To think the judge was right to throw the book at Just Stop Oil?

[StripedPiggy]

Five Just Stop Oil activists, including leader & XR founder Roger Hallam have been sentenced to up to 5 years in jail for blocking the M25 & other main roads.
Their intention was to cause gridlock on roads in the South East. The disruption they caused resulted in people missing medical appointments, flights & business meetings.

Well done to that judge. The criminal justice system is right to pass serious sentences on these fanatics which will act as a strong deterrent to others who might try to cause mass disruption, and put people’s lives in danger, to further a political agenda, whatever it might be.

"Don’t understand how prison is proportionate for blocking traffic"

These people have had several chances already. They stand up in court and say "I'll go right out and do it again. You can''t stop me".

What would you have us do?

And if you think blocking traffic sounds trivial.....

it's your daughter's wedding day and a bunch of middle class kids have told her she can't go.

It's your mother's hip operation and it will be put off six months because JSO say you can't pass.

Your child is dying from stab wounds and the ambulance is way back in the jam caused by JSO.

JSO will tell you "oh we'd let someone in a serious condition through" but they won't even know the ambulance is back there and it's too late to undo their damage.

And who the hell do they think they are to decide if you qualify.

Just Stop Oil have said they will not stop there, but will break any law they have to in order to force us to obey them.

Which may include burning down the oil company building where your friend works as a cleaner.

For those who used to watch Grange Hill when it was first on (and yes, this is relevant): does anyone remember the Students' Action Group SAG, led by Jessica Samuels, pressuring against school uniform? There were some interesting parallels.

When they are marching and waving signs around, the headmaster drily comments to a teacher "this is the downside of living in a democracy", and genially invites the group to state their case; and at one point, agrees on the spot to abolish special tables for pupils who get free meals. But then SAG start upping the ante, by picketing sports matches, and finally staging a "sit in" in the secretary's office; when they refuse to leave the room, he does then come down very hard on them, and many of them are expelled (in an era when pupils could be expelled on the spot). It's been mentioned on the internet that soon after this, there were some "copycat protests" of sit-ins in real schools.

The point being that peaceful protest is acceptable up to a point, but if it goes too far, it has be stopped, or people will jump on the bandwagon.

And while on the subject of Grange Hill, I can't resist throwing this in. A few years later, on a different protest, a pupil makes this beautifully ironic comment: "the school will only call a referendum when they're certain they will get the result they want".

Is that the best you can do?

Three words were sufficient.

You’re just scaremongering. By all means promote a cause - anyone sensible agrees with the science - but to tell people that we should expect righteous violence by activists is irresponsible.