highwaystar101 said:
Didn't you bring up the fact that St. Georges day could cause violence so the pubs were closed in certain areas where violence is likely? I used another unrelated scenario where violence is likely to occur to show that the same precautions are made. I am not drawing a comparison between the two underlying causes of the violence for the two scenarios at all. I am saying that the solution to reducing the likelihood for violence is the same for a number of scenarios. For all intents and purposes I could also draw on the fact that pubs are closed near protests for the same reason. Pubs are an area where violent behaviour is likely to be incubated when tensions are high. It would be just as accurate a scenario as the football one. No-one is actually trying to stop you from celebrating St. George's day, or at least no-one with any actual power to make you stop. I think it is a very sad situation that precautions have to be made to stop violence on St. George's day because a few small minded people want violence. But I do agree that it is a good idea to make precautions because we don't want violence in locations and times where potential violence is high. We can't stop people wanting to be violent and that's sad, so we just have to try and make the probability as low as possible. It's sensible planning. Nothing else. Your right as an individual to celebrate St. George's day still exists and is as strong as ever. |
Why would violence be likely on St. Georges Day in Bradford?
Anyway, this isn't even on the topic as Khuutra said. It's just spawned from me having a rant about how shitty England is to live in.
![]()







