Well if you do insist on getting all technical,
erecting and maintaining a statue does not meet the definition of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, nor is it a display of written material.
But even if it did, it's been sitting there quietly ignored by passers by, for longer than the collective ages of the people who toppled it,
thoroughly failing to stir up the fires of racial hatred. I argue that racial hatred got stirred up first, and then was targeted at the statue.
Incidentally I'm not upset, and I bear these guys no ill will; Beni literally requested for a contrary opinion so he got one.
I don't think the acquittal particularly makes sense, but it's not like this is a big deal. At worst the damage was a bunch of noisy hassle.
Yeah, the statue is shit, of a guy who was shitter, and it's for the best that it has gone.
I agree with the outcome, I'm just not down with mobs knocking down monuments.
(, Mon 10 Jan 2022, 0:40, Reply)
I've heard testimony
from black Bristolians who describe the gutting feeling of walking past that statue to and from work. They didn't make a conscious decision to be a victim.
Legal precedent is on my side wrt the public order act, I believe.
(
brb man-child cuck corporate supplicant fuck, Mon 10 Jan 2022, 1:20,
Reply)
You may well be right. IAMAL.
But if that is the case I expect some extremely circuitous chicanery of words must have been employed to get that legislation to fit.
My blind guess is it would all hinge on the word insulting, which is a deeply flawed word that is impossible to objectively define.
(, Mon 10 Jan 2022, 1:36, Reply)