419
Do not (thelemmy.club)
submitted 2 days ago by to c/casualuk@feddit.uk
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 23 points 2 days ago (4 children)

depressing context: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ceqe3y34e9eo

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    You should not take photos of people in public?

    Since when did street photography become illegal over here? I know it is much of Europe, but I was under the impression that we worked under the assumption of no reasonable expectation of privacy in public places.

    Or is it just illegal for assilum seekers to do it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 days ago* (1 child)

    In principle, targeting someone and taking photos of them should be illegal, under harassment law.
    In practice, this will only apply if you are brown and don't speak very good English.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    So taking photos of people in general is still fine, but going after one person and taking lots of photos of just that person isn't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    How can a Labour government offer up such a freebie to the right? Now the right wing will feel even more justified in their bigotry.

    I think the comment in this article from the Greens is pretty decent "We support consent education, but it needs to be universal."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 days ago

    IIUC, the point of the leaflets is to extend consent education, so that instead of just covering the first group below it also covers the second.

    1. UK school pupils. They already receive it.
    2. Asylum seekers. AFAIK they did not previously receive it, which was a twofold problem: a. for the victims of the very small number of asylum seekers who committed crimes against consent, perhaps not knowing how seriously that would be viewed in the UK; and b. for the many innocent asylum seekers tarred with the same brush.
    3. Older adults in the UK. These may never have received consent education, but unfortunately are often reactionary enough to vote Reform if anyone tries to “nanny” them - so they will probably never receive it.

    Labour needed to do something to stop the law-abiding majority of asylum seekers having their reputations tarnished by a tiny number of no-goodnik asylum seekers.

    IMO, the booklets were a good move by Labour. They will make it easier for thicker members of the public to distinguish between the very few bad apples among asylum seekers (“This guy broke the rules, and can’t plead ignorance because he received the booklet in a language he reads fluently”) and the law-abiding majority.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent