It is an offence to use a loudhailer/megaphone for 'political canvassing' other that at specifically authorised times... and also to use it to advertise any 'entertainment, trade or business' without obtaining a licence from the local authority. Its also an offence to use one between 9pm and 8am. (control of pollution act 1974) and also one of the later environmental pollution acts.

It is also an offence to use a loudhailer/megaphone on a public highway (which the road and pavement is included) if it can be heard by someone over 50feet away and there is a person 'annoyed' by the noise.. (highways act)...

SOCPA 2005 has a specific prohibition on the use of loud speakers at protests (specifically defined areas)...

S14 Public order act is used to prohibit certain things at protests, such as megaphone use, banging drums, blowing whisles etc if it causes ANNOYANCE to other people.

If you have lots of shoppers complaining to the police about the noise, then expect s14 to be used.

Most of the stuff in the above comment (whilst clearly well meant) is incorrect, or misrepresented. It is all the kind of stuff that you would find in the NETCU handbook, and has all been discredited by lawyers, judges and even other police forces.

Protests are not political canvasing, and that act specifically does not mention protests.

The highways act does not cover peaceful protest. SOCPA does not ban megaphone use on protests. Section 14 can only limit: a) the numbers of people who may take part, b) the location of the assembly, and c) its maximum duration; not megaphone use. To use a s.14 for this would be unlwaful.

So in short, the use of a megaphone is not unlawful, although how it is used may be. For example, sticking it in someone's face could be called harassment. Politely talking towards a company premises is NOT unlawful.

SHAC Brum are sorted then. Seems like the police wanted them wrapped around their corrupt policies - shame it didn't work for shit!

Keep up the great resistance! Barclays are clearly feeling the heat across the globe at the moment by SHAC particularly in England, Ireland, USA, Italy, amongst other countries.

//////////////////////////////////////////

Barclays: An Analysis

I'm getting the distinct impression that Barclays thought SHAC would tone it done after 8 months of campaigning, instead of increasing the pressure and are living to regret the initial investment. They are experimenting with a small dose of repression, but will soon realise it has the opposite effects, as at first they didn't act like they cared - now it seems they're livid!

Furthermore I think it's because HLS, the state and their lackies conned them into it, to a degree. Deluding them into believing "it'll all be sorted when 7 shactivists get 50 years in January" - as - "nobody would bother risking time in jail after the convictions" - they conjured up quite a hilarious lie, managed to fool executives, and/or encouraged them to gamble.

Their desire to 'protect' HLS is understandable, as it's to indirectly defend themselves, nothing more, nothing less. Barclays are also major NYSE Euronext investors (HLS' only listed stock exchange) so they knew they would be next. Just a shame they invested in HLS and are paying the price for it! When they dump them it'll be the largest result for sometime though, definitely further reigniting the campaign and putting capital back in its place.

I predict another 1-3 months - and they'll be gone, maybe less with even more ALF direct action*. These corps rarely last a year, normally cutting themselves loose after 9-11 months if they get round to lasting over 6 months that is. Unless they don't get round to calculating the losses on being a HLS associate like Marsh Inc. did - fools!!

These targets traditionally sustain a 1-3 month campaign**, sometimes 6 month (ish), or more rarely just short of a year (due to using risk assessments instead of basic intelligence). Barclays must be doing these (unless they're as stupid as Marsh Inc.) but are doing so with optimism and a heavy dose of unrealistic patience. It's also more difficult to accurately estimate financial risk when dealing with more than one country. Do they average it for all countries, or correlate results to those affected - its all about perception. A perception they are going to regret in the near future as they must be loosing big profit over it by now.

In summary, they are living on corporate hopes and dreams, AKA : free market capitalism.

* http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22barclays%22+site%3Adirectaction.info&meta=&aq=f&oq=

** http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/422852.html

"In this list you will find some of the world's largest companies including all four main high street banks in the UK, the world's largest financial institution, the world's second largest bank and the world's largest insurance broker. All these companies have made clear and unequivocal statements to SHAC stating that they will never deal with Huntingdon ever again. Incredible isn't it? But there again with Huntingdon $89 million dollars in debt and with NO commercial bank and insurance company anywhere in the world prepared to deal with them it's hardly surprising." -  http://www.shac.net/SHAC/victories.html

Barclays are looking to offload their investment arm. Its the investment arm that has the shares in HLS. The rumours in the city are that it'll be sold off before the end of June. What mug can they find to sell their failing investment arm to?

The police wrote this obviously. They have become parroting robots where morality about things is replaced by the words "It is an offence".

I once reported a pedo and while I was telling the copper how disgutsing this monster was and that I wouldn't normall speak to the police but I had to this time, he replied : "It's an offence". [child abuse].

This is how they speak and is evidence of how they have become robots.