Options
WTF? – politicalbetting.com
WTF? – politicalbetting.com
Most Britons would support fines for foul language, based on Thanet Council proposals for £100 fines for those refusing to stop swearing if asked by police/council officersSupport: 54%Oppose: 36%yougov.co.uk/topics/socie…
2
Comments
The big partisan difference is how much Tories support it compared to the other three parties!
"John Spartan you are fined three credits for a violation of the verbal morality statute..."
The figures suggest I may not be quite the dinosaur I thought I was.
No, I don't suppose fines are a good idea.
Interesting question. If Vance actually shoots Trump because of
great desire to take the top jobhis fear that Trump is senile, would he then be OK under the Presidential Immunity Ruling the Supreme Cucks came up with?Vance isn't Dear Leader yet, so isn't in office yet. Though he does have the (R) so that'll help him.
Vance wouldn't have been POTUS when he pulled the trigger.
MP: Can you provide any examples?
Keir Starmer: No.
He’s either clueless, lying or both.
https://x.com/archrose90/status/1947311205904777481?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
There aren't enough houses in the North either, we have a chronic housing shortage up here too.
Indeed addressing the housing shortage is one of the things from his manifesto. Its why I lent him my vote.
And not only has he done Jack Shit on meaningful planning reform, caving in this week to the NIMBY lobby, but now he's coming out with this crock of shit that there's lots of houses?
When he's supposed to be dealing with the lack of houses?
Feck right off. And when you get completely lost, go feck off some more.
Also, wouldn't it mean that someone somewhere will have to define a list of impermissible words? Where do I find such a banned-word list? (I might learn some new ones!) How will it be curated? Will Thanet Council have an official Librarian of Naughty Verbiage? Who authorises a new addition to the list? The whole thing is badly thought through, if indeed any thought whatsoever has gone into it after the jerking of a knee?
Or some similar guff. The Republican stooges on the Supreme Court will come up with whatever Vance needs.
We need serious reform. Shuffling some powers from Councillors to Mayors is not serious reform.
How very dare you!
But, sure, I support more reform (small r).
https://bsky.app/profile/qwantz.com/post/3lui5swikt22z
Liberalism, with a small l.
One can only assume it was designed by the CEO's work experience 19 year old son - with the same level of management sycophancy as Donald Trump's Cabinet.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/07/21/exposed-pakistani-migrants-50k-falsified-visa-documents/
I don’t care if Reform have the most ludicrous economic manifesto in history and they promise to buy everyone platinum alpacas
They look like the only party willing to address this crisis - swiftly becoming a disaster - with the needful severity and audacity
They’ve got my vote for that alone
Disobeying a Police officer is not in itself illegal, unless they are acting to enforce a specific law, nor should it be. We are not French after all.
We could be looking at ten years of somebody worse than Trump. After all, Trump claimed to know nothing about Project 2025*, whilst Vance was in bed with the writers.
*Yes, I know that was Trumpian horse-shit...
Saying we live in a Police State where the Police can fine you for not following their instructions, rather than breaking a law, is even worse.
Usually they are arrested under a PSPO because they have refused to leave an area so many times that calling a copper and getting them arrested was the only way to make them move.
The one that JD Vance was going on about at Munich had been refusing to leave the restricted area for the best part of two hours.
He could then order someone to apply a pillow to the orange visage, rendering the incapacitation permanent.
That would almost certainly fall under the immunity ruling,
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Mgpb_R38b2Y
Can anyone recommend the way to check if such a claim exists (2018, Skoda) and make it, without getting sucked into a No Win No Fee claims boiler-room type setup.
Anyway, it would almost certainly be self-defeating - councils would doubtless use it to raise revenue, people would get fed up with being targeted, and the whole thing would become a dead letter.
But, in the meantime, swearing would have been glamourised, so, as with most nanny-state interventions that we never really follow through, the result would probably be more of what we're trying to stop, not less.
Ther eare some restaurants in France where you can no longer eat outside because of the intense swarms of these moths. They are big buggers too. The only hope is that birds cotton on to how good a meal their caterpillars make. Some suggestion that blue tits have discovered them. Might want to start a project to put LOTS of nest boxes close to the native box in the Ancaster Valley...just in case.
If we pass this law you will have to arrest most policemen.
Police Scotland is being threatened with potential legal action from its own officers over the force's operational plans surrounding Donald Trump's upcoming visit.
https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1947325272446919107
https://x.com/observeruk/status/1947271339942760593?s=61
She’s still not happy.
And to achieve this goal, the Bill is a buffet of technical tweaks to different aspects of planning – stripping out or reducing burdensome regulation, and changing the ways in which decisions are made to speed the process up.
For example, one element is a change to how Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects – big stuff, like railways and tunnels – are handled, to reduce the number of consultations that can drag projects to a crawl, and to limit the opportunities for NIMBYs to initiate judicial reviews.
Similarly, for smaller projects, planning at a local level will be reformed with the creation of “spatial development strategies” that will ease the approval process, and council bureaucrats will make more routine decisions – leaving only larger or more controversial developments for elected councillors argue about in meetings.
My favourite aspect of the Bill though is the creation of a “Nature Restoration Fund”. This is a mechanism that will mean that instead of having individual projects mitigate their own environmental impact, they will pay into the fund, which will spend the cash far more effectively on a national scale....
And I suppose even if the amendments are a case of two steps forward, one step back, you could make the case that it is, well, it’s still one step forward on balance.2 And that might be the best the government can do for party management reasons.
https://takes.jamesomalley.co.uk/p/dont-ruin-the-planning-bill
Ultimately, we can’t function as a society where everyone’s freedoms are limited solely by legislation. There has to be some agreed societal limits - call them customs or habits or tradition - which define our behavior and especially when interacting with other people.
My freedom to use profanities isn’t more important than other people’s freedom from having to listen to my swearing and it’s about the freedom TO as against the freedom FROM. The former has dominated in recent times at the expense of the latter.
There was once a thing called “personal responsibility” - Conservatives used to believe in it.
A majority of ****ing ****s.
Not the best plan if the idea is to get the Grauniad on Team Corbana.
A public enquiry into Orgreave, which Starmer has announced today, is long overdue and at last a good decision.
However any Vance administration would need to get its approval ratings up closer to 50% than Trump's current 40% approval to be re elected
I do accept part of what people do is predicated on their estimation of the likelihood of being caught and the consequences of that but, and whether you call it ethics or not, we should be starting with the notion of how people should comport themselves in society.
As an aside, I wholly accept when those who are supposed to be setting an example transgress, it weakens the ethical argument. Do as I say, not as I do becomes be the line.
Some profanities aren't even words as such, they're just highly expressive sounds of exasperation/annoyance.
Only if he takes over from the halfway point of this term, which IIRC is 20 January 2027, could he get two terms of his own.
It says so at the bottom: https://observer.co.uk/
Next - the Battle of the Beanfield?
LBJ took over in November 1963 so was past the halfway point, which is why he would have been eligible to seek a 2nd full term.
Truman took over in the 1st half but the constitutional amendment giving the restrictions explicitly didn't apply to Truman.
If Vance took over today he'd be in the first half so only eligible to one full term.
JUST IN: Trump’s lawsuit against Murdoch and the WSJ goes to Judge Darrin Gayles, an appointee of Barack Obama.
https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1947270645554839581
Even with the likely official stonewalling, some of the people involved deserve at least an attempt at some answers.
Leftyish newish media - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortoise_Media
If he takes over tomorrow its one term.
If he takes over in the couple of months after the midterms but before 20 January 2027 its still one term.
Only from 20 January 2027 (or whenever the halfway point is if I'm wrong on that) does it become two terms.
Though the Americans unlike us don't change leaders due to unpopularity anyway so the midterms are neither here nor there. Its death that causes Americans to leave the Oval Office early.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyr7e394p0o
No shit. People were campaigning against being given more public green space than they had when it was a golf course.
In theory, a magistrate could impose one on @RobD banning him from swearing within 100 rods of Cock Lane, say.