Freedom group to protest in Worthing

A protest group has said it will picket outside Worthing Police Station in anger at “an outrageous attack on freedom”.

Members of the Worthing Freedom Campaign have announced that they plan to picket outside Worthing Police Station in Chatsworth Road, Worthing, at noon on Saturday, June 9.

They made the claim after Sussex Police and Worthing Borough Council announced that a dispersal order was being introduced in Worthing.

This came into power on Friday, June 1 and will last the whole summer.

It means police will have the power to move groups of two or more people on if they feel they are causing trouble.

But the Worthing Freedom Campaign – whose symbol incorporates the Sussex Police emblem and a Swastika – said they were not happy about this.

It is not a blanket ban on groups or a curfew on young people – powers to disperse people are only used if they are acting antisocially

Acting Superintendent Ian Pollard

They said in a statement: “An outrageous attack on our freedom has been launched by Sussex Police in collaboration with Worthing Borough Council.

"They have imposed on us the type of draconian legislation that would normally be deployed by a dictatorship trying to put down a revolution.

“The police have said it is about protecting businesses and the council say it is about the Jubilee and Olympic festivities.

"This is not good enough. We don’t need this fascist law in Worthing. This is a town not a prison camp.”

Acting Superintendent Ian Pollard, Sussex Police’s district commander for Adur and Worthing, said: “We are aware of some people’s concerns about how the Section 30 order was introduced and how it will be used.

“Unfortunately, there has been quite a lot of misinterpretation about the order online, which has heightened this concern.

"I can reassure that it was introduced specifically to help tackle antisocial behaviour by some street drinkers in the area, which was reported as a problem by the community.

"It is not a blanket ban on groups or a curfew on young people – powers to disperse people are only used if they are acting antisocially.

“I’ve already spoken to a number of people who raised the concerns to explain when and why the powers are used and would ask any other people who would like more information to contact me or their neighbourhood policing team.”

Comments(18)

AmboGuy says...
4:24pm Tue 5 Jun 12

That's amazing. I thought surely it must be impossible to protest anywhere else than Brighton! Please please every other protest group follow their lead and take your protests to Worthing.

Maxwell's Ghost says...
4:30pm Tue 5 Jun 12

I think it's a good idea. There are large numbers of old folk on the sea front who congregate and are generally rude.
Round them up.

sbiscorrupt says...
4:35pm Tue 5 Jun 12

Ian Pollard: "I can reassure that it was introduced specifically to help tackle antisocial behaviour by some street drinkers in the area, which was reported as a problem by the community".....

But there is no need for a section 30 imposition, as there are already plenty of laws to deal with 'street drinkers', along with existing alcohol restriction areas...Why don't the police use these existing powers instead of this indiscriminate blanket measure?...

The acting superintendant speaks with forked tongue it appears!!

billy goat-gruff says...
4:53pm Tue 5 Jun 12

the terrorists have already won if our freedoms are being eroded on the pretext of tackling 'anti-social behaviour'!

AmboGuy says...
5:15pm Tue 5 Jun 12

billy goat-gruff wrote:
the terrorists have already won if our freedoms are being eroded on the pretext of tackling 'anti-social behaviour'!
'terrorists' !!! You really are a muppet.

pwlr1966 says...
5:56pm Tue 5 Jun 12

pay attention Brighton councilors, we don't have to be held to ransom by the "great unwashed", there are laws to prevent this minority ruining my city & my right to enjoy my freedoms

Royal Window Cleaners says...
6:08pm Tue 5 Jun 12

a bit draconian if you ask me Worthing is a quiet little town no need for anti terror laws

Maxwell's Ghost says...
6:54pm Tue 5 Jun 12

the brighton councillors are the great unwashed silly.
There are a few of them with proper jobs the rest are third sector pretenders.

D360 says...
7:23pm Tue 5 Jun 12

A little town wants to deal with drunken yobs and already there is a campaign group using swastikas and Argus commenters taking about terrorists! Got to laugh really

Dr.Draconian says...
10:56pm Tue 5 Jun 12

Bit daft really, old bill will just move them on using the new powers... #WFCdonuts

mimseycal says...
11:07pm Tue 5 Jun 12

Not if they don't behave in an antisocial manner ;)

Andy R says...
8:18am Wed 6 Jun 12

AmboGuy wrote:
That's amazing. I thought surely it must be impossible to protest anywhere else than Brighton! Please please every other protest group follow their lead and take your protests to Worthing.
Really? You didn't think protests happened anywhere other than Brighton?

You really have managed to sum yourself up quite nicely in three short lines of text.

Well done.

mimseycal says...
9:08am Wed 6 Jun 12

Ever heard of tongue in cheek Andy R?

EDL Supporter says...
10:29am Wed 6 Jun 12

mimseycal wrote:
Ever heard of tongue in cheek Andy R?
Clearly not, I would say that he's the one who's managed to sum himself up quite well with his post!

Well he's not too bright you know!

gaz scott says...
3:20pm Wed 6 Jun 12

mimseycal wrote:
Ever heard of tongue in cheek Andy R?
Actually AmboGuy's pretty good at taking things literally when it suits him.

mimseycal says...
4:17pm Wed 6 Jun 12

Mayhaps ... but this time, it certainly was tongue in cheek!

AmboGuy says...
10:46pm Wed 6 Jun 12

mimseycal wrote:
Mayhaps ... but this time, it certainly was tongue in cheek!
I think this has gone waaaay over Gaz's head....again.

I guess the average SmashEDO thug isn't the sharpest tool in the box!!!

Joelshep says...
1:08pm Thu 14 Jun 12

'Think for yourself, question authority'
This goes down to an individual level, other than purely for our 'professional name tags'.
I had a great long chat with Ian Pollard, and was very comforted by his faith and trust in his team at Worthing. However, it did take a few takes to get the moral questions of "Is this necessary, with the powers of law & section 5 that already cover this behaviour", and that 'thought police' (and thought PCSO's) that can prevent behaviour in people that they think may possibly occur, abit too far.
It just makes you wonder the motives of whoever originally wrote this legislation.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree