The Scottish government’s legislation is frankly unworkable. I worry it may stifle honestly expressed, contentious views, says Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins
If even the Guardian won’t get behind your Hate Crime Act, maybe it’s worth having a wee think about it?
In the article you’ve just linked to she has quoted David Kennedy who provides no evidence to his claim that the act would undermine public trust in policing. He does point out that the police have not been provided with funding for training on this subject which is far easier to believe - fair enough.
She also quotes JKR, who is as far from a balanced opinion as it gets in Scotland. This quote is not even worth the pixels it’s viewed on.
She mentions a demonstration from two TERF groups, and the fucking Scottish Family Party who are a bunch of cavemen.
She doesn’t quote any third parties who are in favour of the bill.
This is not balanced reporting.
Simon Jenkins does not seem to understand the viewpoint of people who are not white men. He has absolutely no problem with being in the men only club. His opinion is only that, and I don’t think it’s worth much at all.
David Kennedy who provides no evidence to his claim that the act would undermine public trust in policing
Given that he is the head of the Police Federation I suppose him giving testimony is his evidence.
She also quotes JKR
It is kind of hard to avoid mentioning her in this story. She’s front page in a few of the broadsheets today.
This is not balanced reporting.
I’m not sure it was meant to be a ‘both sides’ piece. The head of the Police federations’ concerns alone aare enough for a few columns explaining what those concerns are.
Simon Jenkins does not seem to understand the viewpoint of people who are not white men.
I’m not sure we can reduce someone to their skin colour or sex. He’s an establishment figure to be sure, but a long respected columnist in the UK media. Perhaps his conversations with Judges in the Garrick give him access to legal opinions not often made public.
Worthy of consideration, especially from a left leaning publication like the Guardian.
In the article you’ve just linked to she has quoted David Kennedy who provides no evidence to his claim that the act would undermine public trust in policing. He does point out that the police have not been provided with funding for training on this subject which is far easier to believe - fair enough.
She also quotes JKR, who is as far from a balanced opinion as it gets in Scotland. This quote is not even worth the pixels it’s viewed on.
She mentions a demonstration from two TERF groups, and the fucking Scottish Family Party who are a bunch of cavemen.
She doesn’t quote any third parties who are in favour of the bill.
This is not balanced reporting.
Simon Jenkins does not seem to understand the viewpoint of people who are not white men. He has absolutely no problem with being in the men only club. His opinion is only that, and I don’t think it’s worth much at all.
Given that he is the head of the Police Federation I suppose him giving testimony is his evidence.
It is kind of hard to avoid mentioning her in this story. She’s front page in a few of the broadsheets today.
I’m not sure it was meant to be a ‘both sides’ piece. The head of the Police federations’ concerns alone aare enough for a few columns explaining what those concerns are.
I’m not sure we can reduce someone to their skin colour or sex. He’s an establishment figure to be sure, but a long respected columnist in the UK media. Perhaps his conversations with Judges in the Garrick give him access to legal opinions not often made public.
Worthy of consideration, especially from a left leaning publication like the Guardian.
That’s just deferring to authority; Kennedy doesn’t present any evidence via reports, statistics or analysis so what he says is worthless.
Simon Jenkins’ characteristics are entirely relevant to his lack of value in this conversation about hate crime against trans persons.