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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(104,335 posts)
11. And if everyone reads the full Britannica article, it's clear it restricts violence to acts against people
Sun Jul 6, 2025, 05:32 AM
Jul 6

not against inanimate objects.

Types of violence
Violence can be categorized in a number of ways. Violent crimes are typically divided into four main categories, based on the nature of the behaviour: homicide (the killing of one human being by another, sometimes for legally justifiable reasons), assault (physically attacking another person with the intent to cause harm), robbery (forcibly taking something from another person), and rape (forcible sexual intercourse with another person). Other forms of violence overlap with these categories, such as child sexual abuse (engaging in sexual acts with a child) and domestic violence (violent behaviour between relatives, usually spouses).

The UK government are snivelling wankers, who are stretching a bad law way beyond reason. They have made holding that placard in the OP "I support Palestine Action" a crime, despite Palestine Action never having committed any violence or terrorism. Rather than fixing the security at their bases, and disassociating themselves from the arms companies such as Elbit whose property has been the target of Palestine Action vandalism,, they gave into the the lobbying by the arms companies.

In 2003, Keir Starmer was part of the legal team defending a similar case of causing damage on an RAF base.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairford_Five

The sentences were small (a conditional discharge and a £250 fine for costs, or a curfew order). Some were found not guilty by juries because their actions were trying to prevent war crimes. Now Starmer has declared supporting the same vandalism as "terrorism". What a coward and liar he is.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Maybe breaking in to the RAF base & spraying red paint into the engines of $300 million planes was a bad idea? EX500rider Jul 5 #1
Oh yes, property damage is terrorism, but starving and incinerating babies is not. AloeVera Jul 5 #2
Really sucks that Hamas started all this, huh? cabotnn22 Jul 5 #5
"Activists and their supporters have said the group is non-violent and advocates civil disobedience" Beastly Boy Jul 5 #3
They'd be shot dead by the IDF or GHF mercenaries... AloeVera Jul 5 #4
More likely they'd be shot by Hamas cabotnn22 Jul 5 #6
How do you propose your mutually exclusive speculations could possibly take place? Beastly Boy Jul 5 #7
Now you think fences are people too? AloeVera Jul 5 #9
Again... What? Beastly Boy Jul 5 #10
And if everyone reads the full Britannica article, it's clear it restricts violence to acts against people muriel_volestrangler Jul 6 #11
Only if everyone READS the full Britannica article, not READS INTO it. Beastly Boy Jul 6 #12
"way outside the topic"? The topic is the UK government making support for Palestine Action a criminal offence muriel_volestrangler Jul 6 #13
It takes an act of violence to vandalise anything. Vandalism, including vandalising military equipment IS violent. Beastly Boy Jul 6 #14
I think the UK is really stretching the terrorism label AZProgressive Jul 5 #8
However they sprayed the paint into the engines EX500rider Jul 6 #15
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»More than 20 arrests at p...»Reply #11