Controversial issue!

[powder28]

I was in town a few weeks ago with my sons and dh, and there were some people standing by the entrance to a shopping arcade protesting about a clothes shop selling real fur.

They were handing out leaflets with the name of the woman and her shop, encouraging people to confront her with petitions etc.

Putting aside the issue of whether fur is right or wrong, I think this method of campaigning is very dangerous. I happen to think it encourages bullying and a mob mentality.

What do other people think?

I think they have a right to campaign in that manner as long as they are not inciting violence against the woman or damage to her property.
After all bombarding he with petitions alone is not dangerous.

Hopefully she'll stop selling it.

It sounds like a peaceful protest to me. They weren't causing trouble, and they weren't encouraging people do harm the woman or her property, just to protest against the fact she stocks fur. I can't see how that can be construed as bullying or mob mentality.

How do you think they should be allowed to protest, powder, if not through peaceful protests and petitions?

Hmmm..... I'm really happy to live in a democracy where this kind of peaceful protest is ok. Giving someone a petition needn't be confrontational.

I remember in 1991 (those were the days ) demonstrating against the poll tax, student loans etc and that wasn't confrontational (the 'riots' were a very small group of anarchists, those who toured football matches in the late 90's).

I am absolutely not a bully (spent a looong time working for the police, MOD) but do very much believe in peaceful protest and asserting the right that was fought for by the suffragette movement, the abolitionist movement, cnd, boycott south africa etc. Oh, and the Jarrow march and the miners strike......

What worries me is that you never know how people are going to react to it. Most people will just not go in there, but there might be the odd loon who goes in and confronts this woman with something a little more threatening than a petition.
I could see why they were doing it though.

This sounds fine to me. They haven't asked people to spit at her or anything.

I think much like the ban on discussions of certain people, it is difficult when you start to identify one person as a target. But OTOH you can only change the world one person at a time.

If she's running a shop no doubt she meets loons all the time anyway, particularly a shop selling fur (those toffee nosed inbreds tend to be barking anyway)

It?s one thing campaigning against the sale of fur, but giving out personal details like someone?s name and encouraging people to confront them is quite another. How would you feel, for instance, if someone gave out your name to passers by in the street and said that ?this person smacks her child, as protesters against smacking, we urge you to confront this woman and make it clear to her that what she is doing is wrong?.

Peaceful protest is all very well, but singling out individuals is wrong IMO.

I have to agree with wannabe

Thats what I thought wannabe, because normally they just have a table with a petition on it.

Personally as long as it was a non violent approach I wouldn't mind people appoaching me about anything - if I disagreed I would just expect to be able to say so.

If individuals want to take part in deeply unpleasant activities they shouldn't always expect to be able to hide behind a crowd.