Jump to content

Fishery owner and farmer facing legal action on his no eastern Europeans policy


oldypigeonpopper
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 205
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It doesn't matter if they ARE doing it. It doesn't even matter if they admit to doing it. You can't mention it or do anything about it because telling the truth about a thief is far worse than the crime itself.

It's time this country started looking after it's own citizens and their rights rather than pandering to the easily-offended day in day out.

On another thread, someone told me he hated the English. Where were these self-appointed champions of political correctness when I and my country were being abused?

Edited by walshie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 12:29, oowee said:

The UN definition is racist. Èither way it's discrimatory and offensive, to all but Neanderthal. 

I now feel insecure and persecuted due to my Neanderthal heritage, no doubt shared by many. You nasty neanthandthinicophobe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, walshie said:

It doesn't matter if they ARE doing it. It doesn't even matter if they admit to doing it. You can't mention it or do anything about it because telling the truth about a thief is far worse than the crime itself.

It's time this country started looking after it's own citizens and their rights rather than pandering to the easily-offended day in day out.

On another thread, someone told me he hated the English. Where were these self-appointed champions of political correctness when I and my country were being abused?

He probably over exaggerated and just meant 'totally detested' :lol::lol:  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, oowee said:

It's great that common sense and British fair play and justice has won through in the end.

It's a pity that so many sun and mirror readers believe what they read in the press.

You know what the irony of the matter is Oowee.

Mr Evans had the sign up for 8 years, yes it had its initial publicity, mostly in the 2009 left wing press, but nobody was really interested.
The Polish ambassadors argument was swiftly blown out the water, and no one had their offence gland hurt enough to take it legal.

Fast forward to 2017 amd Mr 'building bridges' gets on the post Brexit publicity drive and does his civil duty to ' create a better understanding between fisherman from different countries' by taking nearly 80 year old Mr Evans to court over his 8 year old very offensive sign.

So in summary, do you want to argue that Poles and Eastern Europeans DONT  take fish (often via theft) for the pot ?
Or does that not matter one bit, because Mr Evans sign was very racist ? (Even though virtually no one complained about it)
Does 'offence crime' over rule real crime these days ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rewulf said:

You know what the irony of the matter is Oowee.

Mr Evans had the sign up for 8 years, yes it had its initial publicity, mostly in the 2009 left wing press, but nobody was really interested.
The Polish ambassadors argument was swiftly blown out the water, and no one had their offence gland hurt enough to take it legal.

Fast forward to 2017 amd Mr 'building bridges' gets on the post Brexit publicity drive and does his civil duty to ' create a better understanding between fisherman from different countries' by taking nearly 80 year old Mr Evans to court over his 8 year old very offensive sign.

So in summary, do you want to argue that Poles and Eastern Europeans DONT  take fish (often via theft) for the pot ?
Or does that not matter one bit, because Mr Evans sign was very racist ? (Even though virtually no one complained about it)
Does 'offence crime' over rule real crime these days ?

No. They are both crimes and subject to law. Simples. We have to believe in and follow the rules or we are all lost. What annoys me is when the laws are not enforced for all. Particularly when as firearms owners we go to great lengths to ensure that we follow stuff to the letter and others seem to get away with blue murder due to a lack of resources. It then comes down to the likes of ordinary citizens to seek redress as a result of the failure of the legal system to take action. That can't be right. :unhappy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, oowee said:

No. They are both crimes and subject to law. Simples. We have to believe in and follow the rules or we are all lost. What annoys me is when the laws are not enforced for all. Particularly when as firearms owners we go to great lengths to ensure that we follow stuff to the letter and others seem to get away with blue murder due to a lack of resources. It then comes down to the likes of ordinary citizens to seek redress as a result of the failure of the legal system to take action. That can't be right. :unhappy:

No its not right.
But the question I was asking you was, does the fact that his sign, that no one reported to relevant authorities, or perhaps no authority saw fit to pursue it, for 8 years, take precedence over the theft of the mans fish, a financial loss of possibly thousands of pounds ?
Is offence crime more important to our liberal mindset?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Ha! Is it still a crime if no one is offended, or if no one reports it ?
You are either dodging the question, or blind to the issue.

I give up.

People were offended, it was reported and the farmer was taken to court. 

30 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Which law was broken?

 

Studio_20180215_172804.jpg.e5e6a689db73b4e254c3985b01aebf91.jpg

I draw your attention to the crudely circled part. I don't think even you can deny that the farmer's rule was justified.

Racial discrimination laws were broken. The farmer withdrew the sign (no doubt on legal advice) and the case was dropped. 

I think even you would agree that racial discrimination should not be tolerated. 

Edited by oowee
structure
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, oowee said:

People were offended, it was reported and the farmer was taken to court. 

Racial discrimination laws were broken. The farmer withdrew the sign (no doubt on legal advice) and the case was dropped. 

I think even you would agree that racial discrimination should not tolerated

:lol::lol::lol: quite right...been called a sheep ******* more times than I care to remember but you know what a couple of man the **** up pills and I'm still alive, unharmed and unbothered :good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, oowee said:

People were offended, it was reported and the farmer was taken to court. 

Racial discrimination laws were broken. The farmer withdrew the sign (no doubt on legal advice) and the case was dropped. 

I think even you would agree that racial discrimination should not be tolerated. 

But you are just ignoring the fact that his sign was justified! And the picture I shared clearly states that sometimes a rule is justified That picture is a screen shot from a .gov website.

Yes they are both against the Law,

1 is criminal the other is not, not until it becomes a hate crime.

The fact is the Polish embassy worker or whatever he is, would have been better starting a campaign to educate the people to the wrongs of stealing fish, and explain that in this Country the general policy is catch and release, if you want to eat your catch then ask permission first!

I think you will agree that theft (in this case fish), should not be tolerated. And as this one is criminal it trumps the inequality of the sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

But you are just ignoring the fact that his sign was justified! And the picture I shared clearly states that sometimes a rule is justified That picture is a screen shot from a .gov website.

Yes they are both against the Law,

1 is criminal the other is not, not until it becomes a hate crime.

The fact is the Polish embassy worker or whatever he is, would have been better starting a campaign to educate the people to the wrongs of stealing fish, and explain that in this Country the general policy is catch and release, if you want to eat your catch then ask permission first!

I think you will agree that theft (in this case fish), should not be tolerated. And as this one is criminal it trumps the inequality of the sign.

His sign was not justified in the least.  If his sign said "No Thieves" or "No Stealing Fish" it would be justified.

The key thing being that the act of theft was highlighted as the reason for the sign.  To then conflate all Eastern Europeans as being responsible for that theft is a discriminatory generalisation and therefore completely and wholly unjustified.  It is also wrong.

The part of the guidance note on the government website that you highlighted would be justification for a sign saying "No Men" on the door of a ladies changing room.

It does make me wonder if the sign saying "No Eastern Europeans" was so effective as to prevent the theft of fish then wouldn't a sign simply saying "No Theft" be as equally effective?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, grrclark said:

It does make me wonder if the sign saying "No Eastern Europeans" was so effective as to prevent the theft of fish then wouldn't a sign simply saying "No Theft" be as equally effective?

Quite possibly, but it still doesn't take away the fact that the farmer had crimes committed against him, crimes which according to him were committed by Eastern Europeans. He felt rightly or wrongly that a carpet ban was the way forward  (which I have previously said was not the right way).

But as I previously stated

I think you will agree that theft (in this case fish), should not be tolerated. And as this one is criminal, it trumps the inequality of the sign.

The theft of Fish is a criminal offence, inequality while against the law is not criminal, until it becomes a Hate Crime.

And again as previously stated

The Polish embassy worker or whatever he is, would have been better starting a campaign to educate the people to the wrongs of stealing fish, and explain that in this Country the general policy is catch and release, if you want to eat your catch then ask permission first!

Yes the farmer did wrong but the bigger wrong was done to the farmer!

 

Edited by Newbie to this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

 

Yes the farmer did wrong but the bigger wrong was done to the farmer!

 

You are flogging a dead horse Newbie.

They are not interested in the farmer, he has committed an offence crime and is therefore a nazi.

He could have been beaten to death with his own fish, but it would be justified because of the sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

You are flogging a dead horse Newbie.

They are not interested in the farmer, he has committed an offence crime and is therefore a nazi.

He could have been beaten to death with his own fish, but it would be justified because of the sign.

What a ludicrous statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...