To think there shouldn't be a right to *protest*

It is. It could get far worse under other, too, sadly.

The right to protest is similar to the right to Freedom of Speech. Sadly both are being eroded by the government due to pressure from people who don’t like what is being said and protested about.

I also kind of like people not being able to own slaves, and people of colour being allowed on the same bus as me. It's also nice that places which were once unfairly colonised, often by the British, can have their independence, leading to a more emancipated world generally.

Oh and I like the fact that my stupid pink makeup doesn't always include rabbits being tortured to death and my medicine, while still injuring some animals in the making, keeps that to as strict a minimum as possible.

None of those have directly affected OP's right to go to TK Max when she feels like it, though, so yeah, maybe none of it matters.

Yes, I think we should keep the right to protest, and the lines need to be drawn more clearly as to what those rights are exactly.

“Once a protest crosses the line into infringing on other people’s civil liberties, it stops being a protest and starts being coercion.”

I agree with here OP. And those who state that writing to MPs doesn’t work are wrong, however, it takes dedication to a cause and plenty of people being energised into doing it, presenting reasoned arguments. In my experience, lobbying the media and being counter argue also helps. I speak from experience.

People dont care when they arent inconvenienced..

I worry that people who come on here with domestic arguments about buses are really helping to pave the ground for Reform to behave like that in the UK. They wouldn’t admit it, if that were the case.

Another problem is, it now seems to be a short step from “protest is wrong” to let’s send in people like ICE in the US , and let’s start shooting. This is not who we are.

You're an inspiration xx

Thankyou, I always aim to please and inspire 😍

They do. You just don't notice because it's not inconveniencing you. And it doesn't tend to get news coverage because it's not inconveniencing the general public. Since we live in a democracy, politicians respond best to things that affect large numbers of the electorate and may affect their chances of re-election. Therefore protests that involve large numbers of people either actively protesting or annoyed that they are inconvenienced by it tend to receive the most news coverage and the quickest responses.

That rather leaves a bad taste if you are a wheelchair user who could not board a bus because it was filled with pushchairs.

This.

Can I ask again why people don't make a point of inconveniencing MPs, government buildings, CEOs and Head offices?
Why is it always the people that can afford it the least that get to suffer?

You don’t have a “right” to get to work, you have a “responsibility” and part of that responsibility is checking the route and making adjustments or at least communicating issues to your manager.

Of course people should have a right to peaceful protest.

Can you find an Iranian accessible Internet forum to post on so that they know not to inconvenience people there?
OTOH they aren’t really being allowed by their government and are being shot/executed instead so is this what you’d like to happen to stop protests?
Don’t assume a very hardline government couldn’t happen here - we’d still be licking the boots of the ruling classes here if we’d always just sent letters - oh but we probably couldn’t have sent them, education rights.
I counter protest at hotels - I could be tempted to agree people shouldn’t be protesting outside them, though I’d say they’re intimidating the vulnerable. However, it is one of the Ltd ways by which they can demonstrate their frustration at immigration/hotel costs to the point the government may take notice - and tbf they are taking notice of the loudest views on the street with their immigration policies. However much I dislike and disagree with this personally, there is no world where only my view rules, or should do, and everyone must be allowed what here are becoming limited protesting rights - we should all fight to keep them and use them.
There are many rules - you’re obviously not allowed criminal activity just because you’re on a protest and would be arrested. This can be disorder not just violence. There are time frames to reduce this ‘inconvenience’ as well. There are section 14s used to stop them happening and/or to limit them as well.
I am worried to see that for some people their own convenience trumps rights for others - not actually society friendly when you think about it.

Yes it’s fine for people to protest as long as it’s not YOU that can’t get to hospital, can’t get to work, can’t get to the funeral, or it’s not your property that’s being damaged.

Yeah, like those Iranians causing so much inconvenience. 🙄

With kindness, I do suggest you take a peek at history books at some point: I take it you own property and vote? Two things you wouldn’t have if it weren’t for the more troublesome Pankhurst.

People have bought the rights we have now with their own blood. And now we have a generation of people so uneducated that many of us are actually calling to have our own rights removed to curtail rights for others. It makes me so sad.

How would you fit in 1 or 2 million into Parliament sq? and what about the inconvenience they cause when getting there/leaving?

I don't think anyone is saying toddler tantrums should be banned, i look at the ones i had to put up with now and they were really funny! esp the one when she went bananas because she couldn't get another ride in a Noddy car at a shopping centre... i like reminding her of that one😂

With the best intentions, you appear to be trying to equate blocking your neighbour in with a car (which is criminal) with say people marching to let their feelings known on Fox hunting, Iraq, Brexit, ID Cards, Migration...or in previous years - votes for women.... sure i get the Gaza Protests are bit tiresome but if these were banned, then i'm sure the authorities, inc this Govt, would seek to ban them all.

Exactly this. Thank you for that link.

OP's post explains why democracy is so precarious. Giving away rights without even realising it.

Heavy traffic caused by people using roads for their intended purpose is not the same as people deliberately blocking roads to make a point.

A protest might make traffic slow due to congestion. But there are also protesters who block traffic to be a pain in the ass. Or deliberately stop trains that affect thousands of people, even potentially millions. There was a protest in my country where a group stopped trains for over a week.

There are people on the thread arguing that things like this are within the definition of protesting.

There are people saying that the point of protesting is to make things difficult and unpleasant so the government does what they want.

I have at various times on MN seen people say that those yahoos that broke into the military base, people blocking low enforcement, people stopping trains from running, or blocking highways, are all legitimate forms of protest so they shouldn't feel legal consequences.

I suspect that kind of approach is informing the OPs stance on this, since she said that gathering and voicing dissent is fine in her view.

I’d much rather bear the consequence of inconvenience due to protesters than bear the consequence of losing my rights and liberties because I have no voice anymore.