Wednesday, 20 May 2009

Anti Social Behaviour Order For…Pointing Out Anti Social Behaviour

I guess this chap can count his blessings that he wasn’t a fireman, or he’d be in even more trouble:
A man who filmed men meeting for sex in an attempt to stop them visiting a Lincolnshire wood has been spared jail.
Colin Haw, 47, of Mayflower Road, Boston, earlier admitted a public order offence for filming one person in June.

He said he reported the matter to police but was ignored so he decided to act because families visited the area.
It’s not really surprising that he was ignored, is it? Which chief constable would dare poke his head above the parapet and declare that he was enforcing the law in the teeth of the progressive lobby?

But this takes the bloody biscuit!
Chairman of the bench Pat Walsh rejected an application by Lincolnshire Police for an antisocial behaviour order (Asbo) to be made against the self-employed mechanic.
Pointing out antisocial behaviour (sex in public) and the non-response to it of the authorities gets you threatened with an anti-social behaviour order.

Pretty much sums up the state of the UK today.

You really couldn’t make it up:
He told the father-of-two: "Your actions were premeditated and quite deliberate in targeting a group of people we would describe as vulnerable. Our thoughts were to send you to custody but we are not going to do that today."
‘Vulnerable’? In what way are they ‘vulnerable’, then…?

It seems to me that they are the very antithesis of ‘vulnerable’.

They get to cock a snook (so to speak) at the laws and mores of the country, secure in the knowledge that the police will not dare to enforce them. Indeed, they will protect them from anyone else pointing out that they are breaking the law, and expecting the police to do something about it.
After the hearing the Lincolnshire-based Strategic Independent Advisory Group, which represents vulnerable communities, and Lincolnshire Kaleidoscope which represents gay, bisexual, lesbian and transgender people condemned Haw's actions as "truly disgusting. "
But illegally having sex in the open air in front of families with young children? Just peachy!
Haw told the BBC he had not wanted to harm anyone.

He said: "I've got nothing against the gay community, but what I do not like, whether it's gay or heterosexual, is sex in a public place. I've got a problem with that. "
Most people have. The phrase ‘Get a room!’ was never more apposite than here.

It seems to me that some of the sexual pleasure these people derive from their al fresco trysts is that they can ‘frighten the horses’ and rub it in the face (so to speak) of ‘normal society’. Despite what the lobby groups may think, that’s not the way to promote ‘tolerance’.

Quite the opposite, in fact…


Anonymous said...

Is not sex in a public place illegal? If I were to have heterosexual sex in a public place could I not be arrested and charged with outraging public decency or something?

So how can filming a criminal act be in itself a crime?

Presumably this wood can now be used by anyone to have sex in public. If its OK for al fresco gay sex, I guess everyone can get some action. Though what's the betting if you tried it, and someone saw you, the Police would arrest you?

This country IS a Police State. There is no other explanation.

Oldrightie said...

This gels with police stations flying gay pride flags. We have a Gay Mafia controlled State. I like The Russian approach.

Anonymous said...

Allegedly, round my way it is the senior police and members of the judiciary that are engaged in these activities.

Shlomo said...

Priceless Julia! You sure know how to pick 'em!

As per usual, tolerance is a dirty word for those who drumbeat about it being a mandatory requirement for others.

Keep up the good work!

AntiCitizenOne said...

We have an ACPO ltd. State.

WV chips! We've had ours.

JuliaM said...

"Is not sex in a public place illegal?"

Yup, that was always my understanding too.

"WV chips! We've had ours."


Dr Melvin T Gray said...

The 'gay and transgender' community condemned Mr Haw's actions as "truly disgusting". Such a description may be more appropriate to the forces denying him a Good Citizens Award. A well treated topic, Julia.

woman on a raft said...

Purely in the interests of research I googled the outdoor-sex fraternity's guide to Lincolnshire, and Mr Haw is wasting his time. There are dozens of sites, neither he nor the police could possibly patrol them all.

If his plan is to embarrass people by putting up pictures, he obviously hasn't see websites such as XXX and XXX. I have, and there is going to be some explaining to do when the police finally come for me.

If he wanted to take photos, he should perhaps have gone to one of the sites which specialize in voyeurism - although there may be an exquisite protocol distinguishing those where voyeurs are welcome but not photographers. Apparently the laybys of Lincs are full of people misunderstanding each other, thinking they haven't been invited in, when in fact they have. (Look, I'm only repeating the research, OK)

To anyone thinking of visiting Lincolnshire, all I can suggest for a method of avoiding people relieving the tedium, is to play your radio very loudly and step out of the car and bellow "eeee, I hope nobody is havin' sex out here. I'm right delicate of constitution I am, and I don't want any of that filth, neither."

Take particular care when visiting Tydd St Mary, which is very small and has one pub, but the reviewer hasn't been down to visit it. It has two popular sites, allegedly, but that might be a practical joke as one of them is "outside Sheddy's" (my apostrophe). First you'd have to identify which one is Sheddy's, presumably by the row of rocking cars.

The advice for East Barkwith site is that "its in wragby". You know, Wragby.

alfstone said...

There certainly seems to be a discrepancy in the way the law is enforced judging by this story

Now I wonder why that can be.

a_guy_in_lincolnshire said...

FFS calm down! For starters this "wood" full of "families" is in fact a lay-by with a bunch of trees and bushes in it at the side of a busy main road in the middle of nowhere. Anyone who sends their children there to play deserves to go to jail, or get a job as a nursery nurse in Plymouth.

Second, one of the guys he filmed had simply stopped to discretely take a leak behind a tree and found himself surrounded by this bunch of clowns. This video was then put on the web. The guy quite rightly complained and this is what resulted in the court case.

Third, if I was a 47 year old guy who found sex in a public place so distasteful, I wouldn't drive 20 miles with a group of younger men half my age and go looking for it, unless of course I had a few sex-related issues of my own going on.

Fourth - and finally - sex in a public place is NOT illegal unless it "outrages public decency." Which is a bit like me as a non-smoker saying "I hate cigarette smoke, so I'll go out and look for someone who is smoking and go and stand right next to them and then start whingeing about it!"