Friday, June 04, 2010

Vandals deface Uffington White Horse

According to this BBC report, the head and eye of the ancient monument had been sprayed with purple paint and a banner that read "fathers 4 justice stop the secret family courts" was recovered from the scene. Purple was, of course, the favoured colour of protest of the old Fathers 4 Justice group. Here we go again... ?

[Thanks to the tireless John Hirst of Jailhouselawyer's Blog for the link to this story.]

4 comments:

  1. Purple is also the colour of Unlock Democracy...

    ReplyDelete
  2. One night every other weekend as standard is rubbish, the family courts need to change.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm afraid I have no time whatever for "Fathers for Justice". Everything they've ever done makes me think they're simply a bunch of right-wing bullies who like to cause trouble. It' no surprise they should indulge in cultural vandalism, and if they keep going, or keep being resurrected, I'm sure they'll turn to violence one day. There's already been that incident where it's thought some of them may have planned to kidnap Leo Blair. I see them as sort of apprentice terrorists, a bit like the worst of the animal rights people twenty or thirty years ago.

    The way to deal with this sort of thing is not to "address the root of the problem" by making concessions to them. That'll just encourage them. The key is to realise that their anti-social behaviour is a problem in itself, quite separate from anything that happens in the family law system.

    What we should do is make it clear that their cause and arguments will be completely ignored as long as they carry on damaging property and harassing people. I'm not saying that'll make them go away; but it's the best strategy we could adopt if we want to encourage lobby groups to use reason and argument rather than bullying.

    It might also be useful to study them as an example of the way educated men can be radicalised into acts of politicised aggression. That's an important subject at the moment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks, Carl. Interesting view. The only problem would be refusing good reform simply so as not to be seen to be making concessions.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.