have brought forward proposals to do so and they have not. They are pandering to the worst elements of Scottish society and they should be ashamed. Edited January 26, 2018 by Baxter Parp 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 4 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said: So where is the compromise from the opposition? Where are the proposed amendments? Where is the constructive criticism? The opposition have done absolutely nothing but propose repeal. If they had any intent to reform the bill they would have brought forward proposals to do so and they have not. They are pandering to the worst elements of Scottish society and they should be ashamed. I don't know why you are trying to argue with me on those points. I have already stated several times, quite clearly, that I agree with you on that. The opponents to this, in terms of those involved in politics, seen it as nothing but an opportunity to get one over on the SNP. There was zero interest in the real impact or application, merely a chance to have a go at what seemed at the time to be an unstoppable SNP government. That doesn't the fact that the SNP left themselves wide open to what has happened by a) Putting a very poor piece of legislation in place to start with, and b) Not bothering to fix that legislation when it was initially criticised. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Just now, Ross. said: I don't know why you are trying to argue with me on those points. I have already stated several times, quite clearly, that I agree with you on that. The opponents to this, in terms of those involved in politics, seen it as nothing but an opportunity to get one over on the SNP. There was zero interest in the real impact or application, merely a chance to have a go at what seemed at the time to be an unstoppable SNP government. That doesn't the fact that the SNP left themselves wide open to what has happened by a) Putting a very poor piece of legislation in place to start with, and b) Not bothering to fix that legislation when it was initially criticised. Fair enough, I'm just a bit pissed off about it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 I'm a Scotland fan in Paris watching the national team and i sing a song which is considered distasteful by some in Scotland (although it's not racist or sectarian) , but has no connotations that would offend anyone in France. I arrive home and am arrested and charged under the OBAF act. My friend goes to Paris the next weekend to watch the Scottish rugby team. He sits in the same stadium, in the same seat as me and sings exactly the same song. In both situations no-one was offended, yet I've broken the law and he hasn't. And neither of us were even in Scotland. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodhull Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 4 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: I'm a Scotland fan in Paris watching the national team and i sing a song which is considered distasteful by some in Scotland (although it's not racist or sectarian) , but has no connotations that would offend anyone in France. I arrive home and am arrested and charged under the OBAF act. My friend goes to Paris the next weekend to watch the Scottish rugby team. He sits in the same stadium, in the same seat as me and sings exactly the same song. In both situations no-one was offended, yet I've broken the law and he hasn't. And neither of us were even in Scotland. How do you know noone was offended? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, Rodhull said: How do you know noone was offended? The French hate the English. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 21 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: I'm a Scotland fan in Paris watching the national team and i sing a song which is considered distasteful by some in Scotland (although it's not racist or sectarian) , but has no connotations that would offend anyone in France. I arrive home and am arrested and charged under the OBAF act. My friend goes to Paris the next weekend to watch the Scottish rugby team. He sits in the same stadium, in the same seat as me and sings exactly the same song. In both situations no-one was offended, yet I've broken the law and he hasn't. And neither of us were even in Scotland. Actually no, as police Scotland have no jurisdiction in France amazingly enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loondave1 Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Depends. Are they East Fife players ****s, ****s or ******s? The SNP called for compromise and suggestions in 2016 and were ignored. You can't go pointing the finger at them when it's the opposition that have put us in this place. I will go with "absolute rotters" "scoundrels" type stuff just to be on the safe side. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 29 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: Actually no, as police Scotland have no jurisdiction in France amazingly enough. This is what I'm talking about. The people defending it haven't actually read the f*cking thing. regulated football match does not include a regulated football match outside Scotland unless the match involves- (I) a national team appointed to represent Scotland, or (ii) a team representing a club that is a member of a football association or league based in Scotland. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodhull Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: This is what I'm talking about. The people defending it haven't actually read the f*cking thing. regulated football match does not include a regulated football match outside Scotland unless the match involves- (I) a national team appointed to represent Scotland, or (ii) a team representing a club that is a member of a football association or league based in Scotland. You still haven't explained how you know for certain noone was offended by the objectionable song in your weird example? Normally it wouldn't be the person who sings the song that gets to decide that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 7 minutes ago, Rodhull said: You still haven't explained how you know for certain noone was offended by the objectionable song in your weird example? Normally it wouldn't be the person who sings the song that gets to decide that. It would be the pf, as I say to anyone criticising this act, show me one wrongful conviction. But I stand corrected about the France thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 6 minutes ago, Rodhull said: You still haven't explained how you know for certain noone was offended by the objectionable song in your weird example? Normally it wouldn't be the person who sings the song that gets to decide that. I could be standing in an empty field and it would still apply. The law states that it is irrelevant whether anyone was actually offended, or even present. Just that a hypothetical person could have been. That definition covers about 90% of what's shouted at football. "F*ck off ref!" is offensive to a reasonable person. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodhull Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 7 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: I could be standing in an empty field and it would still apply. The law states that it is irrelevant whether anyone was actually offended, or even present. Just that a hypothetical person could have been. That definition covers about 90% of what's shouted at football. "F*ck off ref!" is offensive to a reasonable person. Indeed there's a lot of hypotheticals involved here. Including a lot of hypotheticals miscarriages of justice that may or may not ever happen or have happened already. Improve/amend the wording of the law by all means but removing it completely with no hint at anything being done to replace it at all is a backwards step. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Growing up as a mixed raced teenager in London, I used to regularly get stopped and searched by the police for literally nothing (I was once with a group of 8 friends, all of whom were white, and I was the only one that was searched). I have a HUGE problem with giving the police massive, sweeping, poorly defined powers, and then just relying on their good faith. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 2 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: Growing up as a mixed raced teenager in London, I used to regularly get stopped and searched by the police for literally nothing (I was once with a group of 8 friends, all of whom were white, and I was the only one that was searched). I have a HUGE problem with giving the police massive, sweeping, poorly defined powers, and then just relying on their good faith. That's your bias. Doesn't mean it has any relevance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 17 minutes ago, Carl Cort's Hamstring said: I could be standing in an empty field and it would still apply. The law states that it is irrelevant whether anyone was actually offended, or even present. Just that a hypothetical person could have been. That definition covers about 90% of what's shouted at football. "F*ck off ref!" is offensive to a reasonable person. No it's not. Calling him something homophobic or racist is. And it's for the pf to decide, who is qualified to do so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 (edited) Why are SNP supporters defending this shite and ill considered piece of legislation? I'm a paid member btw. Edited January 26, 2018 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodhull Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 7 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Why are SNP supporters defending this shite and unconsidered piece of legislation? I'm a paid member btw. Because amending it is preferrable to the example of doing nothing that will follow once its repealed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 1 minute ago, Rodhull said: Because amending it is preferrable to the example of doing nothing that will follow once its repealed. Why didn't the SNP amend it when they had a majority? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.