Labour buying votes?

[Al R]

BBC News - Labour wants new law for attacks on armed forces

Attacking a member of the armed forces should be a "specific criminal offence", the shadow defence secretary has said. The move would give British troops "the protection their bravery deserves", he told delegates at the party's annual conference in Brighton.

Among the party's plans are proposals to name streets after those killed in action, new legal entitlements to "in-service education" and personalised health support for those with life-changing injuries.

Increasing child support probably wouldn't help military spouses; the issue there is more professional turbulence created by regular relocation. That detail is a bit thin.

[Not_a_boffin]

Call me a moron, but isn't attacking someone (whether HMF or not) a criminal offence already?

Or is this the party of lawyers trying to make work for their mates by creating yet more laws requiring interpretation of whether said person was on or off duty and therefore subject to the act or not? Or whether service personnel being "off-limits" to attack infringes the yooman rights of some flavour of protestor?

Gimmickry of the worst kind.

[Wensleydale]

Interesting to know what the charges would be if a squaddie attacked one of his "mates". Would the new law apply to "Blue on Blue"?

Also wonder whether the new law would be similar to current laws relating to minority "hate" crimes: the military being added to race and gender offences for example. Just a thought.

[Biggus]

Given the current size of the armed forces, it won't buy many votes!!

[SOSL]

I quite agree, Biggus.

But they (Labour Party) seem not to have noticed that many, many more attacks are carried out on the Police Force, Ambulance Service, Fire Service and Highways Agency guys day in and day out. No mention of specific offences for them.

The uneducated, ignorant and cowardly thugs responsible are not deterred by laws. They would struggle to understand what a law is!

On the other hand they might be deterred by the certainty of arrest, conviction and punishment.

But that won't happen will it?

Rgds SOS

[Courtney Mil]

SOSL,

Wasn't there a lot of discussion about creating a specific offence for attacks against police officer - about 2 or 3 months ago? Can't recall where it ended up.

Courtney

[clicker]

While I welcome the idea in general I think there is a couple of points to make.

Most of the public doesn't even know what you guys do for us. Will they be that bothered? I don't think it would bring in votes.

If they think some people should get more protection from the law why is it not in force now or at the very least waiting to go thru parliament to be made law.

[Martin the Martian]

'The protection their bravery deserves'

Why do the words 'body' and 'armour' keep shouting at me?

[air pig]

It's not that there is or is not a law, it would just be good if the present laws were both used and enforced in the courts. Until that happens nothing will change. As an example, if you have people shouting on the streets screaming at people in the armed forces why aren't they arrested for a public order offense, charged and brought before the courts.

[blimey]

At some stage in the future, we'll all be part of a protected minority, so as it should be: equal in the eyes of the law (unless, a you're transgender, ginger-haired, one-legged, muslim, obese, traveller in uniform, in which case you'll have won life's legal protection/thought crime lottery).

[Heathrow Harry]

just getting some coverage in case the Daily Mail is planning a headline

"Labour Hates our Brave Soldiers!" in the future

[skydiver69]

Wasn't there a lot of discussion about creating a specific offence for attacks against police officer - about 2 or 3 months ago? Can't recall where it ended up

Ms T May tried sucking up to the police at the Police Federation conference earlier this year and proposed the idea that anyone who kills a PC will receive a mandatory life sentence. That was the first and last time I heard about the idea and to be honest she would have to do a lot more than that to get the rank and file back on side after the constant stream of insult and attacks inflicted by HMG in the name of 'reform.'

It's not that there is or is not a law, it would just be good if the present laws were both used and enforced in the courts. Until that happens nothing will change. As an example, if you have people shouting on the streets screaming at people in the armed forces why aren't they arrested for a public order offense, charged and brought before the courts.

Unfortunately the trouble you run into when trying to get a conviction in court is that some words and actions are protected by freedom of speech. I'll give you an example of a male who I arrested for ripping up a Koran in front of a group of Muslims whilst telling them that their religion was 'bollocks.' I arrested him for s.4 public order and he was duly charged but pleaded not guilty and elected to go to crown court. Pre trial the CPS almost dropped the case, then when it went to trial the jury could not return a verdict before being discharged with the male being found not guilty. The prosecuting lawyer told me that the male's actions and words were an acceptable freedom of speech. Now if it had been a Muslim insulting a soldier you would find exactly the same issue.

[air pig]

Skydiver 69:

Unfortunately the trouble you run into when trying to get a conviction in court is that some words and actions are protected by freedom of speech. I'll give you an example of a male who I arrested for ripping up a Koran in front of a group of Muslims whilst telling them that their religion was 'bollocks.' I arrested him for s.4 public order and he was duly charged but pleaded not guilty and elected to go to crown court. Pre trial the CPS almost dropped the case, then when it went to trial the jury could not return a verdict before being discharged with the male being found not guilty. The prosecuting lawyer told me that the male's actions and words were an acceptable freedom of speech. Now if it had been a Muslim insulting a soldier you would find exactly the same issue.

What about S5 or conduct liable to alarm distress or harass or is that S4.

[Courtney Mil]

Originally Posted by Martin the Martian

Why do the words 'body' and 'armour' keep shouting at me?

I'm not sure how to take your post there, Martin. Are you suggesting that soldiers wear body armour and are, therefore, not being brave, or that they should continue to wear in the UK in case someone attacks them for what they are, or that body armour is all the protection they deserve? In second thoughts, probably just a play on words. Sorry.

[Army Mover]

I think it's the lack of supply of body armour by the previous Labour Government prior to GW2.

[Courtney Mil]

Ah, of course. Thank you. I was having a thick moment there.

[skydiver69]

What about S5 or conduct liable to alarm distress or harass or is that S4.

I arrested him for religiously aggravated section 4 public order uses towards another person threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, but apparently he was using freedom of speech.

[NutLoose]

Among the party's plans are proposals to name streets after those killed in action, new legal entitlements to "in-service education" and personalised health support for those with life-changing injuries.

Dedicated personalised health support, isn't that what the Military hospitals used to give for both serving and ex servicemen before they shut them all?

In-Service education, again didn't we used to have that? Must be a bitch part away through your course to find yourself sitting in a drainage ditch up to your armpits in sh*te in some fleapit of a country.

As for having a street named after you, one would have thought the local council already do that...... Shallow words from a shallow party.

I arrested him for religiously aggravated section 4 public order uses towards another person threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, but apparently he was using freedom of speech.

As for the would the Muslim be treated the same for attacking a soldier, well those on Remembrance Day in London were not arrested, though I would like to point out they were sadly misguided as Muslims also gave their lives during the wars.

[racedo]

Let armed forces use whatever they use in normal job...................ok would make parking at Sainsbury fun tank commander but would never get a parking ticket.

[skydiver69]

As for the would the Muslim be treated the same for attacking a soldier, well those on Remembrance Day in London were not arrested, though I would like to point out they were sadly misguided as Muslims also gave their lives during the wars.

Personally I agree with you however legally speaking, freedom of speech might take precedence over whatever insult or bad feeling was caused by the protesters to the spectators or armed forces.