I know that the law is not meant to include such events but the interpretation is what is up for debate. For example who would be offended by such a statement about Marmite and could therefore take offence? The manufacturer if sales started to fall. Similarly, who would have guessed that Santander would be offended by the current Nationwide TV adverts to the extent that they have asked the authorities to investigate? Santander are not mentioned in the ads and yet they obviously feel offended by them. It’s all about the interpretation and with that comes the minefield of unintended offence that will invariably side with the ‘victim’.

hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

The interpretation is not up for debate: “There is no legal definition of hostility so we use the everyday understanding of the word which includes ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.”

The wording of the CPS above is what I find worrying; resentment and dislike. I accept prejudice and to a lesser extent unfriendliness and antagonism but if I don’t like somebody because I think they are incompetent or a bully but they happen to be gay, transgender, a Muslim or whatever, I can find myself being questioned if the other person wants to use their classification as a weapon against me. As I say, the victim invariably wins due to the legal process. Not good. I am surprised that you would be happy with this.

hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Criticism of anyone for being a bully is not a hate crime. It’s only if you refer to them in a discriminatory way because of their membership of the defined categories that is.

Not being comfortable with the CPS wording is fine. Criticise it as much as you like and campaign for change. If anyone weaponised the law and used it unfairly against you, or anyone else, then you would have every right to defend yourself and call it out, with support from me. I don’t think the CPS are stupid and only proceed when there is extremely clear evidence of a crime. I therefore think your concerns are imaginary rather than real.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

It has to be but it isn't. The ridiculousness of it all is astounding. Even for Irish politicians. Then again they do as directed by the EU.
It is not defined anything someone says that another person does not like can be hate speech.

Different rules apply.

[Link]

My wife was getting a bit paranoid about her phone listening to her. Saves me the job.