Senior Tory Blocks 'Upskirting' Bill

[Meece 1,958]

Yes. He's right on. if a bill is woth going into law it is right that the finer points are examined thouroughly so that stuff doesn't slip through on the nod.   But hang on who want's a photo of the fat sh#$ covered rear of a horse faced hippo. There's nowt as strange as folk. Apologies to hippos and horses.

[WILF 48,465]

If there is one thing the UK don’t need it’s more law!!........there are laws in place to cover harassment, sexual assault and a myriad other things.

Just stop and think this shit through before reacting to the poxy media ! 

[Born Hunter 17,843]

Woha hold on a minute..... laws can be passed without going through parliament in the proper way?

The f**k kind of tyranny is this!? 

[Arry 23,509]

Well i for one can't see why finer point need discussing. To make it illegal to take up skirt photo's. If it helps to protect are wife's and daughter's, its even happened to kids for christ sake. That tw@t and his mate seemed by talking for four hour so the time went 14.30.

Cheers Arry

AConservative Member of Parliament has single-handedly blocked a bill to make the photographing of women’s genitals without their consent – a disturbing practice known as ‘upskirting’ – illegal.

 

The private members bill to make upskirting illegal was brought to the House by Liberal Democrat MP Wera Hobhouse, and was widely expected to pass unchallenged after gaining support from the Ministry of Justice this morning

 

However, Parliamentary rules state that after 14:30 it requires just one MP to shout ‘object’ to block such a bill progressing.

The controversial rule had been engaged because Chope and fellow Tory MP Philip Davies decided to speak for four hours during today’s proceedings – a brazen process known as filibustering.

Tory MP Christopher Chope’s decision to shout ‘object’ to the bill was met with cries of ‘shame’ from other members.

Hobhouse, who brought in the bill, responded to Chope’s shameful objection by saying:

 

  

[WILF 48,465]

2 minutes ago, Arry said:

Well i for one can't see why finer point need discussing. To make it illegal to take up skirt photo's. If it helps to protect are wife's and daughter's, its even happened to kids for christ sake. That tw@t and his mate seemed by talking for four hour so the time went 14.30.

Cheers Arry

AConservative Member of Parliament has single-handedly blocked a bill to make the photographing of women’s genitals without their consent – a disturbing practice known as ‘upskirting’ – illegal.

 

The private members bill to make upskirting illegal was brought to the House by Liberal Democrat MP Wera Hobhouse, and was widely expected to pass unchallenged after gaining support from the Ministry of Justice this morning

 

However, Parliamentary rules state that after 14:30 it requires just one MP to shout ‘object’ to block such a bill progressing.

The controversial rule had been engaged because Chope and fellow Tory MP Philip Davies decided to speak for four hours during today’s proceedings – a brazen process known as filibustering.

Tory MP Christopher Chope’s decision to shout ‘object’ to the bill was met with cries of ‘shame’ from other members.

Hobhouse, who brought in the bill, responded to Chope’s shameful objection by saying:

 

  

All points of law need discussing and making more law is a subject that should never be taken lightly......it’s a serious f***ing business that affects everyone’s life but it seems we have gotten so used to being legislated against that it’s just not even considered !

In fact new law should be resisted, tested and then restested over and over again before it ever gets put on the statute books.

Because otherwise what you end up with is nonsense like “hate crime” law where anyone can accuse anyone else of hate crime, there is no yardstick......there is no measure........it’s just totally down to the state to decide if you did it!!..........in short, that’s means they can lock you up for anything they classify as being “hate crime”..........your freedom has been removed !

That is why law need complete examination, resistance and re-examination to make sure it’s fit for purpose but only in the job it’s meant to do.

[WILF 48,465]

Just to add, I have daughters of 15 & 16 and I personally consider it much more important for them to live in as free a society as possible.......the thought that some fuckwit MP wants to make himself look good by making up some nonsense law that means, in the remote possibility, some pervert takes a picture of their knickers on the escalator he gets a fine and a term in the sex offenders register is completely meaningless when weighed against their greater freedom.

Freedom from the state matters, it’s the greatest gift we can give future generations.

[Arry 23,509]

2 hours ago, WILF said:

All points of law need discussing and making more law is a subject that should never be taken lightly......it’s a serious f***ing business that affects everyone’s life but it seems we have gotten so used to being legislated against that it’s just not even considered !

In fact new law should be resisted, tested and then restested over and over again before it ever gets put on the statute books.

Because otherwise what you end up with is nonsense like “hate crime” law where anyone can accuse anyone else of hate crime, there is no yardstick......there is no measure........it’s just totally down to the state to decide if you did it!!..........in short, that’s means they can lock you up for anything they classify as being “hate crime”..........your freedom has been removed !

That is why law need complete examination, resistance and re-examination to make sure it’s fit for purpose but only in the job it’s meant to do.

I agree Wilf with what you are saying, but this must have been look at in depth and had cross party support. As it stand now you catch some low life taking pictures up the skirt of your daughters or grand child and you tw@t him one your the one that gets done and he walks and then claims, cant be right.

Cheers Arry

Edited June 16, 2018 by Arry

[WILF 48,465]

Just now, Arry said:

I agree Wilf with what you are saying, but this must have been look at in depth and had cross party support. As it stand now you catch some low life taking pictures up the skirt of your daughters or grand child and you tw@t him one your the that gets done and he walks and then claims, cant be right.

Cheers Arry

I hear you mate, but I bet if you look it’s already covered by more than one law.

atb 

[Arry 23,509]

4 hours ago, WILF said:

I hear you mate, but I bet if you look it’s already covered by more than one law.

atb 

Well i'm not sure if it was the woman that brought the bill, but there was a woman at a concert she grabbed a photo of a guy ran to the police. No charges nothing they could do. I think that the phone cameras haven't been around long and they have improved so much and so easy to use in these cases, it need some legislation to cover the misuse.

Cheers Arry  

Edited June 16, 2018 by Arry

[Arry 23,509]

Found it.

http://www.dazeddigital.com/politics/article/38563/1/this-woman-is-fighting-to-make-upskirting-illegal

Cheers Arry

[ChrisJones 7,975]

1. He hasn't blocked the bill because it's a bad law. He's blocked the debate of the bill for as yet undisclosed reasons. He's got form for it too. He blocked the Hillsborough investigation because he believed the time should be spent debating MP's pensions.
2. Currently, voyeurism law doesn't cover upskirting. It's only considered voyeurism if the place the photograph was taken should be reasonably expected to provide privacy to the victim.
3. No one fully knows or understands the contents of the new bill because Chope has blocked the debate.

Personally, I see it as a gross invasion of privacy and I do believe it was wrong to block the debate of the bill. You have an inalienable right to privacy. If you consent to these pictures, fine. If not you should be protected.

Is the panel supporting Chope because they believe taking pictures of women's genitals without their knowledge is okay or is it because they believe the bill requires further scrutiny which Chope has obstructed outright?

[j j m 6,600]

filthy feckers id make them eat there mob

[WILF 48,465]

31 minutes ago, ChrisJones said:

1. He hasn't blocked the bill because it's a bad law. He's blocked the debate of the bill for as yet undisclosed reasons. He's got form for it too. He blocked the Hillsborough investigation because he believed the time should be spent debating MP's pensions.
2. Currently, voyeurism law doesn't cover upskirting. It's only considered voyeurism if the place the photograph was taken should be reasonably expected to provide privacy to the victim.
3. No one fully knows or understands the contents of the new bill because Chope has blocked the debate.

Personally, I see it as a gross invasion of privacy and I do believe it was wrong to block the debate of the bill. You have an inalienable right to privacy. If you consent to these pictures, fine. If not you should be protected.

Is the panel supporting Chope because they believe taking pictures of women's genitals without their knowledge is okay or is it because they believe the bill requires further scrutiny which Chope has obstructed outright?

I support him for the shear fact that in a time when so much law is nonsense, when it is used for all the wrong reasons and perverted in so many ways the last thing we need is more of it!.........no, I don’t think taking pictures of strange girls knickers in public is OK but then again I don’t think rewarding 30 years of blowing up kids on British and Irish streets with a highly paid job in government is OK either !

Ya know, there’s  a lot we should take seriously that we don’t and other things that mean nothing really that we are told are important.......

[mushroom 13,580]

1 hour ago, WILF said:

Just to add, I have daughters of 15 & 16 and I personally consider it much more important for them to live in as free a society as possible.......the thought that some fuckwit MP wants to make himself look good by making up some nonsense law that means, in the remote possibility, some pervert takes a picture of their knickers on the escalator he gets a fine and a term in the sex offenders register is completely meaningless when weighed against their greater freedom.

Freedom from the state matters, it’s the greatest gift we can give future generations.

My daughter who lives here is 15 and has that freedom to go wherever she wants in the city with friends. 

In the summer here, It's impossible to walk up an escalator and not get an eyeful of some birds minge hanging out. Had a couple of great views on my way home from the city last night, didn't take any photos mind

[ChrisJones 7,975]

1 minute ago, WILF said:

I support him for the shear fact that in a time when so much law is nonsense, when it is used for all the wrong reasons and perverted in so many ways the last thing we need is more of it!.........no, I don’t think taking pictures of strange girls knickers in public is OK but then again I don’t think rewarding 30 years of blowing up kids on British and Irish streets with a highly paid job in government is OK either !

Ya know, there’s  a lot we should take seriously that we don’t and other things that mean nothing really that we are told are important.......

I can agree with you part but this could actually be a rare occasion where all of the elected officials, bar one, has tabled a bill that will help protect vulnerable girls. In a country that doesn't have a written constitution that guarantees the right to privacy this evolution of policy has to continue in order for it to remain relevant. Sticking his fingers in his ears and saying 'La la la la la... not listening' is a waste of taxpayers money as this bill will come back for another go.

I also don't believe for a minute that government use their time efficiently but completely shutting down the process defeats the whole point of having them in the first place. We have a bloated inefficient process and someone is making that process even more inefficient. I just hope that no one's kids are subject to this practice while the Right Honourable Mr Chope submits his parliamentary overtime expenses.