Jump to content
IGNORED

Banning Orders


i hate rovers

Recommended Posts

A Football Banning Order is not handed out by the police, it has to come from the courts.

Contrary to popular belief, they do not just do things because the police ask them to, it would need some kind of evidence.

Unless you can prove otherwise.....

Where did I say it wasn't?

From your comments it is clear you are unaware of how these bans work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you saying that courts are imposing 3-year Banning Orders on fans with no conviction or even a charge?

The Police need neither to apply for a ban via a civil court. You appear to have a misconception between the use of civil and criminal courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Police need neither to apply for a ban via a civil court. You appear to have a misconception between the use of civil and criminal courts.

 

Yes Football Banning Orders are issued by Civil Courts, but that doesn't mean that they just get handed out because the police ask for it.

 

There needs to be at least evidence that banning the individual concerned will reduce the risk of trouble at football matches.

 

They might get it wrong sometimes, but that is why there is an appeal process that can, on occasion, get a ban overturned.

 

The don't just do it for a laugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Football Banning Orders are issued by Civil Courts, but that doesn't mean that they just get handed out because the police ask for it.

There needs to be at least evidence that banning the individual concerned will reduce the risk of trouble at football matches.

They might get it wrong sometimes, but that is why there is an appeal process that can, on occasion, get a ban overturned.

The don't just do it for a laugh.

Banning orders are handed out by civil courts because the Police apply for a ban. So yes bans are handed out because the Police ask for them.

You appear to have conceded that a ban can be applied for without any charge or conviction being made, which is correct.

There needs to be at least evidence that banning the individual concerned will reduce the risk of trouble at football matches .. And that requires a threshold that is almost non existent = Suspicion is enough.

They might get it wrong sometimes, but that is why there is an appeal process that can, on occasion, get a ban overturned ... Which takes months and can cost thousands.

Banning any individual reduces the possibility of violence to a degree.

No other strata of society is treated on the basis of being punished because individuals may do something, that they haven't done, but may in the future ... It is ludicrous and like something out of 1984.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No other strata of society is treated on the basis of being punished because individuals may do something, that they haven't done, but may in the future ... It is ludicrous and like something out of 1984.

 

There we can agree.

 

Unfortunately it is a situation brought upon us by generations of idiots that are unable to conduct themselves in a reasonable manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There we can agree.

 

Unfortunately it is a situation brought upon us by generations of idiots that are unable to conduct themselves in a reasonable manner.

 

Read right through this thread and that is a depressing comment.

 

You agree its like 1984 and yet justify it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That can't be legal :laugh:

This was enforced upon a City fan I know who was banned from being within a mile of AG on match days, so I'm afraid it can be. The only other alternative he had was spending the entire day outside of the one mile exclusion zone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...