To wonder if a lot of the Just Stop Oil protesters are not very nice people on a personal level

Me pointing out that sometimes other forms of transport are available for some journeys, makes me an 'urban elite'? Righto

Poverty kills more ' brown people' than climate change. But taking people out of poverty just leads them to want more stuff- stuff we take for granted, like fridges, cars and meat. That will then increase consumption globally. JSO need to be clear in what they are expecting of people, especially the young in terms of lifestyle, and whether theyvare prepared to take the hit. None of this ' the plane was flying anyway/ I need a new iPhone for my activism. The way to stop oil is to massively reduce overconsumption in the Developed world. So no new phones every year, no gap years tramping about Asia, massive reduction in food prices, fast fashion including clothes, makeup, polluting hair dyes, holidays abroad, driving. We can't sustain the levels of consumption we have without fossil fuels. In an ideal world, we should have enough resources for everyone to live a comfortable life. But that means taking people in the developing world out of absolute poverty but also a massive reduction in consumption in the West.

It gives haters a reason to hate

Nobody is saying you can. But you absolutely should be able to make your case before a jury, as other groups have.

It's very difficult to argue case vs case as the latest JSO arrests have largely been under legislation introduced recently to target protests with an eye on JSO specifically.

I can't think of many recent peaceful protests where journalists have been arrested while simply covering events. https://www.ft.com/content/3d634d0e-3692-4997-9bc8-a83f51d74012

Ok I’ll bite.

People, including children are starving and dying every day because of the impact of burning fossil fuels. That’s not emotional blackmail, it’s relevant facts.

And a practical response to that is write to or book an appointment to see your new MP. To tell them that they must support the rapid phasing out of burning fossil fuels.

We are rapidly heading towards global food shortages, and hugely disruptive weather patterns are already upon us. The electorate en masse can influence policy and government priorities, but a lot of us have to do it to make enough of an impact.

I'm not ignoring them. This thread is about the recent convictions. I don't know about the others and I would have to look into them to comment, which I am not going to to do as this thread is not about them. Given the woeful misrepresentation of the JSO action on this thread though, I suspect there are reasonable factors behind the sentencing decision, just as there were for the recently convicted.

I'm sorry but your comparison was terrible. It really was. For all the reasons I outlined.

The Judge stopped the defendants from giving long rambling speeches that were holding up the trial.

I don't know the details of this part of the trial but as a lay person I would think that to make the type of defence you are arguing for there has to be a direct link between your action and the outcome you are stating to achieve.
e
Knocking down a statue that represents a slave trader actually does stop people from being offended by a celebration of a slave trader.

Bringing the whole of the SE road system to a standstill does nothing whatsoever to stop or slow down climate change. If anything it makes it worse if people have to repeat journeys, which many people must have had to.

I repeat: You can't just do anything to anyone and say ' Climate change means I can do it.' That's just not a tenable position and that court rightly rejected it.

Anyone who behaves the way they do cannot be a nice person.

You just used it yourself.

Disagreeing with JSO and their ludicrous tactics means that you ignore and don't care about the plight of 'brown people'.

Is that the level we're at? With that level of argument it's no wonder you don't get more people on board.

This judgment - https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/R-v-Trowland-judgment-310723.pdf

Lays it all out quite clearly why they received the sentence they did. It also says they had previously convictions and were on bail. Have you even read it?

Not really, just highlighting the hypocrisy in playing the emotional blackmail card when you own lifestyle choices outside if your immediate cause have a detrimental effect on others.

Did you just use whataboutery there?!

One doesn’t justify the other. They aren’t mutually exclusive. Not joining JSO, defending their actions and dedicating your life to activism mean you don’t care about anything else. Nice use of ‘brown people though’. I see what you’re trying to do. Try harder.

Classic whataboutery that has nothing to do with the discussion.

Let me get this straight. You feel that British people being disrupted and dying on a handful of occasions is not ok.

But brown people being disrupted and dying in far greater numbers can just be ignored.

I don’t particularly like JSO’s tactics but I absolutely cannot tolerate children suffering wherever in the world they live. If phasing out the burning of fossil fuels for energy saves lives, I’m all for it.

I demonstrated how the cases of JSO protesters were treated differently under law. By refusing to allow JSO to include their motivation in defense. That's a significant difference in treatment.

Why do you keep ignoring the Nov 2023 sentencing of JSO activists where Morgan Trowland, 40, was jailed for three years and Marcus Decker, 34, for two years for causing a public nuisance. Neither on bail or previously convicted.

How long do you think these lot got?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67390514

I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong.

A child probably clawed lithium, cobolt, indium and terbium out of the ground somewhere in the DRC. Are you going to stop using your mobile phone to post replies on here??

Lecturing this to me and stopping me from getting to my work is going to do naff all to
stop this.

A child dies of malnutrition every 11 seconds. The impact of the climate on food production in the global south is a key cause of that (along with conflict). There are no food banks in Mali. If your crops fail due to floods, drought, or wildfires, you don’t eat.

Lives ade ending miserably every day. And for now the impact is mainly felt in Africa, but it’s spreading. This is why phasing out fossil fuels is number one priority.

'Just blocking a road'. 'Just talking about blocking a road'. You can keep trying to simplify it all you like. They are repeat offenders. Offending whilst on bail. Their actions could've cost lives, their actions did have massive ramifications. The ripple effect.

Also judges are bound by sentencing guidelines, they don't just get to decide willy nilly. I believe the maximum sentence for which they were convicted was 10 years so they got off lightly!

They weren't jailed for ' just talking', they were jailed for the intent to commit a criminal act which was then carried out.

They weren't just 'blockading a road' they were planning to stop the entire road infrastructure in the whole SE. They were prevented only due to a police tip off.

It was not a harmless protest. It caused harm. And no, I don't count things that cause harm, or that can foreseeable cause harm, peaceful.

You have to completely distort what actually happened to make your case.

Have you even read the judgement? Or are you getting your 'facts' from activists on SM?

Not quite, they have multiple previous arrests/convictions for disruptive protests, they have shown zero contrition and they have publicly stated they intend to continue to cause disruptions via their form of direct action protests that in the past has led to deaths. Just because they are fluffy middle class types they should be given a free pass and another slapped wrist?

Oh I really do

So when asked for a comparable protest, you chose a statue being pushed into a river, done by people who were not on bail, had no previous convictions in this area and were not escalating in their criminality when they pushed a statue to the river. So the severity of the impact of the crime was in no way comparable, and the pattern of behaviour was in no way comparable, and the people committing these acts were in the no way comparable in terms of their record of criminality.

And that's your comparable example to demonstrate how JSO are not being treated fairly compared to other protestors?

You don't have a comparison. You can't make your case.

Oh wow, so people really support a long jail sentence for just talking about blockading a road? This is absolutely crazy and gone way beyond sensible discussion. The Holly Willoughby is nowhere near the same, that was stalking and targeting an individual with a very clear intent to kill. What you're talking about is jailing people for talking about a peaceful protest.

🤣🤣🤣