The Flying Rodent expands on the same Blood & Treasure post I commented on below and argues:
Similarly, judges frown upon people being assaulted in the Houses of Parliament and attacks on policemen, not least because they also frown upon attacks on judges, but also because the H’es of P and the cops are symbols of democracy and good order. For obvious reasons, those who make the law want citizens to think twice before getting into boxing matches with the constabulary.
Now, you might think this is unfair. You might think it’s scandalous and symptomatic of whatever societal ills, but the one thing it isn’t is politicised. Get caught committing these types of offences, and it’s Wormwood Scrubs for you. If anything, half of these folk could’ve been given far worse sentences and they wouldn’t have had many grounds for complaint.
With which I disagree much more than I did with Jamie’s post. Not so much the idea that if you engage in civil disobedience you should be prepared for jail time, but the idea that the laws under which you are convicted are not politicised. If you punish an attack on a cop more than the same attack on a citizen because the former is a symbol of “democracy and good order”, how is that not a political decision? That’s the state arguing that crimes against its representatives are more harmful than crimes against ordinary people so should be punished harsher. Which is a view of the state that’s political, small c conservative.
Furthermore, consider Otis Ferry. Remember him? The twatty son of popular rock star Bryan Ferry, who invaded parliament back in 2004 to intimidate MPs into voting against the hunting ban? He got a 450 pound fine for his offence, but Jonnie Marbles got six weeks. Same offence, well, minus one pie, different punishment.