BAN the hood for good, says Sunday Express


David Davis

It says it here.

In not sure that hoodies aren’t just reacting logically, to the very illiberal surveillance culture and police state that we seem to have allowed to be created around us, while we slept.

Our masters have slipped so far down the one-way-slide into full nazism that even nominally “modern conservative” papers like the Express (that is to say, papers which overtly support a Big State and its actions “for the children”) get away with the chorus of “ban it”, whenever faced with anything invonvenient to deal with except by a change of philosophical outlook.

About these ads

5 responses to “BAN the hood for good, says Sunday Express

  1. I’ve lost count of how many times in the last couple of weeks I’ve heard the phrase – “to protect the children” poppping up on radio, tv, and newspapers, about measures the government (from the pressure of certain groups and individuals) is gladly considering, to get their filthy paws on determining what people should see on the internet. Now it is being used in terms of clothing out on the street. Several comments from people on that website express how they know a lot of kids wearing hoodies who are certainly not knife wielding thugs. But does anybody care? No. Our nation seems to hold itself up as some utopia of freedom, when the opposite is happening. The most immediate examples of ‘clothes police’ that come to my mind right now are the Revolutionary guard in Iran, who among other duties have to keep an eye out for people wearing clothing deemed problematic to the society they are regulating.

  2. Can I put up the hood on my anorak when it rains? Will there be a government mandated level of precipitation beyond which hood-wearing is acceptable?

  3. I suspect that if you are real hoodie, from, say, Beckenham, with a knife, and you assault only white small shopkeepers for a living, then the EU-precipitation (minimum-permitted wetting per minute per capita – per chipped citizen before hood-wearing) (2007-EU-401/A)-level-directive will not need to apply to you.

  4. Its a sad, sad affair when we live in a country where we insist on blaming everything and everyone else for crime instead of actually tackling the problem itself.

    Lets ignore how the government stops parents from slapping their kids, teachers from shouting at kids in the classroom and the police from actually arresting anyone.

    Lets ignore how ASBOs are nothing more then a badge of honour, and how the government continues to blame anti-social behavour on “bad eductions, bad family situations and coming from a council estate” and they responde by saying “to fix it, we will just pump more money into the community and let them build a climbing frame”!

    I mean… its not like any of the MPs in power, have litte chav kids who probably run around the streets at nights, binge drinking, having underage sex and smashing windows.

    No nooo! The MPs all have sweet, little darling kids who behave themselves and go to oxford and say lardy dar all day!

    Its astounds me how you only ever hear about kids being anti-social in council estates and run-down areas. How about we actually get a real report for once and someone explores the life of the upper class brats in this country.

    I bet you could walk down a street in oxford at 9 at night, and see just as many kids in hoods, drinking and being roudy. Unless their all at home, drinking daddies wine with their 14 yr old g/f.

  5. The Express (tagline: “the world’s greatest newspaper” — surely a breach of the Trades Description Act) says…

    “In every case, the killer’s sullen face was hidden beneath the disguise of feral society – the hooded top.”

    Really? If the faces were “hidden”, how do you know that they were “sullen”? They might have been gleeful…

    DK