The social liberals of the last thirty years have eroded and then destroyed civil liberties in this country....in some instances in place for centuries.

The word, 'liberal' is a parody.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

She wasn’t though “doing nothing”! A known activist was in a restricted area accompanied by video cameras. I doubt if anyone said they were intimidated or requested her arrest. It’s the call of the police to determine whether in their opinion her behaviour had the potential to intimidate. Not what she thought. Not what users of the centre thought, or even the centre itself thought. Just the police, based on behaviour alone and not what she claimed was in her head. Threats are not the issue. Intimidation is. That means being fearful of doing something you wish to do, in this case as a result of the behaviour of another. If the police thought her behaviour, whatever it was, had the potential to intimidate others within that zone, they were left with no choice.

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.

Firstly, they wouldn’t because none of my properties have gas connected. Secondly, if there was gas, they would call me because they all know and trust me so if a service was overdue they know it would swiftly be attended to. Thirdly, as none of my rental properties are in a restricted zone the same considerations do not apply.

A more relevant analogy would be a pedestrian deciding to sit in the middle of a motorway. Something that nutters like extinction rebellion might just try. Whilst obviously extremely dangerous and stupid, is it illegal? Yes it is, because pedestrians are specifically restricted from motorways. Go on one on foot and you will be arrested.

They might claim they have a right to protest, or even to stand and silently pray, but they cannot do it there. It’s restricted. So are the 150 meter zones around designated advice centres.

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.

Why on earth would a rental property without gas connected have any gas appliances in it, let alone ones that need servicing? There are some weird concepts postulated in these threads but this one takes some beating.

Entirely hypothetically, on the very rare occasions when a gas supply to a tenanted property is disconnected the appliances are either removed or the gas capped off. Any tenant would be told that when they first signed a tenancy agreement, which in my case is with an agent who would ensure it was in writing. It hasn’t happened because there is neither gas nor gas appliances in my properties.

The analogy is ridiculous and has no bearing whatsoever on the activities of a pro-life activist pulling publicity stunts whilst hiding behind excuses.

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.

As I patiently pointed out several posts ago it isn’t up to any individual expressing concerns. It’s up to the police to determine if an offence has occurred. They are the ones responsible for ensuring the laws are enforced.

So in the ridiculous example above it is impossible to imagine the police getting involved for they would quickly recognise the true situation. Anybody making stupid complaints would probably be arrested themselves and charged with wasting police time. Just as this silliness is a waste of time.

When the pro-life activist pulled her publicity stunt nobody but the police were involved in dealing with her. There an order had been broken so action was inevitable.

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.

For the umpteenth time she wasn’t just standing silently in a public street. She was deliberately standing somewhere which was subject to a restriction order, accompanied by others ready to video the inevitable consequences. The offence wasn’t standing silently. It was where she was, and what she was doing. Which was a lot more than standing silently!

In the ridiculous example the landlord you hypothesise about has already explained to their tenant what the situation is and has received their confirmation of it in writing. Any tenant complaining of being terrified in those circumstances would not need to call the police, but if they did the police would likely suggest they visit their doctor for a mental health assessment.

I am not what some describe as “pro-life”! Which I prefer to describe as anti-choice. It doesn’t though matter what either of us believe. Abortion is legally available in the UK and those who seek advice have a legal right to do so without fear of being intimidated.

The police, and the courts, have got themselves into a pickle over this because the way the law is drafted causes confusion. This has resulted in the Government carrying out a consultation exercise which hopefully will result in clarication. Unsurprisingly the ones getting excited about it are all anti-choice activists themselves, most of them religiously inspired. I have no time for such reasoning.

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.