88
Two charged for pouring porridge and jam on Queen Victoria bust in Glasgow
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
88 points (97.8% liked)
United Kingdom
4087 readers
109 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
this is a victimless crime that is also crimeless because it shouldn't be illegal
Unfortunately the tittle misses. Spray painted cunt on the plinth and planned to glue themselves to it.
Jam and porridge has minimal victims yes. Someone has to pay to clean it. So I'd say clean up is a punishment that suits the crime.
Spray paint and glue gets a bit more complex. As clean up is a little more involved. And presents the risk of damaging the statue.
Unfortunately the concept of who the statue represents and current feelings towards her. Really do not relate to weather their is a victim or not. It is property be it tax payers or some wealthy plonk. Victims exist.
I was on board with making a mess but i see where defacing property could be illegal.
yes, but defacing the statue of a royal is cool and good, and the more defaced it gets, the cooler and gooder. why clean it up? why erect it in the first place?
To deface it
Ok this will get a littlevlong. In part because I am thinking as I type. I am also legally blind (very poor vision) so forgive some typos on my tablet.
Your opinion or mine of the value of a persons property. Has and should have 0 effect in the laws relating to that property.
Lets take a less questionable example. If a person collects Nazi statues and memorabilia the law has no right to decide you and I may harm or destroy it. Nor dose him or her owning it indicate he agrees with their views. Be honest with yourself. In 2024 even if you consider the history of the allies to be important to remember. Few today would agree with the soldiers views on women's rights and racial integration. You would be hard pressed to find a person or time in our nations past. Where you or I agree with all of their views.
But the past still happened. And we still have a duty to let our decendents see evidence of how the people of the time saw the world around them. Back in the time of Queen Victoria most of England by a huge %. Supported the existence of the royal family. Heck 250 years before (1649) her rule. We killed the king and replaced it with parlimentry rule. It lasted untill 1660. So in less time then the current tory shitshow of a government. The people of the UK decided they wanted a king again.
Yeah that is a simplification of the times and ideals. But it dose make it very clear that the people of the time that bust was made. Had very differing ideals of the youth of today. The evidence of that past needs to be their for our decendents to see.
Because we will not be there to tell them what the world we grew up in felt or looked like. ( by we im going to guess i am older then you here)
But generations from now. People will need busts and statues like this. In museums. To fully understand the effort and work our ancestors were willing to put into supporting the royal ideal. Or else they will have no understanding of the history that motivated us to change it. That is afterall the point of museums. (Ignoring the theft of other nations history)
I was born in 1970. And while when I was young republican sentiment was far from unheard off. It was also still very very much a minority opinion. I watched it growth. By the 90s things very much started to change. The general attitude was that the corranation of Charles would lead to a greater push for republicanism. But folks supported the current queen. By the mid 2000 more info about the queen's actions started to help. But republicanism was still well under 50%. Hugly so with folks older them me. Pretty close to 50% at my age.
My personal view for what it is worth. We need to remove our current fptp political system before giving more power to parliment. And removing the monarch atm would only make the PM head of state.
But yes it is time the royal family was no more then they are in other EU states. I just feel removing a system that allows less them 30% to often select the direction of the nation. Is more urgent then removing the figurehead atm.
They damaged a statue that belongs to a publicly owned local museum...
They put more history in it. That's practically a service to the museum, a value add. Ought to be commemorated for it, really.
Least deranged hexbear user
Yeah, bunch of useful idiots, bots, and shills spreading authoritarian propaganda.
They will be commemorated, by the prison system putting more history into them.
importing the yankee's hardon for punishment, i see
I'm just using your logic.
Treating things as things -> me, cool, historical
Treating people as things -> you,
"logical"
They poured what I eat for breakfast every morning on a chunk of stone. I think it'll be fine.
Which is owned by the city, they damaged a statue owned by the city.
Big fucking deal mate. No one was actually hurt.
So there was no victims ofJanuary 6th either because the capital building is publicly owned too?
You’re right, defacing a statue is the same as attempting insurrection, doubly so where people were assaulted or died.
That’s your fucking amazing retort is it?
My retort is that "it's publicly owned so it's fine if anyone destroys it" is a stupid argument no matter who makes it
It’s called nuance.
Not everything is exactly the same in the world.
*they poured jam over a statue