I have already explained what the graph is about.
Your explanation was wrong, the report already explains what each graph is about.
Now, do you have that number, or do you just have more percentages?
The number of hate crimes is 94,098. The percentages are from that number.
And there are many tables inside the report.
For the year 2018, there were 1605 cases regarding online hate speech.
And the numbers for London alone are already quoted previously. You'd know if you didn't ignore all the stats and continued in your logical fallacies.
Forgot that percentages don't count now.
Though, it's, as you said, amusing how you're running in circles trying to move the goal post instead of actually responding.
Finally, when did written hate speech become illegal in the Uk? Section 127 is about online speech. The answer is 1986, not 2003.
Hate speech, in its current form and scope, became illegal in 2003.
The relevant legal text was already quoted.
The 1986 law addresses incitement, not offence and hate speech as a whole.
A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
The 1994 expansion addressed harassment;
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 inserted Section 4A into the Public Order Act 1986. That part prohibits anyone from causing alarm or distress. Section 4A states, in part:
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he—
(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or
(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... ed_Kingdom
The 2003 communication act is not limited to online material.
Anyways, I'm tired of this discussion.
8 pages of having to deal with you continuously ignoring every data provided, misrepresenting, twisting, and strawmaning everything, along with countless red herrings and endless narrative pushing is about enough.
When you have an argument that is more than logical fallacies, we'll continue.