Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
United Kingdom
Related: About this forum"Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance" - the new ASBOs
A piece of legislation that is going through Parliament is rather alarming. It has passed committee stage, meaning its close to becoming law.
...
Summary
- The replacement of the ASBO will be harsher and easier for the authorities to serve
- The replacement of the Dispersal Order will be harsher, longer lasting and easier for the authorities to serve
- These, together with recent government moves (below) represent a genuine threat to UK freedoms, not least the right to protest and right to assembly
...
This version, however, is worse. ASBOs could only be issued when a yob/hoodie/hoodlum had done something wrong caused harassment, alarm or distress.
As Scriptonite Daily points out, IPNAs require only that you might engage in behaviour capable of causing annoyance. This is FEROCIOUSLY WIDE AND FUZZY.
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/08/06/a-terrifying-attack-on-our-civil-liberties-is-currently-going-through-parliament/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+liberalconspiracy+%28Liberal+Conspiracy%29
...
Summary
- The replacement of the ASBO will be harsher and easier for the authorities to serve
- The replacement of the Dispersal Order will be harsher, longer lasting and easier for the authorities to serve
- These, together with recent government moves (below) represent a genuine threat to UK freedoms, not least the right to protest and right to assembly
...
This version, however, is worse. ASBOs could only be issued when a yob/hoodie/hoodlum had done something wrong caused harassment, alarm or distress.
As Scriptonite Daily points out, IPNAs require only that you might engage in behaviour capable of causing annoyance. This is FEROCIOUSLY WIDE AND FUZZY.
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/08/06/a-terrifying-attack-on-our-civil-liberties-is-currently-going-through-parliament/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+liberalconspiracy+%28Liberal+Conspiracy%29
Injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance
1 Power to grant injunctions
(1) A court may grant an injunction under this section against a person aged 10 or
over (the respondent) if two conditions are met.
(2) The first condition is that the court is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities,
that the respondent has engaged or threatens to engage in conduct capable of
causing nuisance or annoyance to any person (anti-social behaviour).
(3) The second condition is that the court considers it just and convenient to grant
the injunction for the purpose of preventing the respondent from engaging in
anti-social behaviour.
(4) An injunction under this section may for the purpose of preventing the
respondent from engaging in anti-social behaviour
(a) prohibit the respondent from doing anything described in the
injunction;
(b) require the respondent to do anything described in the injunction.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2013-2014/0007/14007.pdf
1 Power to grant injunctions
(1) A court may grant an injunction under this section against a person aged 10 or
over (the respondent) if two conditions are met.
(2) The first condition is that the court is satisfied, on the balance of probabilities,
that the respondent has engaged or threatens to engage in conduct capable of
causing nuisance or annoyance to any person (anti-social behaviour).
(3) The second condition is that the court considers it just and convenient to grant
the injunction for the purpose of preventing the respondent from engaging in
anti-social behaviour.
(4) An injunction under this section may for the purpose of preventing the
respondent from engaging in anti-social behaviour
(a) prohibit the respondent from doing anything described in the
injunction;
(b) require the respondent to do anything described in the injunction.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2013-2014/0007/14007.pdf
Yeah, that looks pretty damn wide.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 2161 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance" - the new ASBOs (Original Post)
muriel_volestrangler
Aug 2013
OP
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)1. Step by step: the POLICE STATE cometh
New World Disorder
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)2. See also Operation: Northwoods at:
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)3. More here on Northwoods
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
That subject comes up from time to time in the Latin American Forum here. Read up on this time for Cuban payback at a much later date: Mariel Boatlift - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_boatlift
That subject comes up from time to time in the Latin American Forum here. Read up on this time for Cuban payback at a much later date: Mariel Boatlift - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_boatlift