Ok then. Soviet Union had free speech too. Nobody got arrested for criticizing Reagan or Churchill.

Clearly the point is clear. Why nitpick pointlessly?

You've missed my point entirely, by a country mile.

Someone above asked me how it was nonsense. I responded that people parotting the point about getting arrested for criticising the king is nonsense - like for instance, my American coworkers asking if that's true, because they read it somewhere on the internet. That is nonsense.

If you want to argue with this point please do, but also please observe the rest of my comment and especially the parts that I haven't actually said.

▲

subscribed 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Let me repeat reports about these arrests here as well, for your convenience.

6 people got arrested for trying to say "Not my king!" BEFORE his coronation: https://londondaily.com/not-my-king-anti-monarchy-protesters...

Before they had a chance of protest. After months of discussing the planned protest in details and getting a green light from the Met Police: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65542558

52 people were arrested DURING the coronation, for example for holding a placard "not my king": https://londondaily.com/over-52-anti-monarchy-protestors-arr...

Police arrested despite KNOWING it's the member of public doesn't commit any offence: https://novaramedia.com/2025/03/11/police-officer-who-arrest...

I'm afraid you unwittingly misled your coworkers.

▲

gambiting 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm aware you are still going to twist what I said to prove your point, but I really don't fancy repeating the exact same point for the third time just so you can say something unrelated.

▲

Dylan16807 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

They already said you can get in trouble for [planning] protesting. They said you won't get in trouble for online criticism. Your links about protests aren't proving anything.

	▲	subscribed 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's not in the comment I'm responding to, >> Someone above asked me how it was nonsense. I responded that people parotting the point about getting arrested for criticising the king is nonsense Protesting against the king is criticising the king IMO. I didn't see his quantifier, since I would agree that online critique of the king in particular is not yet penalised. Not surprising you're implying bad faith though, if we're splitting the hair this thin. (and this specific planning of the protest was so heavy handed, because it belong to one of the two naughty protests, environmental. The second naughty one is protesting against the genocide. The rest is okay)

▲

2ahg7 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, and no one mentioned parroting the king in this thread. Journalists under known observation from the state, which the UK does arrest from time to time, were mentioned however.

You can use other European countries like The Netherlands, which is a lawless police state with a liberal cover, as well.