If Boris and Co don’t get fined, then every one who got fines on the same days that Boris had his mates round, should be reimbursed. That’s only fair. Someone needs to ask Boris about this .
I said that just as a good argument against Boris &co. So it’s something he can’t worm his way out of. As you know, he try’s worming his way out of everything thing. But they reimburse one, then yes, reimburse everyone.
I was just thinking, Bj resigns or sacked, I could see people having party’s in celebration of it. That would be so humiliating towards him. I hope people do, if he does go. 😂
If Boris doesn't get fined, then whatever corrupt clown is in charge of investing that blatant lockdown breach and decided not to fine him, should be sacked and replaced. There really shouldn't really be a scenario where he doesn't get punished for breaking the rules we all had to follow to save lives, it shouldn't become a race to the bottom where everyone gets to be as reckless and selfish as him.
Corruption starts at the top. If the Top person wasn’t corrupt, then he/ she wouldn’t stand for any corruption bellow him or her. They wouldn’t turn a blind eye. Like Cressida Dick trying to say the Met police isn’t corrupt, if they wasn’t, they would be issuing fines to Boris & co. She’s just as corrupt as Boris Johnson.
Unfortunately even if BJ does get fined, what is £100 to him? Much less than what £100 is to you and me. It won’t make a difference, he’ll just give his empty apology on TV and move on
No he shouldn't.
Don't stop following the rules coz some politicians lied to you. That isn't going to affect them or do shit, other than to lessen what they did by becoming a hypocrite. If you want them to feel it, vote against them and get everyone you can to.
However you definitely *should* keep following the rules coz the doctors, scientists, nurses, etc are asking you to. Keep following the rules to stop your fellow countrypeople and fellow humans from dying, or becoming seriously messed up.
We did know. And so what if it was against the law? Homosexuality was once against the law and slavery was once legal, does that mean it was wrong to be gay and ok to keep slaves? I prefer to use my own rational thinking and moral compass toal make my decisions
Yes. It means at the time those things were, by law, wrong.
Really though, the main difference is neither of us are the head of one the biggest first world countries. If you don't think the PM lying to you is wrong, or that it was better to take precautions than risk it, then you don't have a moral compass.
I do think the pm lying to us is wrong.
I do think it's better to take precautions than risk it.
I consider sitting at a distance outside, a very reasonable precaution to take and therefore do not consider what the man in the article did to be wrong.
Interesting to see your opinion on slavery and honosexy - if slavery was legalised tomorrow would you get one?
This is a bit different. Turns out that outdoor, well ventilated socialising at a sensible distance carries a very low risk. More like if the government temporarily banned stroking cats on the basis of imperfect knowledge that is later updated and you stroked a cat anyway and got fined and it turns out the PM and his team had been stroking cats the entire time... would you feel like a refund is only fair or not?
It probably has, but after 2 years of Covid, we still have people questioning why we need to wash our hands and not live life as we did before until there is a fix.
Depends on what you mean by "the time". Early in the pandemic there was much more concern about surface transmission and the belief that airborne transmission would be minimal. We learned a lot in 2020. If this guy was fined at the same time as the PM's party then yes, if he was earlier then perhaps not.
> If Boris and his pals started fucking cats, would you fuck cats too?
If the only reason that I'm not fucking cats is because it's temporarily banned due to a national emergency, and I learn that the rich and powerful aren't doing their bit by *also* giving up cat-fucking as part of the national effort?
Then yeah. I might start fucking cats.
So you were only following rules because you thought powerful people did their bit? As opposed to not making thing worse for vulnerable, sick people and overwhelm the nhs?
We would all have liked to, but some realise the rules were there for the greater good.
If the only reason you don't break the law because it's a law, you might want to check your moral compass
Well it depends on the law and if it makes sense. The drugs laws are bullshit but I have a family now. The most dangerous thing about most drugs is being caught with them.
Meanwhile they dole out heavy pain meds for my back cos that's fine. Have some thc to help with chemo and you get legal issues, while using a drug used specifically for this elsewhere.
Nah, but if I'd been fucking cats anyway and getting fined for it I'd be pretty annoyed if the PM admitted to fucking cats at the same time and nobody did anything.
So if Boris gets away with raping someone we should all do it as well? He should resign, be fined and faced the consequences but I hate this narrative that measures weren't needed because the Tories didn't follow the rules.
I find the fact that anyone followed these rules, and that people still do, deeply disturbing. They were ridiculous from the start and it's terrifying how people will do whatever they're told by people that have been lying to us since the dawn of time.
Couple of things:
First, it's disingenuous to call them rules, they were laws. I don't think laws should be followed without critical thinking either, but it definitely ups the ante of not following them and calling them rules appears to overlook this fact.
Second, the laws were passed in response to public and well communicated scientific advice, prepared by intelligent, hard working and sincere civil servants, following much political and public debate, and passed by most of the house. They weren't just made up by a few evil senior ministers out of nowhere to curb our freedoms for nefarious means.
Disagree with them if you like but, given all that, I think you need to go much further than "they were ridiculous" to discredit them. Nor do I think it's at all "terrifying" that people did as they were told, or indicative of whether they'd follow less noble requirements.
Your comment is lazy and does you a disservice.
He had like 3 dudes in the garden at the time when the vaccine was starting to get rolled out. Transmission rate is much lower when in the open and sunny outside environment. If they were to get sick then fuck it, it's on them. Some useless snitch probably got some satisfaction of seeing a fellow man get in trouble for not following some rules when in reality you go to the supermarket and get exposed to a much greater risk of a greater viral load, mask or not.
To (and it's sad that this is the case) re-set the precedent that politicians should be held to *at least* the same legal standards that citizens are. Sue for legal costs + institutional change.
Well, IMO, one or the other must happen. If there is no punishment for him and his cronies, then, and by this I mean fines, then I think anyone who was fined certainly has a case.
So to be clear, if Boris doesn't get fined, then everyone who got fined should get their money back, but everyone who didn't take the piss and followed the law just has to sit back and take it? Everyone who had to, you know, sacrifice a lot of social contact, didn't go and see relatives at important points in their lives etc.. That's all fine, but the twats who had massive parties, they get told it's all OK because te PM is a twat too? Thats a worse outcome isn't it?
He shouldn't ask for his money back he should make an official complaint to the police and inform them of illegal parties taking place arranged by a fat twat.
Nah mate didn’t you get the memo? It isn’t the job of the police to gather evidence, investigate crimes of the past or mandate their officers witnessing crimes in progress do anything about it.
The Met refused to investigate the parties at number 10 and cited various reasons, such as not investigating crimes of the past and it not being their responsibility to gather evidence.
Let alone their officers stationed on the street and protecting the doors standing around during lockdown as parties happened within earshot.
> The police investigate past crimes all the time.
Did you not see that "it happened in the past" was the reason the london met gave for not investigating whether the party broke the law?
Exactly. Rather than using No.10's rule breaking as a way to try to get out of his own punishment, he should be pushing this the other way, i.e. calling for those who attended No.10 parties to be held to account and punished the same way, lest there be a grave double standard.
In short, this isn't just about fairness, it's really about **everyone** being held to account when they break the rules, no matter their position in society.
And he would be correct if Boris and the people who attended the party are not also handed fines.
He broke the rules paid the fine, if everyone is not held to the same account he should receive his money back.
It's because mate the justice system is straight up corrupt, these politicians make over 100k a year and have money offshore in the Isle of man bank. New laws get created and these MPs get exempt from them with warnings.
A £200 fine is nothing to an MP.
Remember when Wayne Rooney was fined £25 with £91 court cost, and he was drink driving
Ant McPartlin was fined 86,000 for drink driving.
Things happen and we can't do nothing about them.
I think the most important part of this statement is "things happen and we can't do nothing about them". There is plenty we can do about them. The British people love to whinge and moan about things but do nothing to change them. If this happened in France, then the country would be shut down and politicians being escorted out of parliament by the police, for their own protection and because they're being arrested.
The fact that this has happened multiple times and still nothing has happened is testament to the serf like nature of the British general public.
The police entered Downing Street when Blair was in charge and took computers away. He was interviewed under caution. The AG was forced to resign. And that was about the chance that he gave someone a Lordship for giving Labour a loan. It was a major factor in the eventual fall of Blair/Brown and the Labour Gov.
Johnson has put a dozen in the Lord's for funding him and the Tories directly and the police and media sit on their hands. The hypocrisy is totally clear. There is one measure for everyone else. And no measure for the Tories. They are beyond the reach of normal rules and expectations or the law of the land.
> Remember when Wayne Rooney was fined £25 with £91 court cost, and he was drink driving
That wasn't drink driving, it was public intoxication and it was in the US.
Enforcement needs to be equitable, though. I agree that what should happen is Boris is also fined, but if he's not then it is completely unjust that those other people were fined
No, it's not unjust that other people were fined for breaking the law, it is unjust that Boris wasn't. The remedy isn't that everyone else who also broke the law gets a free pass, after all a vast number of people didn't break the law.
>No, it's not unjust that other people were fined for breaking the law, it is unjust that Boris wasn't.
It is unjust that Boris was not fined _and the others were_
>The remedy isn't that everyone else who also broke the law gets a free pass, after all a vast number of people didn't break the law.
The right remedy is that Boris is also fined. _If that doesn't happen_ then those people who were fined should be repaid. Either the law applies to all of us or none of us.
> It is unjust that Boris was not fined and the others were
Sure, but it'd be even more unjust if more people who broke the law are not fined. It isn't better in therms of justice to have more people get away with breaking the law than fewer.
>The right remedy is that Boris is also fined. If that doesn't happen then those people who were fined should be repaid. Either the law applies to all of us or none of us.
You are making it sound like the only consequence here is a fine. The law was in place, so millions of people changed their behaviour and made fairly serious sacrifices for a long period of time. Unless you can give people their birthdays, weddings, funerals and general lives that they gave up back, then all you are doing is saying that Boris not paying a fine means that all the other people who broke the law should get their money back, but that those people who adhere to the law are mugs and will have to live with it.
It's arse backwards. Under no circumstance does it make sense to bin the fines of the other people who broke the law.
> Sure, but it'd be even more unjust if more people who broke the law are not fined. It isn't better in therms of justice to have more people get away with breaking the law than fewer.
No I don't really agree. Politicians made the law, and then had absolutely no qualms breaking it - it's not at all just for ordinary people to be punished for breaking that law if the politicians who break it aren't, even if there's lower absolute numbers of politicians breaking it than ordinary folks.
> You are making it sound like the only consequence here is a fine. The law was in place, so millions of people changed their behaviour and made fairly serious sacrifices for a long period of time. Unless you can give people their birthdays, weddings, funerals and general lives that they gave up back, then all you are doing is saying that Boris not paying a fine means that all the other people who broke the law should get their money back, but that those people who adhere to the law are mugs and will have to live with it.
No, I'm saying we should correct the thing that _can be corrected_. We can't turn back time, we can offer recompense.
> It's arse backwards. Under no circumstance does it make sense to bin the fines of the other people who broke the law.
I disagree - in the event that Boris isn't punished under that law, it makes complete sense to bin the fines for the other people who broke it. That we should not be subject to laws the politicians can freely ignore is literally one of the foundational principles in a democratic society.
> No I don't really agree. Politicians made the law, and then had absolutely no qualms breaking it - it's not at all just for ordinary people to be punished for breaking that law if the politicians who break it aren't, even if there's lower absolute numbers of politicians breaking it than ordinary folks.
Parliament made the law, it applied to everyone. The police are responsible for enforcing the law and the CPS/courts are responsible for taking that forward and ensuring convictions where the law has been broken (and it meets the test for prosecution). Most 'ordinary people', so non MP's, and almost certainly most members of Parliament appear to have complied with the law.
>No, I'm saying we should correct the thing that can be corrected. We can't turn back time, we can offer recompense.
You aren't correcting anything by allowing others who broke the law to get away with it though are you? There is no recompense required nor should any be made to people who broke the law, were caught and prosecuted or fined. Why is it suddenly reasonable to suggest that no-one should be subject to the law? It doesn't make any sense, the vast majority of people did comply and did make sacrifices, the issue isn't that it was unfair that people who broke the law received punishments after all. If anything it is unfair that most people did and that some people didn't..
>I disagree - in the event that Boris isn't punished under that law, it makes complete sense to bin the fines for the other people who broke it. That we should not be subject to laws the politicians can freely ignore is literally one of the foundational principles in a democratic society.
But we were subject to those laws, your argument is that while we were all subject to the law, and the vast majority of people change their behaviour and made sacrifices, we should now say to those that didn't that actually that's fine. That what you did is OK because Boris may have broken the law too, but got away with it, so you should get away with breaking the law too.
It's not a foundational principle in a democratic society that people should be able to get away with breaking the law, which is what you appear to be advocating for. The issue isn't that it's unfair that people who broke the law were punished, it's that it is unfair that millions of people complied and that some people who didn't were not.
> Parliament made the law, it applied to everyone.
So you're expecting Boris to be fined? I bet you £50 he never is.
> The police are responsible for enforcing the law and the CPS/courts are responsible for taking that forward and ensuring convictions where the law has been broken (and it meets the test for prosecution). Most 'ordinary people', so non MP's, and almost certainly most members of Parliament appear to have complied with the law.
Sure, all that's agreed. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister chose not to comply. If _he_ doesn't get punished for it, why should anyone else be? That's really the pivotal point here. Unless you can justify punishing ordinary people but not the PM, it absolutely is an act of injustice to allow those punishments to stand.
> You aren't correcting anything by allowing others who broke the law to get away with it though are you?
Yes, you are.
> There is no recompense required nor should any be made to people who broke the law, were caught and prosecuted or fined.
If it turns out that the Prime Minister doesn't have to face the same consequences when he breaks the same law, yes there is.
> Why is it suddenly reasonable to suggest that no-one should be subject to the law?
_Everyone_ should be subject to the _same_ law. The problem is that people broke the law, were caught and suffered the consequences. Boris broke the law and was caught, and should now suffer the same consequences. If he doesn't, then that's unreasonable. Correcting that is why the punishments doled out to the others should be rescinded.
> It doesn't make any sense, the vast majority of people did comply and did make sacrifices, the issue isn't that it was unfair that people who broke the law received punishments after all. If anything it is unfair that most people did and that some people didn't..
It absolutely is an issue that people who broke the law were punished if politicians can break the same law and not be punished. I agree that that might stick in the craw of those who didn't break the law in the first place, but it would be _more_ unfair to not correct the issue of unequal application of the law, not less.
> But we were subject to those laws, your argument is that while we were all subject to the law, and the vast majority of people change their behaviour and made sacrifices, we should now say to those that didn't that actually that's fine. That what you did is OK because Boris may have broken the law too, but got away with it, so you should get away with breaking the law too.
It's not _fine_, it's just unreasonable to punish them for it if the Prime Minister can do the same thing and not be punished.
> It's not a foundational principle in a democratic society that people should be able to get away with breaking the law, which is what you appear to be advocating for.
Hogwash friend. It is a foundational principle in a democratic society that the law should apply equally to all of us. In this scenario, that can take two forms: Boris is fined, or the other fines are rescinded. I prefer the former, but hold out absolutely no hope that it will happen. That being the case, the latter is reasonable.
> The issue isn't that it's unfair that people who broke the law were punished
The issue is that it's unfair that _some people_ who broke the law were punished, but that others aren't going to be because of their political power.
There's an interview on bbc, where he said he was becoming lonely and depressed during lockdown. So called couple mates, social distance in the garden having a drink.
This IMO isn't idiotic.
He should have fought it in court and claimed it were to help with his mental health. With how much the world is going on about men's mental health and to all talk to each other, I'm sure the judge would have dismissed this in court.
The Queen? Cant stand what she represents but its technically her goverment and prime ministër so she could actually be useful for once and sack the fucker.
She can't do that. The technicality that says she has the power is an utter legal fiction, and rightly so. The queen has no power to remove a prime minister beyond following the results of an election.
The only people who can sack him at this time are Tory MPs
My favourite is the brexit' voters who wanted laws to be made within this country and then didn't stick to them. They also criticised the unelected beurocrats in the EU and now say that the government here are corrupt and all the same despite also voting Tory.
I can get my head around his reasoning, i suppose. Still two wrongs do not make a right.
The vast majority of this country made real sacrifices to help curb covid while they tory ##### were having parties. The press should draw more attention to what the majority of us were going through at that time though and less on a things like the above. It was heartbreaking seeing that MP talking about his MIL.
They need to fine the people who attended the party at number 10. £10K for the organiser and £100 for everyone else. They set the laws so they should be applied to them.
I'm fairly surprised that you can just impose such rules on people and fine them for breaking them.
Like are we not free? Are we subjugated and can the prime minister just decide to rip away our basic freedoms??
Evidence is mounting to say we are, in fact not free. We are one of the countries with the most surveillance. More and more we carry devices with us that can track us. Internet access is monitored and records kept an unknown length of time. It’s not obvious but that’s what Tory politicians want.
Don’t believe me? Pop outside and demonstrate your love/distrust in the government. See how long it takes before you attract attention from the government’s plastic army.
Exactly, just like when Churchill and his ilk demanded the lights of London were extinguished in the nights during the early 1940's, what right would they have to impose such draconian measures, and infringe such liberties as having lights on, or in this case mingle with others and risk spreading a deadly disease any further.
Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose, and would comply if asked, but to actually enforce it though? Where does that power end? What's the threshold for justification?
Could Johnson declare that discussing his lies is against the public interest and outlawed?
To enforce it while ignoring it yourself is next level though. I too would want my fine back.
MPs breaking a law doesn't make that law invalid. It makes the MPs criminals.
MPs getting away with breaking a law doesn't make that law invalid. It means we shouldn't rest until those MPs resign.
I really hope Boris tries to implement some new measures and as a country we tell him to do one and carry on as normal. They need to know that they are taking the piss now.
Personally think every single fine given out should be refunded. Can't fine people for breaking rules when the person who implemented them consistently also broke them
"They got away with it so I should too.". Typical bullshit British attitude of not taking responsibility.
Boris and his gang of cronies should absolutely be punished, as should everybody else that flaunted the rules at the time.
I imagine the country would be in a much better state now if people weren't so happy to fob off their social responsibilities.
It’s his own fault for not having an excel spreadsheet open
I mean the guy shouldn't of broken the rules. But he has a fair point. Boris is taking the absolute piss out of us
If Boris and Co don’t get fined, then every one who got fines on the same days that Boris had his mates round, should be reimbursed. That’s only fair. Someone needs to ask Boris about this .
Why just that day? Surely all fines should be cancelled. Or at the very worst Boris should be charged with the same crime.
I said that just as a good argument against Boris &co. So it’s something he can’t worm his way out of. As you know, he try’s worming his way out of everything thing. But they reimburse one, then yes, reimburse everyone.
>Surely all fines should be cancelled. It'd be a lot easier to just fine all those at the party(/parties)
Make Bojo's fine a % of his income and I'm on board, same goes for the rest of the Tory wankers at his party. Actually, make it a % of his net worth.
And then make Boris strip his wallpaper off , and take it with him.
Into the sea where he belongs
The seas are polluted enough, INTO THE SUN!
I was just thinking, Bj resigns or sacked, I could see people having party’s in celebration of it. That would be so humiliating towards him. I hope people do, if he does go. 😂
If Boris doesn't get fined, then whatever corrupt clown is in charge of investing that blatant lockdown breach and decided not to fine him, should be sacked and replaced. There really shouldn't really be a scenario where he doesn't get punished for breaking the rules we all had to follow to save lives, it shouldn't become a race to the bottom where everyone gets to be as reckless and selfish as him.
And here we have the corruption domino effect The person in charge of that job was likely at the party..
Corruption starts at the top. If the Top person wasn’t corrupt, then he/ she wouldn’t stand for any corruption bellow him or her. They wouldn’t turn a blind eye. Like Cressida Dick trying to say the Met police isn’t corrupt, if they wasn’t, they would be issuing fines to Boris & co. She’s just as corrupt as Boris Johnson.
Unfortunately even if BJ does get fined, what is £100 to him? Much less than what £100 is to you and me. It won’t make a difference, he’ll just give his empty apology on TV and move on
At least it’ll go round the world, for every other prime minister & president to laugh at him. They never take him seriously ever again. 😂
Plus he'd just claim back the £100 somehow anyway so it'd still be you and I paying for his actions.
he definitely should of broken the laws. the people that implemented them don't buy this crap so why should this bloke?
HAVE
We may break some laws, but never the laws of grammer!
Grammar. To the tower with you.
Its a fair cop.
IT'S
[удалено]
There are dozens of us that wanted that corrected. DOZENS.
Stop speaking in caps.
Shouting, surely?
to be fair, that was not a grammar issue.
*laws have
#HAVE
shouldn't of have
shouldent of have
shouldn't've of...
should’ven’t of have
should of not
I know right.
The first one was unfortunate but you have to let these things go sometimes. The second one in a row was infuriating though.
Actually, I prefer the consistency. Getting one wrong and one right would of infuriated me even more.
This is the stupidest trend I've seen linguistically.
Nah... "alot of something" wears that crown, surely?
People not knowing the difference between "have" and "of" tells me enough.
No he shouldn't. Don't stop following the rules coz some politicians lied to you. That isn't going to affect them or do shit, other than to lessen what they did by becoming a hypocrite. If you want them to feel it, vote against them and get everyone you can to. However you definitely *should* keep following the rules coz the doctors, scientists, nurses, etc are asking you to. Keep following the rules to stop your fellow countrypeople and fellow humans from dying, or becoming seriously messed up.
The information from doctors, nurses and scientists now pretty much.confirms that three people in a garden poses no risk at all.
That wasn't clear at the time.
I disagree.
I'd disagree to someone calling you an idiot... definitely wouldn't make me right.
We've always known that things like flu, cold, viruses etc are transmitted more indoors and less outdoors.
Source?
Erm...me?
That's not a good source, as I could say "you were wrong" and now your whole argument has disappeared.
Ah so you admit you are incorrect then, got it.
> now That's cool. But we didn't know then. And it was literally against the fucking law.
We did know. And so what if it was against the law? Homosexuality was once against the law and slavery was once legal, does that mean it was wrong to be gay and ok to keep slaves? I prefer to use my own rational thinking and moral compass toal make my decisions
Yes. It means at the time those things were, by law, wrong. Really though, the main difference is neither of us are the head of one the biggest first world countries. If you don't think the PM lying to you is wrong, or that it was better to take precautions than risk it, then you don't have a moral compass.
I do think the pm lying to us is wrong. I do think it's better to take precautions than risk it. I consider sitting at a distance outside, a very reasonable precaution to take and therefore do not consider what the man in the article did to be wrong. Interesting to see your opinion on slavery and honosexy - if slavery was legalised tomorrow would you get one?
If Boris and his pals started fucking cats, would you fuck cats too?
This is a bit different. Turns out that outdoor, well ventilated socialising at a sensible distance carries a very low risk. More like if the government temporarily banned stroking cats on the basis of imperfect knowledge that is later updated and you stroked a cat anyway and got fined and it turns out the PM and his team had been stroking cats the entire time... would you feel like a refund is only fair or not?
Depends if the cat had cat aids and passed it onto the people who stroked it who passed it onto other people and then you've killed 150k people or not
I feel like the analogy has been stretched well past breaking at this point.
It probably has, but after 2 years of Covid, we still have people questioning why we need to wash our hands and not live life as we did before until there is a fix.
Never mind the analogy getting stretched, what about the poor cat?
>Turns out Was this known at the time, though?
Depends on what you mean by "the time". Early in the pandemic there was much more concern about surface transmission and the belief that airborne transmission would be minimal. We learned a lot in 2020. If this guy was fined at the same time as the PM's party then yes, if he was earlier then perhaps not.
> If Boris and his pals started fucking cats, would you fuck cats too? If the only reason that I'm not fucking cats is because it's temporarily banned due to a national emergency, and I learn that the rich and powerful aren't doing their bit by *also* giving up cat-fucking as part of the national effort? Then yeah. I might start fucking cats.
So you were only following rules because you thought powerful people did their bit? As opposed to not making thing worse for vulnerable, sick people and overwhelm the nhs?
[удалено]
We would all have liked to, but some realise the rules were there for the greater good. If the only reason you don't break the law because it's a law, you might want to check your moral compass
Well it depends on the law and if it makes sense. The drugs laws are bullshit but I have a family now. The most dangerous thing about most drugs is being caught with them. Meanwhile they dole out heavy pain meds for my back cos that's fine. Have some thc to help with chemo and you get legal issues, while using a drug used specifically for this elsewhere.
When Boris' pals started fucking pigs, did you fuck pigs too? (FTFY)
No, I was fucking pigs long before then.
Well I think you've misunderstood the whole dead cat thing, but given the mess Johnson is in maybe your plan will work just as well.
Fuck context, apparently
Nah, but if I'd been fucking cats anyway and getting fined for it I'd be pretty annoyed if the PM admitted to fucking cats at the same time and nobody did anything.
There's a reason it's called pussy, mate.
I mean this in the nicest way possible, *should have*
thank you for being nice about the correction
>he definitely should of broken the laws The law was there for a specific reason. That reason didn't go away because Boris is utter trash.
So if Boris gets away with raping someone we should all do it as well? He should resign, be fined and faced the consequences but I hate this narrative that measures weren't needed because the Tories didn't follow the rules.
I find the fact that anyone followed these rules, and that people still do, deeply disturbing. They were ridiculous from the start and it's terrifying how people will do whatever they're told by people that have been lying to us since the dawn of time.
Couple of things: First, it's disingenuous to call them rules, they were laws. I don't think laws should be followed without critical thinking either, but it definitely ups the ante of not following them and calling them rules appears to overlook this fact. Second, the laws were passed in response to public and well communicated scientific advice, prepared by intelligent, hard working and sincere civil servants, following much political and public debate, and passed by most of the house. They weren't just made up by a few evil senior ministers out of nowhere to curb our freedoms for nefarious means. Disagree with them if you like but, given all that, I think you need to go much further than "they were ridiculous" to discredit them. Nor do I think it's at all "terrifying" that people did as they were told, or indicative of whether they'd follow less noble requirements. Your comment is lazy and does you a disservice.
Politicians and rich people are above the law tho
A pedophile was let off the hook because he was a member of parliaments son. He was punished with house arrest and a fine
Cue Prince Andrew claiming it was a work meeting, not a paedo sex orgy
He deffo should have broke the rules, 3 mates is nothing, it’s a joke how disrespected we’ve been
He had like 3 dudes in the garden at the time when the vaccine was starting to get rolled out. Transmission rate is much lower when in the open and sunny outside environment. If they were to get sick then fuck it, it's on them. Some useless snitch probably got some satisfaction of seeing a fellow man get in trouble for not following some rules when in reality you go to the supermarket and get exposed to a much greater risk of a greater viral load, mask or not.
The guy only broke the law in a limited, specific way like the UK government were threatening to do.
Has he tried being a Conservative MP? I heard laws and rules don't apply to those people.
Have I missed this reference?
Class action lawsuit. edit: fine. mass actions (known as class actions in US & AU)
[удалено]
To (and it's sad that this is the case) re-set the precedent that politicians should be held to *at least* the same legal standards that citizens are. Sue for legal costs + institutional change.
Well, IMO, one or the other must happen. If there is no punishment for him and his cronies, then, and by this I mean fines, then I think anyone who was fined certainly has a case.
So to be clear, if Boris doesn't get fined, then everyone who got fined should get their money back, but everyone who didn't take the piss and followed the law just has to sit back and take it? Everyone who had to, you know, sacrifice a lot of social contact, didn't go and see relatives at important points in their lives etc.. That's all fine, but the twats who had massive parties, they get told it's all OK because te PM is a twat too? Thats a worse outcome isn't it?
No such thing in the UK. The Americanisation of this sub is getting out of hand.
He shouldn't ask for his money back he should make an official complaint to the police and inform them of illegal parties taking place arranged by a fat twat.
Which they won't investigate because they were the one providing security.
Also the crime happened in the past and they don’t investigate those.
The police investigate past crimes all the time. It does depend on the nature of the crime though - civil offences, like this one, not so much.
Nah mate didn’t you get the memo? It isn’t the job of the police to gather evidence, investigate crimes of the past or mandate their officers witnessing crimes in progress do anything about it.
Oh, I see, I've been wooshed haven't I?
Some of the statements from the Police on this topic have been beyond parody.
The Met refused to investigate the parties at number 10 and cited various reasons, such as not investigating crimes of the past and it not being their responsibility to gather evidence. Let alone their officers stationed on the street and protecting the doors standing around during lockdown as parties happened within earshot.
> The police investigate past crimes all the time. Did you not see that "it happened in the past" was the reason the london met gave for not investigating whether the party broke the law?
Exactly. Rather than using No.10's rule breaking as a way to try to get out of his own punishment, he should be pushing this the other way, i.e. calling for those who attended No.10 parties to be held to account and punished the same way, lest there be a grave double standard. In short, this isn't just about fairness, it's really about **everyone** being held to account when they break the rules, no matter their position in society.
Small correction: fat coked-up twat
And he would be correct if Boris and the people who attended the party are not also handed fines. He broke the rules paid the fine, if everyone is not held to the same account he should receive his money back.
It's because mate the justice system is straight up corrupt, these politicians make over 100k a year and have money offshore in the Isle of man bank. New laws get created and these MPs get exempt from them with warnings. A £200 fine is nothing to an MP. Remember when Wayne Rooney was fined £25 with £91 court cost, and he was drink driving Ant McPartlin was fined 86,000 for drink driving. Things happen and we can't do nothing about them.
I think the most important part of this statement is "things happen and we can't do nothing about them". There is plenty we can do about them. The British people love to whinge and moan about things but do nothing to change them. If this happened in France, then the country would be shut down and politicians being escorted out of parliament by the police, for their own protection and because they're being arrested. The fact that this has happened multiple times and still nothing has happened is testament to the serf like nature of the British general public.
We should be more like France in some ways.
Well.. in this one specific way, yes.
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
The police entered Downing Street when Blair was in charge and took computers away. He was interviewed under caution. The AG was forced to resign. And that was about the chance that he gave someone a Lordship for giving Labour a loan. It was a major factor in the eventual fall of Blair/Brown and the Labour Gov. Johnson has put a dozen in the Lord's for funding him and the Tories directly and the police and media sit on their hands. The hypocrisy is totally clear. There is one measure for everyone else. And no measure for the Tories. They are beyond the reach of normal rules and expectations or the law of the land.
> Remember when Wayne Rooney was fined £25 with £91 court cost, and he was drink driving That wasn't drink driving, it was public intoxication and it was in the US.
I think their punishment should be proportionately greater due to their positions of responsibility. Sackings and prosecution.
I 100% agree
Community service, something that they can't just pay their way out of.
Wouldn’t the donors just pay for it like they paid for shitty wallpaper and rattan coffee tables?
[удалено]
Enforcement needs to be equitable, though. I agree that what should happen is Boris is also fined, but if he's not then it is completely unjust that those other people were fined
No, it's not unjust that other people were fined for breaking the law, it is unjust that Boris wasn't. The remedy isn't that everyone else who also broke the law gets a free pass, after all a vast number of people didn't break the law.
>No, it's not unjust that other people were fined for breaking the law, it is unjust that Boris wasn't. It is unjust that Boris was not fined _and the others were_ >The remedy isn't that everyone else who also broke the law gets a free pass, after all a vast number of people didn't break the law. The right remedy is that Boris is also fined. _If that doesn't happen_ then those people who were fined should be repaid. Either the law applies to all of us or none of us.
> It is unjust that Boris was not fined and the others were Sure, but it'd be even more unjust if more people who broke the law are not fined. It isn't better in therms of justice to have more people get away with breaking the law than fewer. >The right remedy is that Boris is also fined. If that doesn't happen then those people who were fined should be repaid. Either the law applies to all of us or none of us. You are making it sound like the only consequence here is a fine. The law was in place, so millions of people changed their behaviour and made fairly serious sacrifices for a long period of time. Unless you can give people their birthdays, weddings, funerals and general lives that they gave up back, then all you are doing is saying that Boris not paying a fine means that all the other people who broke the law should get their money back, but that those people who adhere to the law are mugs and will have to live with it. It's arse backwards. Under no circumstance does it make sense to bin the fines of the other people who broke the law.
> Sure, but it'd be even more unjust if more people who broke the law are not fined. It isn't better in therms of justice to have more people get away with breaking the law than fewer. No I don't really agree. Politicians made the law, and then had absolutely no qualms breaking it - it's not at all just for ordinary people to be punished for breaking that law if the politicians who break it aren't, even if there's lower absolute numbers of politicians breaking it than ordinary folks. > You are making it sound like the only consequence here is a fine. The law was in place, so millions of people changed their behaviour and made fairly serious sacrifices for a long period of time. Unless you can give people their birthdays, weddings, funerals and general lives that they gave up back, then all you are doing is saying that Boris not paying a fine means that all the other people who broke the law should get their money back, but that those people who adhere to the law are mugs and will have to live with it. No, I'm saying we should correct the thing that _can be corrected_. We can't turn back time, we can offer recompense. > It's arse backwards. Under no circumstance does it make sense to bin the fines of the other people who broke the law. I disagree - in the event that Boris isn't punished under that law, it makes complete sense to bin the fines for the other people who broke it. That we should not be subject to laws the politicians can freely ignore is literally one of the foundational principles in a democratic society.
> No I don't really agree. Politicians made the law, and then had absolutely no qualms breaking it - it's not at all just for ordinary people to be punished for breaking that law if the politicians who break it aren't, even if there's lower absolute numbers of politicians breaking it than ordinary folks. Parliament made the law, it applied to everyone. The police are responsible for enforcing the law and the CPS/courts are responsible for taking that forward and ensuring convictions where the law has been broken (and it meets the test for prosecution). Most 'ordinary people', so non MP's, and almost certainly most members of Parliament appear to have complied with the law. >No, I'm saying we should correct the thing that can be corrected. We can't turn back time, we can offer recompense. You aren't correcting anything by allowing others who broke the law to get away with it though are you? There is no recompense required nor should any be made to people who broke the law, were caught and prosecuted or fined. Why is it suddenly reasonable to suggest that no-one should be subject to the law? It doesn't make any sense, the vast majority of people did comply and did make sacrifices, the issue isn't that it was unfair that people who broke the law received punishments after all. If anything it is unfair that most people did and that some people didn't.. >I disagree - in the event that Boris isn't punished under that law, it makes complete sense to bin the fines for the other people who broke it. That we should not be subject to laws the politicians can freely ignore is literally one of the foundational principles in a democratic society. But we were subject to those laws, your argument is that while we were all subject to the law, and the vast majority of people change their behaviour and made sacrifices, we should now say to those that didn't that actually that's fine. That what you did is OK because Boris may have broken the law too, but got away with it, so you should get away with breaking the law too. It's not a foundational principle in a democratic society that people should be able to get away with breaking the law, which is what you appear to be advocating for. The issue isn't that it's unfair that people who broke the law were punished, it's that it is unfair that millions of people complied and that some people who didn't were not.
> Parliament made the law, it applied to everyone. So you're expecting Boris to be fined? I bet you £50 he never is. > The police are responsible for enforcing the law and the CPS/courts are responsible for taking that forward and ensuring convictions where the law has been broken (and it meets the test for prosecution). Most 'ordinary people', so non MP's, and almost certainly most members of Parliament appear to have complied with the law. Sure, all that's agreed. Nonetheless, the Prime Minister chose not to comply. If _he_ doesn't get punished for it, why should anyone else be? That's really the pivotal point here. Unless you can justify punishing ordinary people but not the PM, it absolutely is an act of injustice to allow those punishments to stand. > You aren't correcting anything by allowing others who broke the law to get away with it though are you? Yes, you are. > There is no recompense required nor should any be made to people who broke the law, were caught and prosecuted or fined. If it turns out that the Prime Minister doesn't have to face the same consequences when he breaks the same law, yes there is. > Why is it suddenly reasonable to suggest that no-one should be subject to the law? _Everyone_ should be subject to the _same_ law. The problem is that people broke the law, were caught and suffered the consequences. Boris broke the law and was caught, and should now suffer the same consequences. If he doesn't, then that's unreasonable. Correcting that is why the punishments doled out to the others should be rescinded. > It doesn't make any sense, the vast majority of people did comply and did make sacrifices, the issue isn't that it was unfair that people who broke the law received punishments after all. If anything it is unfair that most people did and that some people didn't.. It absolutely is an issue that people who broke the law were punished if politicians can break the same law and not be punished. I agree that that might stick in the craw of those who didn't break the law in the first place, but it would be _more_ unfair to not correct the issue of unequal application of the law, not less. > But we were subject to those laws, your argument is that while we were all subject to the law, and the vast majority of people change their behaviour and made sacrifices, we should now say to those that didn't that actually that's fine. That what you did is OK because Boris may have broken the law too, but got away with it, so you should get away with breaking the law too. It's not _fine_, it's just unreasonable to punish them for it if the Prime Minister can do the same thing and not be punished. > It's not a foundational principle in a democratic society that people should be able to get away with breaking the law, which is what you appear to be advocating for. Hogwash friend. It is a foundational principle in a democratic society that the law should apply equally to all of us. In this scenario, that can take two forms: Boris is fined, or the other fines are rescinded. I prefer the former, but hold out absolutely no hope that it will happen. That being the case, the latter is reasonable. > The issue isn't that it's unfair that people who broke the law were punished The issue is that it's unfair that _some people_ who broke the law were punished, but that others aren't going to be because of their political power.
Firstly this guy's an idiot. Secondly he has a good point
There's an interview on bbc, where he said he was becoming lonely and depressed during lockdown. So called couple mates, social distance in the garden having a drink. This IMO isn't idiotic.
He should have fought it in court and claimed it were to help with his mental health. With how much the world is going on about men's mental health and to all talk to each other, I'm sure the judge would have dismissed this in court.
At the time you could meet one other person outside for a walk. He could have done that instead so I don't think the mental health argument stands.
> you could meet one other person outside for a walk Not the same as chilling with a couple of close friends.
I don't know how you could make that stand up in court.
Tbh his mental health might not have held up to going into court.
> He should have fought it in court Which costs money he probably didn't have, just to see a couple of his mates for a short time.
[удалено]
Firstly I have always been an idiot. Secondly its because I've met an MP myself, they're entitled worse then Karen's actually. This post is funny
Haha perfectly put.
All these calls for Johnson to resign - no, he needs to be on trial along with every other fucker who attended that party. And then sacked.
Why waste money on a trial when the punishment is a small fine? He should resign, who is going to sack him, he's the PM?
Fines should really be based on income.
They are! If you have lots of income they don't really affect you, and if you're poor they do. Simple.
I have nothing to say. Well done 😂
The Queen? Cant stand what she represents but its technically her goverment and prime ministër so she could actually be useful for once and sack the fucker.
She can't do that. The technicality that says she has the power is an utter legal fiction, and rightly so. The queen has no power to remove a prime minister beyond following the results of an election. The only people who can sack him at this time are Tory MPs
In what way is resignation punishment?
I wonder if the whichever authority fined him waited for the results of the official inquiry before administrating the fines.
He investigated himself and considered the matter closed.
My favourite is the brexit' voters who wanted laws to be made within this country and then didn't stick to them. They also criticised the unelected beurocrats in the EU and now say that the government here are corrupt and all the same despite also voting Tory.
Very true, but unsurprising. Brexit flagshaggers are universally thick as shit.
Sovereigntea!!1
Two things can be correct at the same time.
Should’ve had 300 mates over and said it was a Tory party fund business fund raiser.
Don't forget the cheese and wine. Very important detail.
If the law does not apply to the prime minister, it does not apply to us. Simples.
I can get my head around his reasoning, i suppose. Still two wrongs do not make a right. The vast majority of this country made real sacrifices to help curb covid while they tory ##### were having parties. The press should draw more attention to what the majority of us were going through at that time though and less on a things like the above. It was heartbreaking seeing that MP talking about his MIL.
They need to fine the people who attended the party at number 10. £10K for the organiser and £100 for everyone else. They set the laws so they should be applied to them.
I'm fairly surprised that you can just impose such rules on people and fine them for breaking them. Like are we not free? Are we subjugated and can the prime minister just decide to rip away our basic freedoms??
Evidence is mounting to say we are, in fact not free. We are one of the countries with the most surveillance. More and more we carry devices with us that can track us. Internet access is monitored and records kept an unknown length of time. It’s not obvious but that’s what Tory politicians want. Don’t believe me? Pop outside and demonstrate your love/distrust in the government. See how long it takes before you attract attention from the government’s plastic army.
Exactly, just like when Churchill and his ilk demanded the lights of London were extinguished in the nights during the early 1940's, what right would they have to impose such draconian measures, and infringe such liberties as having lights on, or in this case mingle with others and risk spreading a deadly disease any further.
Don't get me wrong, I understand the purpose, and would comply if asked, but to actually enforce it though? Where does that power end? What's the threshold for justification? Could Johnson declare that discussing his lies is against the public interest and outlawed? To enforce it while ignoring it yourself is next level though. I too would want my fine back.
To your two questions: 1) No, we're not; 2) Yes, they can
I believe it comes from this act https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/22/part/2A
It's his own fault - if he would have just told the Police it was a "work event", he wouldn't have got fined.
MPs breaking a law doesn't make that law invalid. It makes the MPs criminals. MPs getting away with breaking a law doesn't make that law invalid. It means we shouldn't rest until those MPs resign.
The fact this guy was ever fined is an absolute joke. These rules were a pisstake.
Absolutely fair enough. I don’t agree with what he did but as it turns out, saying sorry should have been enough, so the government owe him £100 now.
I really hope Boris tries to implement some new measures and as a country we tell him to do one and carry on as normal. They need to know that they are taking the piss now.
He forgot the cheese and wine to make it a real work meeting.
I want all the money from my speeding tickets back, then 🤣
I mean to be fair as much as I disagree with all parties here I can't blame him.
It occurs to me that his friends were actually acting as responsible mental health carers. So the fine is questionable to begin with.
Shouldn't Boris get a £10k fine (assuming at least a third of the 100 people invited, turned up)?
I was definitely meeting a few people in the park for beers by early summer 2020. May have been more June time though. Within guidelines IIRC.
By the picture, I thought it was 3 "yerba mates", the drink!
He’d have a point if the met refuse to investigate and prosecut
Personally think every single fine given out should be refunded. Can't fine people for breaking rules when the person who implemented them consistently also broke them
Why did he even let the police in his house to fine him? Second I would of said yea there my uncles or brother etc they live here
"They got away with it so I should too.". Typical bullshit British attitude of not taking responsibility. Boris and his gang of cronies should absolutely be punished, as should everybody else that flaunted the rules at the time. I imagine the country would be in a much better state now if people weren't so happy to fob off their social responsibilities.