Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Teenager fined £80 for swear word in a private conversation, in a public place.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   


A teenager is refusing to pay an £80 on-the-spot fine imposed by a police officer who overheard him swearing in a private conversation with friends.

Kurt Walker, 18, from Deal, Kent, said he would go to court rather than pay the fine handed out in a town park.

He said he received the fixed-penalty notice after he used the F-word to a group of friends he met in the park.

Kent Police said fixed penalty notices were just one tool to help them to tackle anti-social behaviour.

Student Mr Walker was on his way to a youth centre where he works as a volunteer when he stopped to talk to friends.

"One of my mates said, 'What have you been up to', and I swore when I replied," he said.

"I was shocked when the female police officer gave me the fine, very shocked.

"It is not every day you swear and you get an £80 fine. It is just absurd, really."

Mr Walker is adamant he will not pay the fine and will challenge the penalty notice in court next month.
BBC


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Obscenities in public, I can see. A private conversation?


Dover District Council's anti-social behavior unit works closely with Kent Police to tackle bad behavior.


The anti-social police? Again, I can see how this can be a good thing, but I also can see how it can turn real bad, real fast.




posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   
And I wish him the very best of luck!

Unbelievable really!

Next step comes 'The Thought Police'
If you think of terrorism or have an anti government thought your guilty!

Madness really.

Have you heard about the new craze thats sweeping the UK to tackle youths. Its a device that emits a shrieking noise that can only be heard by those under 21.
Here's the story.

UK News Item
Inventor finds sound way to noise up rowdy teenagers
IAN MARLAND

FORGET your ASBOs and dispersal orders - cunning technology may be the way to end the scourge of anti-social youths and rowdy teenagers.

A device that sends out a high-pitched noise that can be heard only by teenagers and those in their early 20s is being used by police and shopkeepers to tackle nuisance behaviour.

The Sonic Teenager Deterrent - or Mosquito - projects a controlled 80-decibel pulsing frequency, which "irritates" younger ears but leaves older ones unaffected. The device works on the fact that from our mid to late 20s, the human ear experiences a big drop in its ability to hear upper frequency sounds.

Placed outside shops or sheltered homes, it has the effect of dispersing children who cannot stand the noise.

The unassuming black box can be mounted on a wall in a casing similar to that of a halogen security light.

Two English police forces are trialling the device, while in Scotland, the Dundee-based independent retailer CJ Lang, which operates the Spar chain, is among clients looking at whether it can be used to tackle the problem of nuisance youths hanging around its stores.

Its inventor, Howard Stapleton, said: "The device emits a high-frequency pulse that is barely audible to anyone over 20 because, as we get older, we suffer progressive hearing loss due to our noisy environment and the structure of our ear changes.

"Ninety per cent of people under 20 will be able to hear it and 90 per cent of people over 30 won't."

What I say is What effect will this have on babies and Infants?" This system is now installed and used at many locations throughout the UK

lifttheveil



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   
That's so ridiculous!

Is it actually against the law in the UK to use profanity in public? Anyone know?



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Agreed

Yes, The UK Police system basically has 'catch all' offences.

For instance shouting, loitering, finger gestures and basically anything can be covered by the offence 'breach of the peace'

The general UK citizen has no real rights or freedoms nowadays. We have always been given an illusion of sorts as to our police rights but today things are a lot worse, and they make it look like it isnt with all criminal justice bills etc.

Do you know the UK police dont need a warrant to search your home anymore, there are a host of reasons covering every concievable situation, the main one being 'reasonable suspicion' which a police officer can claim for anything in any situation, think about it, "I suspected he went in that house" or "i had reasonablle suspicion because an anonymous informant told me" etc

lifttheveil



posted on Feb, 26 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   
I'd have thought they'd be too busy trying to catch those bank robbers to worry about someone using a "profanity" in a private conversation!! Oh well, seems they're taking a leaf out of Australia's book then.......where the police "man" the speed camera's diligently, but when there's been a real crime you can't even get them to come to your home due to alleged manpower shortages! What a load of wank! If the guy wants to swear in a private convo, bloody well let him! What business is it of anyone elses.....they shouldn't be eavesdropping anyway!



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
Things are just getting way beond the joke. I mean I've had similar, not a fine though. A few times I've gotten a bit drunk and loud in a pub and been asked to quiet down, or once I was asked to leave, which in a place like a family pub I can understand.
But I got warned by a cop in town once for calling my mate a D***Head, which I was rather shocked by. So now I can't say what I want in a private convo? It's madness.
It's the same as all this "ban it" stuff that's coming about, ban smoking? I have a better idea... If a landlord wants his pub to be a smoking environment, let him, if not, he can make that choice, there shouldn't be a law saying "You CAN'T allow smoking in your pub", what next? No consumption of alcohol in Public houses maybe?
The road the UK is going down is not a good one, it'll end up with more trouble than it's worth.

(Typo Edit)

[edit on 22-3-2006 by DreadNaught]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 06:32 AM
link   
This case was dropped but only after the guy refused to accept a caution / £80 fixed penalty and said he wanted them to take him to court. If he hadn't chosen to do this he'd have a criminal record.

I'm sure the CPS told the police to '**** off' and that they wouldn't support a court case 1. they'd lose; 2. the judge would surely have something to say about petty prosecutions.

Worrying times, the Thought Police are here



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 06:38 AM
link   
i'm happpy as all can be the this guy is gonna goto court instead of paying the fine how dumb.....

cussing in a private convo? wtf was the officer doing ? should
nt she be more wary of like murderers and hard drug dealers lol?whatever the world is a scary place to live in now and days I hope to raise my son in a better world but guess thats not the case here



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   
They passed a similar ordinance in Chicago while I still lived there, and I wanted to get a ticket for posterity. Something to frame and show to my children to illustrate the foolishness of bureaucracy.



I spend weeks trying to get an officer to ticket me, to no avail. Mind you, I didn't go around swearing at them or anything, but simply asked nicely if they wouldn't mind listening to a few choice swear words and writing me a ticket for them. Most of them didn't even know about the law, and the ones who did were as appaled as I was. So, in the end, I never did get my ticket.

But I had a lot of fun talking to beat cops about the stupidity of the system.




posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Yeah, at the same time this guy was recieving his fine there were probably
hundreds of criminals getting away with who knows what.

I love the part about "Mr. Walker was on his way to work at a volunteer youth program". Heres a (young) guy who is actually helping his community and this is how he gets treated.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Why don't you people get 100's of people to go there and do the SAME THING as a protest to the loss of Freedom Of Speech!

What are they going to do? Arrest ALL of you for refusing to pay??



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
They passed a similar ordinance in Chicago while I still lived there, and I wanted to get a ticket for posterity. Something to frame and show to my children to illustrate the foolishness of bureaucracy.


To illustrate the foolishness of bureaucracy????

I think it would be more like the illustration of the loss of freedom in the earlier days! NO??



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Good! Serves him right. Swearing is disgusting. It makes you look like trash, and it's a lack of vocabulary.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
This is from my local paper

Protestors



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitelightwolf
Good! Serves him right. Swearing is disgusting. It makes you look like trash, and it's a lack of vocabulary.


That's not really the issue here. It's more the fact that we're now being told what we can and cant say, in a private conversation no less, which is totally wrong, disgusting or not, lack of vocabulary or not, we have the right to use whatever words we want.
Had this fella been in a place where such behaviour would have cause a particular problem (As I meantioned, a family pub or something), fair enough in a way, but this was not the case, as a result, the charges are utterly obsurd.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
So how long before they start microchiping brains and make sure the working class is not having the wrong thoughts? The government control mill may grind exceedingly slow, but it keeps grinding till there is no more to grind.

Amazes me that there is actually anti-freedom pundits on this thread who condone anything that leads to hive mentality. Would say they are already brainwashed into being submissive and complacent drones....pitiful.



Thoughtcrime coming to a Orwellian utopia near you.


In the United Kingdom, legislation to enable the proactive detainment of people considered to have personality disorders who have not committed a crime has actively been considered by the British government.



This ID project is even more sinister than we first thought -The Observer, UK

Sunday March 19, 2006

George Orwell would have been pleased to have invented that particular gem. Yet this is not fiction, but the reality of 2006, and we should understand that if the Home Secretary is prepared to mislead on the fundamental issue as to whether something is voluntary or compulsory, we cannot possibly trust his word on the larger issues of personal freedom and the eventual use of the ID card database.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Obscenity fines today and borgs tomorrow...



[edit on 22-3-2006 by Regenmacher]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I hardly think one can call this 18 yr old's conversation "private" when it was in a public place! If he said it loud enough for other people in this PUBLIC place to hear it, then he deserved what he got!

I am constantly amazed at the lack of respect that people show for others.

I am insulted almost every time I go out in public with my 4 children because everywhere we go some teen is swearing in a public place when hanging out with their friends. I don't want my little ones picking up that kind of language just because we go to McDonald's or the local mall. It's disgusting!

And that entire freedom of speech argument has no place in this story. If he was in his own home and said the F word and was fined for it, THEN we would undoubtedly have an infringment of rights.

However, this kid was in a public place, where it is against the law to use that kind of language.

When is it EVER okay for someone to be so disrespectful of the other people around them?

If we want our children to grow up in a tolerant society, then we must enforce simple respect for others. It's just the most basic of manners, really.



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I must go.

Must drive around the country side dropping F-bombs before it's too late!


*lysergic shaped dust cloud*



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Archerette
When is it EVER okay for someone to be so disrespectful of the other people around them?

If we want our children to grow up in a tolerant society, then we must enforce simple respect for others. It's just the most basic of manners, really.


It's not against the law. Nor should it be, ever. So if you saw like... "Look at the state of him", when you see me walking past with tattoos and stuff... that's ok is it? Even if it causes me/said person offence? Yeh sure it is.
Anyway, this kid wasn't in McDonalds, apparently he was in a town park, "a large public garden in a town, used for recreation", not really an enclosed space, specifically targeted at kiddies then.

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Mar, 22 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by DreadNaught
So if you saw like... "Look at the state of him", when you see me walking past with tattoos and stuff... that's ok is it? Even if it causes me/said person offence? Yeh sure it is.
Anyway, this kid wasn't in McDonalds, apparently he was in a town park, "a large public garden in a town, used for recreation", not really an enclosed space, specifically targeted at kiddies then.


Actually, I consider tatooing a form of art and a perfect way for individuals to express themselves. Maybe you have assumed too much about me?

I am still insistent, however, that ANY public area should be void of language such as that young man used. He's probably a very kind and generous person being as how he was headed to work at a volunteer youth program (of course that might be some kind of community service that was court ordered).

Be that as it may, I don't want my 2 yr old or 4 yr old or 6 yr old to hear the F word. If it was a word he wanted to use in his own home, or if anybody wants to use that word in their own home regardless of who else is around, regardless of age, that is their perogative.

This, however, was not in an individual's private home. To use your definition it was in "a large public garden in a town, used for recreation". Tell me, what age group typically frequents a town park? Lots of little kiddies, that's who. And they're in need of their community's support since they're our future and all...

BTW, maybe you didn't read what I wrote about tolerence, but that whole point I was trying to make is that we should be aware of others around us and this includes people who look different - whether by tattooing, or by deformation, retardation, obesity, hairsyle, clothing choice, handicap, race, size, and the list is endless. The point is, whether by choice or not, some people are not the norm... and they command the same respect as every other individual on this earth. This goes for age as well which is why I think this guy had no right to use innappropriate language in a public place where small children often frequent.

[edit on 22-3-2006 by Archerette]






top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join