Comment on Sikh 'barred from Birmingham jury service' for religious sword

• people_are_cute@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Yes, I do.

  Then you’re stupid.

  But even if it was for clout, it wouldn’t change anything about it being allowed.

  You can say that you don’t think religions should have excemptions, but that’s another topic. As of this incident the excemption exists and he should be able to carry a blade according to the restrictions in there.

  The job of every guard is to look out for threats. If the guard feels it is in the interest of everyone’s safety that a participant removes a literal weapon from their person before entering a place of importance, it is completely reasonable on his behalf. That the participant is feeling sentimental about it is not the guard’s fault and neither should it be.

  source

  • withabeard@feddit.uk ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    The job of every guard is to look out for threats.

    And this “threat” has already had an exception written into the Security staffing standards. So, despite what that individual thinks, the item is not a security threat and the staff member is in the wrong.

    Apologies have been made, and training hopefully improved.

    source
  • HeartyBeast@kbin.social ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    The job of every guard is to look out for threats.

    The job of the security guard is also to understand UK law.

    Section 139(5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 allows the wearing of the kirpan for religious reasons. The Offensive Weapons Act 2019 reaffirms the right of the Sikh community to possess and supply kirpans. Section 47 of the Act provides new defences for some articles such as the kirpan and ‘katar’ (Sikh ceremonial weapon) to enable possession in private for religious reasons and to enable them to be presented.

    Unless the guy was waving it about, the security guard was simply wrong - which is why an apology was issued.

    Then you’re stupid.

    Classy./

    source
  • Vegasimov@reddthat.com ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    It does sound like some ‘sovereign citizen’ bollocks

    “Aha! You say I’m not allowed a weapon in a courtroom, yet I have on my person 5 items beginning with the letter K. Hence I’m allowed a knife of up to 5 inches actually Mr security guard”

    source

    • Chariotwheel@kbin.social ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Difference being of course, that the exception actual exists in current rules opposed to most of the wank sovereign citizens make up.

      Like, he didn't make it up on the spot, did he.

      source

      • HerbalGamer@lemm.ee ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Difference being of course, that the exception actual exists in current rules

        which in itself is simply ridiculous

        source
    • HeartyBeast@kbin.social ⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Except, of course it is codified into English law, and therefore its the almost exact opposite of 'sov cit bollocks'

      source