Flag-Raising Activist Arrested for “Causing Alarm and Distress”
The leader of the Raise the Colours campaign group, Ryan Bridge, has been arrested on suspicion of causing religious and racially aggravated harassment over putting up St George and Union flags in Oxford. The Telegraph has the story.
Ryan Bridge, a co-founder of Raise the Colours, was detained by Thames Valley Police for allegedly causing alarm or distress to members of the public in Oxford on Tuesday.
In recent days, the campaign group posted footage of its members erecting Union and Saint George flags across the city.
In a video posted on Facebook after his release, Bridge said: “I’ve just been let out – 18-and-a-half hours for a public order Section 5 causing people alarm and distress. The world’s gone mad.
“Me putting the flag up in my country is causing alarm and distress to certain members of the public. It’s an absolute disgrace and I’ve had enough, as we all have, we’ve got to march on, we’ve got to fight on. We’ve got a fight on our hands.”
Bridge, from Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, said that his bail conditions meant he was banned from the wider Oxfordshire area.
A police spokesman said an investigation was launched following reports of potential public order offences in Abingdon Road, Oxford.
On Monday, Oxfordshire county council issued a legal notice banning the group from putting up flags, arguing it was an “act of intimidation and division”.
The group has been told that it could face civil and criminal proceedings if it fails to comply with the legal notice.
Operation Raise the Colours is an online campaign that involves displaying the Union Flag and St George’s Cross in public places.
Critics of the campaign have associated it with far-Right activism, with many local authorities removing the flags whenever they appear.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I don’t get this, it seems planned to wind up and anger a certain section of the country, those of us who are happy to see our country’s flag waving, wherever it is flying, rather than flags of other countries and organisations that it seems are ok to be attached to lampposts. There are surely any number of benign charges that could have been tried, under local bye laws, trespass, unauthorised attachment to a council owned structure, damage (if the post was scratched), anything really, but causing alarm and distress by flying the national symbol! Who, living in this country is distressed by the flag. I bet if they were stranded in some hell hole and an army unit arrived to save them, they wouldn’t be alarmed or distressed by the sight of the Union flag.
To me, I think the next logical step – which would be the fairest for all – would be just having a blanket ban on all flags being put up in public places. I think what’s rightly got a lot of patriots’ backs up is seeing countless crummy foreign flags strewn around their neighbourhoods, they then respond in kind with their own flags then cue the predictable and blatant double-standards and two-tier application of the law. It should be all are allowed or nothing and the law should be applied equally.
We should never ever have to see another crappy Palestine or Pakistan flag on a lamppost if this guy is getting prosecuted for hanging England’s flag in his own country.
People can hang their flags from their homes or cars ’til their hearts’ content, but this public ‘flag wars’ thing is just antagonistic, tit for tat and helps nobody. Authorities need to step up and just announce “enough”, and that should apply to everybody.
I disagree. People should be allowed to attach bits of fabric wherever they like! 😉
Whether you agree or not is neither here nor there. The issue is more *where* the flag is being attached, not which flag it is. There’s also the issue of applying the law equally, irrespective of which flag it is. For instance: flags flown from lampposts need to have been granted permission from the Highway Authority first;
”Erecting most flags in the UK do not require planning permission if they comply with certain standard rules and they are on private property.
But when flags have been attached to council-owned assets such as lampposts and bridges, it is illegal unless prior permission is sought and obtained.
Lampposts are part of the public highway infrastructure, and the Highways Act 1980 prohibits placing or attaching anything to a public highway without consent.
Permission can be obtained to erect flags on some infrastructure by contacting a local council’s highways department or National Highways for major roads.”
https://www.aol.co.uk/news/laws-flying-st-georges-flags-184551500.html
Didn’t see much enforcement when all those shitty Palestine and ISIS flags were everywhere did we?
The relevant section seems to be 132 Unauthorised marks on highways. (1)A person who, without either the consent of the highway authority for the highway in question or an authorisation given by or under an enactment or a reasonable excuse, paints or otherwise inscribes or affixes any picture, letter, sign or other mark upon the surface of a highway or upon any tree, structure or works on or in a highway is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding [F600level 4 on the standard scale]. This act obviously wasn’t used here at all. What was used is section 5 of the public order act which says (1)A person is guilty of an offence if he— […] (b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [F1or abusive], within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby. And I think the complaint that it’s absurd and wrong for councils to declare the flag of England or the Union Jack a sign or other visible representation which is threatening or abusive is absolutely justified. These are both official flags of the country and flown from public locations, eg,… Read more »
Not on my property.
I know this is unusual but I disagree Mogs. This is Britain and the only flags which should be allowed on public display are the Union Jack and our constituent countries, all others should be banned with the exception of the Stars and Stripes. All the rest can do one.
Nasty, imperialist, chauvinist – damned right.
I don’t care.
So you’re onboard with people flouting the law as it stands and not being held to account for their actions, just as long as it’s one of the British flags being illegally flown? 🤔Just making sure I understand you correctly.
”It is against the law to attach anything to a lamp post without permission from the local highway authority. This is covered under Section 178 of the Highways Act 1980.”
https://www.westnorthants.gov.uk/highways-licensing-and-advertising/street-lighting-attachments
Completely disagree. The English flag is the national flag of our country to ban it would be an act of treason. I will continue to proudly fly the flag of St George on my front lawn and if anyone tries to take it down they will suffer the consequences.
Who’s talking about banning it? Who’s talking about removing flags from people’s private property?🤔
Perhaps try reading my posts using your eyes next time.
My point is if there’s laws in place then they need to be adhered to and apply to ALL, not applied selectively. Not really sure I can be any more concise then that, tbh.
Yes that is right kowtow to the minority. What on earth is wrong with the Brits? Fly your flags with pride people. It us your country!
The only people I see kowtowing to the minority are the authorities, if they’re allowing certain flags to be flown but prosecuting people who fly others.
So do you think the Highways Act 1980 should only apply to the Muslims sticking their foreign flags on lampposts, but the Brits sticking their country’s flags up on ‘public furniture’ without consent from the council first ought to get a free pass because the law doesn’t apply to them? So you’re advocating for a two-tier enforcement of the law, basically?
The Highways Act is irrelevant here because it wasn’t used. In addition to the outrage of declaring the flags of the UK or England a threatening or abusive symbol, such a public order offense is punishable with a fine and not an open-ended incarceration under inhumane circumstances¹.
¹ If police station cells in Oxford are similar to those in Lower Early, they will have been brightly illuminated all the time, thus making sleep virtually impossible, and will have contained a water tap labelled not for drinking
the prisoners was supposed to use for exactly that.
The Highways Act 1980 is relevant to my original post and point, though. Nowhere in my posts have I condoned somebody getting arrested and detained for 18hrs, charged with causing “alarm and distress” over sticking flags up. This specific law ( Section 132 ) is relevant because it demonstrates there’s a law in place which states you need to get permission from the highway authority before hanging anything from ‘public furniture’, but everybody’s flouting it and expecting zero consequences. Muslims are subject to this law the same as British patriots because it’s nothing to do with which flag it is if you weren’t granted permission to hang it first. The hypocrisy of the DS echo chamber is off the charts as it seems people are happy to accept two-tier law enforcement, but only if it favours them. There may as well be no law in place at all if everybody gets to ignore and flout it with impunity. But “rules for thee but not for me” strikes again, very similar to the whole free speech thing, people demonstrate their double standards. Seems I’m the only person able to look at this issue with any objectivity and not become overly emotional.🙄… Read more »
According to himself, this guy was accused of a section 5 public order offence, that is, intentionally create a threatening or abusive display of some kind in a public location where people supposed to be threatened and abused will likely see it. If all he did was hang the English or British flag somewhere, that’s as absurd as tyrannical. That he could have been accused of violating a different law (the Highways Act) which would have authorized the council to remove the flag despite it’s someone else’s property and fine the person who put it there is irrelevant because this didn’t happen. People are (rightfully) complaining about this supposed public order offence. They’re not complaining about the Highways Act which wasn’t used because without it having been used, they cannot complain about that. I’ve watched the video but it’s pretty inconclusive. There’s a woman lying below a van (a white van, mind you) who refuses to talk to the police while the owner of the van (Ryan) is still there. She can be heard to say “Officer, why is he still here?” Ryan than says “I can’t leave, it’s my vehicle!” Next thing, he’s standing upright at the side of… Read more »
Yes I saw that there was clearly a bit edited out from when he was on the ground then he was pushed against the van. It’s a shame we don’t see what was occurring leading up to the woman crawling under the van. It’s all very peculiar and abnormal behaviour, not to mention very antagonistic. But nobody should be arrested for raising a flag ( even without permission from the council ), or for waving a placard or for just saying/posting words. That’s why I know Ryan can’t have been arrested just for flying a flag because why didn’t they arrest him 3 months ago, for example? And why just him and none of his mates he does it with? Probably that woman was out to stir up trouble and anyone refusing to get out from underneath someone’s vehicle doesn’t exactly have benign intentions, nor are they a reasonable person of sound mind. If anything it should’ve been HER who was arrested for a Public Order offence. He should’ve just got hold of her foot and hauled her out. It would’ve been the same outcome. But what’s happening with these ‘flag wars’ is patriots go around putting them up, then… Read more »
Haven’t you missed the point that this arrest was under the completely spurious ground of (allegedly) “causing alarm and distress”?
I note your appreciation of the double standards. And I appreciate the sentiment that all of of this is symbolic anyway. Who, hanging those ubiquitous Ukrainian flags, would actually go and fight for Ukraine in the hell of a besieged city? Or those hanging Palestinian flags – would they go and live in Gaza and fight off the IDF?
I take your point and conclude the opposite: all flags should be allowed. And certain, “non-global”, unvirtuous flags should not be taken down on fee-fee grounds.
Of course you don’t get it. It makes no sense.
Britain has become a ridiculous country with ridiculous people everywhere doing ridiculous things.
Trying to make sense of it is like trying to make sense of what goes on inside a psychiatric ward. it’s more likely to drive you mad than get you to make sense of anything.
But this is what the mediocre collectivists who have taken over have accomplished. They’ve set out to tear down everything that is valuable and good and coherent. It’s their revolution to destroy everything with their relativism so that their mediocrity can thrive.
The people claiming “alarm and distress” should be publicly identified. Of course any number could come forward for the sake of a tenner but without accusers this charge is simply made up. This convenient law is simply a catch-all available to any police force bent enough to abuse the law, which is exactly what has happened.
I’ve quoted the text of the law in another comment. In my opinion, abuse is the only intended use of it as it just refers to signs and visible presentations which are threatening or abusive. As there’s no definition of that, any official can freely make up his own, even totally absurd ones (like in this case).
And this has some wider implications because it also refers to writings, that is, statements made in public. Eg, let’s assume it would be this writing:
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them.
Can anyone think of a group on whose behalf a Labour politician could perhaps declare this a threatening or abusive statement?
Anyone upset by the sight of our national flag in this country either needs help or a one way air ticket.
No British politician should be allowed to declare official or well-established symbols of the state or its nations threatening or abusive, especially not based on the unproven accusation that some people employing them would be far-right activists, whatever that’s precisely supposed to be. Guilt by association is already fallacious when applied to people. Applying it to things is totally mental.
The enemy (the anti-whitists and anglophobes) think that “history is on their side” and that we will meekly accept the deletion of our people from our country.
The Ukrainian flags could not go up fast enough when the Russian/ Ukrainian proxy war started. But put your own flag up and get thrown in jail? The Uk is in serious trouble. By the way someone in Exeter has done a lovely job of flying the British flags along a main road in Exeter. It is refreshing to see someone take pride in their country. Wish there were more.
Oxfordshire Council are acting ILLEGALLY. Flying flags: a plain English guide – GOV.UK “ Flags which do not need consent The full list of flags that do not require consent are: ANY COUNTRY’S NATIONAL FLAG, civil ensign or civil air ensign The flag of the Commonwealth, the United Nations or any other international organisation of which the United Kingdom is a member A flag of any island, county, district, borough, burgh, parish, city, town or village within the United Kingdom The flag of the Black Country, East Anglia, Wessex, any Part of Lincolnshire, any Riding of Yorkshire or any historic county within the United Kingdom The flag of Saint David The flag of Saint Patrick The flag of any administrative area within any country outside the United Kingdom Any flag of His Majesty’s forces The Armed Forces Day flag “ “The use of the word “country” in (1) and (7) of the list above, includes any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and any British Overseas Territory. The flags of St George and St Andrew are recognised as THE NATIONAL FLAGS OF ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND, but the flags of St David and St Patrick are listed separately as they… Read more »
Hopefully the free speech union are helping him. And doing a fund raiser. This kind of harassment by the authority’s needs to be delt with swiftly.
Flag of St George racist, ‘righ wing’, divisive and intolerant ???? F Off.
This is the demise of a country in real time.
Another ‘conspiracy theory’ now fact.
But if Ryan et al were hoisting the Faggot No Pride Flag, BLM, the Hammer and Sickle, the EU, the UN, the black flag of Jihad, the Palestinian Jihad-Mafia emblem – no problems. All the idiots would applaud and scream ‘values’.
Absolutely.
Nobody putting up any of the flags you listed above would be hindered in any way whatsoever. Not only that, he would be applauded for promoting diversity.
👍👍👍
So Ryan Bridge, leader of the Raise the Colours campaign, was arrested for putting up an England National Flag in England, which he has every legal right to do, but when hundreds of Ethnic African rioters stormed Clapham High Street with violent looting, “causing alarm and distress”, only 3 of them were arrested.
M&S Turns on Sadiq Khan With Warning That “Routine” Lawlessness is Putting Public at Risk – The Daily Sceptic
Our Two Tier justice system at work under El Starmeri.
Ridiculous Britain.
Hope the FSU offers to defend him
There were a few blokes waving England flags from a bridge over the M1 as we drove up it earlier today
Oh well done those Patriots! I hope you tooted your horn in support. 🙂
Yup
I’ve just been checking on a well known rape gang case in Oxford where the rapists were finally convicted in 2013 to 2019 for crimes which dated from the period 1998 to 2012. So the convictions occurred up to 20 years after the crimes.
What do you think are the chances that other rape gangs are still operating in Thames Valley Police’s area?
But when it comes to a really major crime, like flying our country’s flag, then you can rely on TVP to pull out all the stops.
They probably “reward” themselves with tubs of Cadburys Heroes.
Wow.
But the flag of a regime that slaughtered 30,000 plus of its own people, regularly tortures and disappears women for disobeying the dress code and whose leader wrote a book on how to successfully rape a 9 year old, is absolutely welcome.
Liz Leffman, 10 Park Street, Charlbury, OX7 3PS
In full view on Companies House website, where she is registered as associated with 3 companies which match her Declaration of Interests section on the OCC website. None of them have a turnover bigger than a school tuck shop.
Good sleuthing! The woman has no legal right to issue a county-wide ban on The National Flag of England, nor any ban on it at all, and is therefore following the Marxist Common Purpose motto to “Go Beyond Authority”. Let her lawyers lead her a merry dance down the garden path, only to get hammered in the courts and then chucked out of office for wasting taxpayers’ money … the Marxist Cow!
Lib Dem council bans group from putting up St George’s flags as leader accuses them of ‘intimidating’ residents | Daily Mail Online
Oxford….say no more
I wonder if the police’s assertion that the flag raising caused people alarm and distress was genuine, i.e. that specific members of the public (or their psychologists or psychiatrists!) actually told the police that it had this effect on them. I somehow doubt it. Just a woke trick to justify an arrest, when there is no other legal basis for it. I hope he sues for wrongful arrest.
If these woke wet wipes are distressed by the British flags they should be told to leave our Country. They clearly don’t belong here.