FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Police methods
Police methods
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"Very hot topic though and not for the right reasons. Look at all that is going on in America at the moment regarding police tactics! I am not sure that more aggression is the way forward. " Very well put.  | |||
 | |||
"Very hot topic though and not for the right reasons. Look at all that is going on in America at the moment regarding police tactics! I am not sure that more aggression is the way forward. " The America situation is slightly different as it has racial undertones. My point is we view hours of footage of police chasing youths/criminals around our country often putting members of the publics lives at risk as therule is to apprehend them and countless times the chase is called off as too risky and they escape, i feel when an opportunity arises the police should be allowed to use anything at their disposal to stop the escapee even if it results in the escapees death after all its their decision to run or not therefore responsible for the consequences | |||
"Exactly give people a living wage they wouldn't have to steal to feed their families "I dont think a lot of people steal to feed families most stealing is to fund drug or drink issues and not forgetting greed many steal to sell goods on to prorvide in some cases quite a good standard of living | |||
| |||
"Exactly give people a living wage they wouldn't have to steal to feed their families "This basically. You need to focus on why people commit crime and sort that out, if it even needs sorting out because some laws are unnecessary. Using force is a quick fix and should only be a temporary measure. | |||
"Very hot topic though and not for the right reasons. Look at all that is going on in America at the moment regarding police tactics! I am not sure that more aggression is the way forward. The America situation is slightly different as it has racial undertones. My point is we view hours of footage of police chasing youths/criminals around our country often putting members of the publics lives at risk as therule is to apprehend them and countless times the chase is called off as too risky and they escape, i feel when an opportunity arises the police should be allowed to use anything at their disposal to stop the escapee even if it results in the escapees death after all its their decision to run or not therefore responsible for the consequences" Yeah, you could be on to something there, but it could only really work in a country that has a relatively non-corrupt police force. Oh well, back to the drawing board!  | |||
"Trust me a lot steal to feed their families "While using their benefits to buy cigarettes, booze and large screen televisions. | |||
"Trust me a lot steal to feed their families
While using their benefits to buy cigarettes, booze and large screen televisions." | |||
"Trust me a lot steal to feed their families "a few cases have come out as this been the reason but the vast majority of theft/robbery are drugs related, followed by the 2nd most been unemployed, trying to fund a better lifestyle for themselves but ultimately failing. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Trust me a lot steal to feed their families
While using their benefits to buy cigarettes, booze and large screen televisions." | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Exactly unemployed no money can't pay bills etc it starts people out on road to crime "but unemployed covers alot of different types of people, if you have just been made redundant and are out of work for a bit, your unemployed, you could have been out of work for ages but tried everything you can to get work, you are still unemployed, then theres those that refuse to work, have never worked but choose to go on the rob because they want more than they get handed to them, thats not stealing to feed your family, thats choosing to take that path. | |||
| |||
"Iv not a lot off time for police these days I feel it's all about no. Especially with younger cops . My dad had two incidents at two dif places he worked one was arson and police just weren't interested . One was iron gates got stolen they had man on CCTV and everything . They let him off with slapped wrist . I feel they just want to sit in cars pulling motorist " thats not down to the police officers, thats down to justice system, police officers are just doing what they are told. | |||
 | |||
| |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP?" Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly | |||
| |||
"Why does this 'large screen TV' thing still get dragged out? Have you seen the price of televisions these days? A 42 inch TV is hardly a luxury these days when you can get them from Asda for £200! As for me aggressive policing, that's probably just asking for trouble. " Most people on benefits can't afford to pay that so they go to brighthouse and buy one weekly that ends up costing them £1000s over a few years. Wonga and all that are doing well out of this recession. | |||
"Blah, it's the unemployed, blah, large screen TV's, blah, blah, blah. White collar crime costs this country inordinately more than pretty theft but hardly gets reported. Usually because the corporations involved are too embarrassed to report it. The degree course I'm on shares some modules with Policing students and you can be reassured that unless they go through some kind of humanising process in the next three years, you'll get just the kind of aggressive bigots you're looking for!" | |||
| |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly" It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? | |||
"Why does this 'large screen TV' thing still get dragged out? Have you seen the price of televisions these days? A 42 inch TV is hardly a luxury these days when you can get them from Asda for £200! As for me aggressive policing, that's probably just asking for trouble. " And you can feed a family of 4 for a couple of weeks for £200 | |||
"Iv not a lot off time for police these days I feel it's all about no. Especially with younger cops . My dad had two incidents at two dif places he worked one was arson and police just weren't interested . One was iron gates got stolen they had man on CCTV and everything . They let him off with slapped wrist . I feel they just want to sit in cars pulling motorist " The CPS make charging decisions, not the police! | |||
"Why does this 'large screen TV' thing still get dragged out? Have you seen the price of televisions these days? A 42 inch TV is hardly a luxury these days when you can get them from Asda for £200! As for me aggressive policing, that's probably just asking for trouble. And you can feed a family of 4 for a couple of weeks for £200" I don't doubt it. The point is that a 'large screen TV' is hardly a luxury item these days. It's like criticising them for having a sofa or a cooker. | |||
" Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end?" Amadou Diallo Michael Brown Jean Charles de Menezes... | |||
| |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end?" Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this | |||
"The CPS make charging decisions, not the police! " wrong .... the police makes decisions on weather to charge for an alleged crime ... the cps decide wether or not to prosecute ... a substantial difference | |||
"Why does this 'large screen TV' thing still get dragged out? Have you seen the price of televisions these days? A 42 inch TV is hardly a luxury these days when you can get them from Asda for £200! As for me aggressive policing, that's probably just asking for trouble. And you can feed a family of 4 for a couple of weeks for £200 I don't doubt it. The point is that a 'large screen TV' is hardly a luxury item these days. It's like criticising them for having a sofa or a cooker. " A large screen tv, xbox and sky sports are hardly essential items | |||
| |||
"A large screen tv, xbox and sky sports are hardly essential items" please can you tell me where to hand these items in when i am next made redundant please  | |||
"Very hot topic though and not for the right reasons. Look at all that is going on in America at the moment regarding police tactics! I am not sure that more aggression is the way forward. " Totally Agree.... Aggression will only lead to a more aggressive criminal, who may take even more desperate measures. | |||
" I personally would like to allow the police to be more aggresive in apprehending criminals we are far too soft on them" Where do you draw the line on this? Who's a criminal? A few years ago my naive younger sister was caught with a stolen tv, she didn't know it was stolen. She was 14 and her friend was 12. Do you think that because they were arrested, that makes them criminals? The definition of a criminal is somebody who has committed a crime. The police had these two young girls in handcuffs because they believed they had committed a crime. How do you decide whether they are criminals or not? Yes, they were suspected criminals but where would you draw the line with aggression? The younger girl was cut with the cuffs and so my mum had to help her go to the toilet because the police wouldn't take the cuffs off as they needed a statement at the police station as to how her wrists got cut. Personally I think that arresting a 12 and a 14 year old, handcuffing them and bundling them in the back of a van is a little too aggressive...? I know that this is slightly different to the types of criminals that you mean - but where is the middle ground? | |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this" Why did you want my name??? I originally said it was someone I know because there are so many judgmental, Daily Mail types who will be quick to side with the police in such matters. Or were you addressing the other poster who said about not wanting to give details to the police? I didn't refuse to give my details to the police on the night in question. Not that they were interested in my name. I was called "fucking cunt" as the PC kicked me all over before kicking me in the head, before I lost consciousness. If you think that is fair, I demand an apology from you. If you don't think it fair, then have the gumption to back down. You said police should have the right to kick someone unconscious if they used force against the police. I'm sure that the police in the Rodney King case said he had done something like that before murdering the bloke in broad daylight. Then a jury clears them. Guessing you would have done too? As for being caught red handed, who defines red handed? Have you ever driven over the speed limit? Probably you have. Would you be okay with a police pursuit, followed by kicking afterwards???? Breaking the speed limit is a crime, after all, and you seem to want a highly aggressive policing.... | |||
" Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Amadou Diallo Michael Brown Jean Charles de Menezes... " And sadly it doesn't - and hasn't - and won't - end there till people who think it is fair for the police to execute (legally???) people with impunity. They need to be as answerable for their methods as anyone else | |||
| |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this Why did you want my name??? I originally said it was someone I know because there are so many judgmental, Daily Mail types who will be quick to side with the police in such matters. Or were you addressing the other poster who said about not wanting to give details to the police? I didn't refuse to give my details to the police on the night in question. Not that they were interested in my name. I was called "fucking cunt" as the PC kicked me all over before kicking me in the head, before I lost consciousness. If you think that is fair, I demand an apology from you. If you don't think it fair, then have the gumption to back down. You said police should have the right to kick someone unconscious if they used force against the police. I'm sure that the police in the Rodney King case said he had done something like that before murdering the bloke in broad daylight. Then a jury clears them. Guessing you would have done too? As for being caught red handed, who defines red handed? Have you ever driven over the speed limit? Probably you have. Would you be okay with a police pursuit, followed by kicking afterwards???? Breaking the speed limit is a crime, after all, and you seem to want a highly aggressive policing.... " Please calm down its a topic for discussion to aleviate an otherwise boring day, i have tried to place my thoughts where aggresive policing is warranted i didnt say in every situation, the post started about an armed robber who had hostages and the manner he was caught, of course i think its wrong for someone on a night out to be bullied and kicked for just enjoying themselves and the case of the two young teen girls also sounds way over the top. My actual question is about people like in my original post who was armed or criminals who drive recklessly endangering lives should they be treated more harshley And be sensible i am not talking about people who speed by a few mph over its those that drive at basy increased speeds with no intention of stopping | |||
| |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this" If it was me who you are asking why i wont give my name to the police it is because firstly if you are innocent of an accusation you are not obliged to answer anything, and secondly having lived in a mining household through the pit strike i am well aware of the truth bending that s yorks police are capable of | |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this If it was me who you are asking why i wont give my name to the police it is because firstly if you are innocent of an accusation you are not obliged to answer anything, and secondly having lived in a mining household through the pit strike i am well aware of the truth bending that s yorks police are capable of "But im sorry the fact you never provided your name resulted in the action which followed kust because you wanted to prove a point. Whether accused of anything or not i would willingly provide my details to the police i have nothing to hide so fear no consequences of doing so. Similarly i dont understand peoples issue with CCTV saying its undermining civil liberties my view is if you aint doing anything wrong or trying to hide anything there isnt an issue its all positive as they can identify and help with prosecutions of those that do | |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this Why did you want my name??? I originally said it was someone I know because there are so many judgmental, Daily Mail types who will be quick to side with the police in such matters. Or were you addressing the other poster who said about not wanting to give details to the police? I didn't refuse to give my details to the police on the night in question. Not that they were interested in my name. I was called "fucking cunt" as the PC kicked me all over before kicking me in the head, before I lost consciousness. If you think that is fair, I demand an apology from you. If you don't think it fair, then have the gumption to back down. You said police should have the right to kick someone unconscious if they used force against the police. I'm sure that the police in the Rodney King case said he had done something like that before murdering the bloke in broad daylight. Then a jury clears them. Guessing you would have done too? As for being caught red handed, who defines red handed? Have you ever driven over the speed limit? Probably you have. Would you be okay with a police pursuit, followed by kicking afterwards???? Breaking the speed limit is a crime, after all, and you seem to want a highly aggressive policing.... Please calm down its a topic for discussion to aleviate an otherwise boring day, i have tried to place my thoughts where aggresive policing is warranted i didnt say in every situation, the post started about an armed robber who had hostages and the manner he was caught, of course i think its wrong for someone on a night out to be bullied and kicked for just enjoying themselves and the case of the two young teen girls also sounds way over the top. My actual question is about people like in my original post who was armed or criminals who drive recklessly endangering lives should they be treated more harshley And be sensible i am not talking about people who speed by a few mph over its those that drive at basy increased speeds with no intention of stopping" I understand what you are saying. Yes, reckless endangerment of life for something like joy riding, car theft etc etc is terrible. It is also a matter of conjecture what would happen if the police did not indulge in high pursuit chases. I saw a documentary where youngsters who had stolen cars were actually doing so because they enjoyed the thrill of the chase. It is also not only the stolen cars that can kill innocent bystanders. Police cars can, and do, kill members of the public. As for aggressive policing, I was not only speaking from bitter personal experience, I was trying to highlight how it is dangerous to advocate greater, more punitive powers for the police. If we allow the police to act with impunity on one crime, then why not another crime? Where does it become unacceptable to allow such freedoms for the police? Personally I know they are not accountable enough currently: the suggestion they have even greater power is, for obvious reasons, repugnant to me | |||
 | |||
"I know of someone who was kicked unconscious by the police? Is that acceptable for you, OP? Without knowing the exact details its hard to comment, if you were to tell me that the guy was extremely violent hitting , kicking maybe have a weapon and police were getting hurt then yes he got what he deserved if it were a 70 year old pensioner with dementia then no but you need to provide more detail before posing a scenario. I think anyone that fights police or drives at high speed to get away deserve what they get, makes my blood boil to watch them argue with the police after being caught red handed that somehow they are being treated unfairly It was me. I'd had a couple of beers in the city centre a few years back. Police came and did me for D&D. They handcuffed me behind my back (very painful in itself), started kicking me outside their van, then threw me on to the floor of their van and one of the five kicked me unconscious, amid a torrent of swear words. I made a complaint after and was unable to get any vindication. The CPS took a witness statement from someone who saw all this but refused to take action as his statement had mentioned my being kicked OUTSIDE the van, while my complaint centred around being kicked INSIDE the van. Be careful what you ask for OP. One day it might happen to you. Ask the families of the likes of Rodney King and Steve Biko. Police were pretty tough on them, weren't they? If we fail to learn from the mistakes in history, we are doomed to repeat them. The police do not, and should not, have the right to issue out some form of summary justice. Thank God. Though attitudes like some on this post make it more likely that one day they might. Else you end up with a situation where people suspected (wrongly) to have committed an offence can end up injured, maimed, even killed by free wheeling police. Where does that scenario end? Well at the moment the perpetrators of crime appear to have the law on the law on their side and to be honest the nber of criminal activity far outweighs the bully tactics of the police. I still believe that police should be able to use more force to apprehend those who commit crime and i mean caught red handed . After all a person ldriving a gettawsy car at 130+ mph overtaking on bends driving across footpaths will kill and injure far more people than an agressive policeman and when people like this are caught i think they deserve the toe cap of the law. And to direct a question to you why didnt you provide your name when asked? I have no issues providing any of my details to the police, why would you? Always strikes people have something to hide when doing this Why did you want my name??? I originally said it was someone I know because there are so many judgmental, Daily Mail types who will be quick to side with the police in such matters. Or were you addressing the other poster who said about not wanting to give details to the police? I didn't refuse to give my details to the police on the night in question. Not that they were interested in my name. I was called "fucking cunt" as the PC kicked me all over before kicking me in the head, before I lost consciousness. If you think that is fair, I demand an apology from you. If you don't think it fair, then have the gumption to back down. You said police should have the right to kick someone unconscious if they used force against the police. I'm sure that the police in the Rodney King case said he had done something like that before murdering the bloke in broad daylight. Then a jury clears them. Guessing you would have done too? As for being caught red handed, who defines red handed? Have you ever driven over the speed limit? Probably you have. Would you be okay with a police pursuit, followed by kicking afterwards???? Breaking the speed limit is a crime, after all, and you seem to want a highly aggressive policing.... Please calm down its a topic for discussion to aleviate an otherwise boring day, i have tried to place my thoughts where aggresive policing is warranted i didnt say in every situation, the post started about an armed robber who had hostages and the manner he was caught, of course i think its wrong for someone on a night out to be bullied and kicked for just enjoying themselves and the case of the two young teen girls also sounds way over the top. My actual question is about people like in my original post who was armed or criminals who drive recklessly endangering lives should they be treated more harshley And be sensible i am not talking about people who speed by a few mph over its those that drive at basy increased speeds with no intention of stopping I understand what you are saying. Yes, reckless endangerment of life for something like joy riding, car theft etc etc is terrible. It is also a matter of conjecture what would happen if the police did not indulge in high pursuit chases. I saw a documentary where youngsters who had stolen cars were actually doing so because they enjoyed the thrill of the chase. It is also not only the stolen cars that can kill innocent bystanders. Police cars can, and do, kill members of the public. As for aggressive policing, I was not only speaking from bitter personal experience, I was trying to highlight how it is dangerous to advocate greater, more punitive powers for the police. If we allow the police to act with impunity on one crime, then why not another crime? Where does it become unacceptable to allow such freedoms for the police? Personally I know they are not accountable enough currently: the suggestion they have even greater power is, for obvious reasons, repugnant to me" Great now our views are merging but i can understand why not totally in agreement due to your bad experience which luckily i have never encountered. But to one point you raised about police cars driving at speed killing innocent bystanders that was the point of my original question where the foreign police force drove a car in the path of a fleeing armed robber this only caused injury to the robber, and prevented any chases at all therefore i nelieve this kind of action is acceptable | |||
"The CPS make charging decisions, not the police! wrong .... the police makes decisions on weather to charge for an alleged crime ... the cps decide wether or not to prosecute ... a substantial difference" I think you'll find the police contact the CPS at the time they make the charging decision to discuss whether there's a realistic chance of prosecution. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"The police may want to charge but if the CPS review the case and decide it's not in the public interest or there's not enough evidence, the case is discontinued." police charge certain offences without consultation and on others they have to consult cps | |||
" The service is well equipped legally and powers wise to deal with most scenarios in a proportionate manner. An increase in aggressive tactics isn't desired by any of the parties involved and is already an option if justified." this.. | |||
"The police may want to charge but if the CPS review the case and decide it's not in the public interest or there's not enough evidence, the case is discontinued.police charge certain offences without consultation and on others they have to consult cps" They can charge but prosecution rests solely with the CPS. | |||
"The police may want to charge but if the CPS review the case and decide it's not in the public interest or there's not enough evidence, the case is discontinued.police charge certain offences without consultation and on others they have to consult cps They can charge but prosecution rests solely with the CPS." I disagree | |||
 | |||
| |||
"The original idea of using such force is a good one, people have gone off on a tangent and used the thread to attack the police as usual. In the incident in question the police freed the hostages, captured the robber and recovered the cash, nobody died. It's about damage limitation, why allow numerous hostages to be in danger when you can lull the bad guy into a false sense of security and then take him out away from any other innocent parties. Where I live and in a lot of other counties the police are not allowed to chase motorbikes in any circumstances which the shit bags know and use to their advantage. Surely that can't be right, we are way too soft in this country, bring back the days when the local bobby would drag you home by the ear and give you a bollocking in front of your parents. The youth of today have no respect for the police or authority in general which will get worse with each generation, something needs to be done. In the likes of Spain if you talk out of turn to a bobby then you get a short sharp slap for your trouble and it works, they are respected out there by the Spanish youth, it's usually the d*unken Brits getting issued with the slaps. " Policeman are you, perchance? | |||
 | |||
"Nope "Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then? | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?"Daily Mail reading Nazi!!!!!!!! | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?"Do you think the Police advocate assaulting people as a matter of routine ? | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
Daily Mail reading Nazi!!!!!!!! "Me or him?
It is surely a Daily Mail attitude to advocate police being able to "clip people around the ears"!!!
You forgot the SHOUTY CAPS!!! | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
Do you think the Police advocate assaulting people as a matter of routine ? "No. I think they are selective when dishing out instant justice. | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
Do you think the Police advocate assaulting people as a matter of routine ?
No. I think they are selective when dishing out instant justice. "At least you recognise the fact they use discretion | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?"So are the people sticking up for the robber robbers themselves are they, when you hear older generations speak of the good old days they always have tales of being dragged home by the local bobby and then getting a pasting from their dad afterwards, they'll alway say it didn't do them any harm. It worked back then, kids don't give a toss when the police speak to them now or take them home and they bloody well should. You might as well do away with the police all together and get social workers to patrol the streets and ask people nicely not to commit crime. | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
Do you think the Police advocate assaulting people as a matter of routine ?
No. I think they are selective when dishing out instant justice.
At least you recognise the fact they use discretion "With the amount of CCTVs about, they have to be discrete! This aint America you know! | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
So are the people sticking up for the robber robbers themselves are they, when you hear older generations speak of the good old days they always have tales of being dragged home by the local bobby and then getting a pasting from their dad afterwards, they'll alway say it didn't do them any harm. It worked back then, kids don't give a toss when the police speak to them now or take them home and they bloody well should. You might as well do away with the police all together and get social workers to patrol the streets and ask people nicely not to commit crime. "Quite right. Kick the shit out of everyone. Give the missus a good right hander too, while you're at it. Especially if she hasn't got your tea on the table or gives you lip. Good old days? Really?? | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
So are the people sticking up for the robber robbers themselves are they, when you hear older generations speak of the good old days they always have tales of being dragged home by the local bobby and then getting a pasting from their dad afterwards, they'll alway say it didn't do them any harm. It worked back then, kids don't give a toss when the police speak to them now or take them home and they bloody well should. You might as well do away with the police all together and get social workers to patrol the streets and ask people nicely not to commit crime.
Quite right. Kick the shit out of everyone. Give the missus a good right hander too, while you're at it. Especially if she hasn't got your tea on the table or gives you lip.
Good old days? Really??"Your words not mine, now you're just being silly arn't you, I've said my piece, I'm not getting into a childish argument, I'll leave that to you. | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
Do you think the Police advocate assaulting people as a matter of routine ?
No. I think they are selective when dishing out instant justice.
At least you recognise the fact they use discretion
With the amount of CCTVs about, they have to be discrete! This aint America you know! "True but camera's only give a portion of the story and are only a representation of what the human eye sees. It's a misconception that people get beaten up regularly all over the country and no one truly believes it's a solution to anything. If assaults take place without reasonable cause and they are found guilty those individuals are dealt with the sane as everyone else. | |||
| |||
"they drove a car out in front of him which he hit and somersaulted down the road, " Think that was staged for the cameras... point of a police chase is only the one being chased knows where he is going, also when a powerful bike broadsides a car there is a good chance bike, rider or both are going inside the car killing everyone involved... clever police would have user a stinger to take out the tyres... | |||
"Nope
Why do you advocate police being able to assault people then?
So are the people sticking up for the robber robbers themselves are they, when you hear older generations speak of the good old days they always have tales of being dragged home by the local bobby and then getting a pasting from their dad afterwards, they'll alway say it didn't do them any harm. It worked back then, kids don't give a toss when the police speak to them now or take them home and they bloody well should. You might as well do away with the police all together and get social workers to patrol the streets and ask people nicely not to commit crime.
Quite right. Kick the shit out of everyone. Give the missus a good right hander too, while you're at it. Especially if she hasn't got your tea on the table or gives you lip.
Good old days? Really??
Your words not mine, now you're just being silly arn't you, I've said my piece, I'm not getting into a childish argument, I'll leave that to you. "I'm being silly? You advocated hitting kids round the head! And did you read where I said a copper kicked me unconscious? Can you really expect me to agree with your point of view? One day you may have the misfortune to be handcuffed and then given a good kicking. When you did, re-read your posts and see how you feel. I cannot express strongly enough how violated I felt then or still do, whenever I think of it. There was a case today in America where a guy restrained by police died as a consequence of how the police treated him. Tell his family that a bit of force from the police is acceptable. It is not Dixon of Dock Green out there! | |||
"they drove a car out in front of him which he hit and somersaulted down the road, Think that was staged for the cameras... point of a police chase is only the one being chased knows where he is going, also when a powerful bike broadsides a car there is a good chance bike, rider or both are going inside the car killing everyone involved... clever police would have user a stinger to take out the tyres... " If you didnt watch the programme as i did you are assuming a lot here. I cant argue about the route from the crime scene as i have no idea and im not going to lie to substantiate the story. However it was very real and not staged. Perhaps it was the only route out pr perhaps he gave some indication where he wanted to get to, we will never know. As for your other point he hit the car clean in the engine by the front wheel no danger to the driver and he somersaulted 3 times down the road if it were staged the police there should dorect the next Bond movie | |||
| |||
"Anyone that pulls a gun on an unarmed Joe Public going about their business deserves to die. Simple. I don't agree with these high speed chases as it is a competition for the bad guys to race the cops. They should use RPGs fired from a Police helicopter gunship and murder the bastards " | |||
"people of new orleans can tell us what lifes like without police for a couple of weeks...gotta love em they put up with the shit we cant handle more powers now to combat the important workers flocking to our un protected border....with long crime sheets ...welcome to the weakest police force...in the world....our fault not theirs "It's called Policing by consent.Any form of paramilitary Police which we thankfully don't have is not desirable. There are rare instances of aggressive police outside the law...just like Dr's murdering people, soldiers executing prisoners, corrupt lawyer's, evil priests....catch my drift ? | |||
"I was watching a Police fly on the wall documentary a couple of nights ago, it had videos from around the world not just the UK. Missed the beginning but was really impressed with the tactics used by the police in one country to capture a bank robber. Basically he had an arsenal of weapons had thousands of pounds of cash hed just just stolen and he had hostages at gunpoint in the bank. He requested a big motorbike to escape on before hed let any hostages free. He got the bike made his escape and tore off down the street at high speed, however police had made safe an area further out of town and as the robber approached they drove a car out in front of him which he hit and somersaulted down the road, he was quickly overpowered and arrested without any danger to the police or public, so the question is do you think our police should adopt these tactics instead of chasing criminals at high speed all over the country where many escape due to the persuit being too risky. I personally would like to allow the police to be more aggresive in apprehending criminals we are far too soft on them" absolute garbage. The police have quite a lot of power as it is, they can already be very aggressive if they have the justification to do so. I'm not sure what you mean by being more aggressive? what are they not allowed to do now that you would like them be allowed to do? | |||
"Exactly give people a living wage they wouldn't have to steal to feed their families "The people stealing to feed their families are not generally the ones getting involved in high speed chases or pulling guns on the public.... | |||
| |||
"I dont know whether to comment in this one or start a new thread... the michael brown verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing was bad enough the eric garner verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing in new york last july.... of which the verdict came down last night... is truely stunning i implore you to read about the case... the video of what happened... the coroners report and the reaction.... this is the case that will end up changing opinions of how minorities are treated by police...." I hope that you are right as its long overdue and not only on that side of the pond either.. however I think real change will only come when the relatives and children of the rich and powerful, 'the establishment' are the ones being treated thus by a minority of some police.. | |||
"I dont know whether to comment in this one or start a new thread... the michael brown verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing was bad enough the eric garner verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing in new york last july.... of which the verdict came down last night... is truely stunning i implore you to read about the case... the video of what happened... the coroners report and the reaction.... this is the case that will end up changing opinions of how minorities are treated by police...." Has Obama come of the golf course to talk about this and the Ferguson case? | |||
or there too busy cooking from munchies haha. | |||
"The police may want to charge but if the CPS review the case and decide it's not in the public interest or there's not enough evidence, the case is discontinued.police charge certain offences without consultation and on others they have to consult cps They can charge but prosecution rests solely with the CPS. I disagree" You can disagree all you like... From the CPS website... 'Today, the CPS decides whether or not to prosecute people in court. However, the police still investigate the alleged offence. In more serious or complex cases, prosecutors decide whether a person should be charged with a criminal offence, and, if so, what the offence should be.' | |||
"I dont know whether to comment in this one or start a new thread... the michael brown verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing was bad enough the eric garner verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing in new york last july.... of which the verdict came down last night... is truely stunning i implore you to read about the case... the video of what happened... the coroners report and the reaction.... this is the case that will end up changing opinions of how minorities are treated by police.... Has Obama come of the golf course to talk about this and the Ferguson case? " I honestly dont know if you are being flippant about the Eric garner case.... if you are you really need to know the facts... because it is really a headscratcher...... | |||
| |||
"Trust me a lot steal to feed their families
While using their benefits to buy cigarettes, booze and large screen televisions."What size tv would you allow poor people to own then ? | |||
"I dont know whether to comment in this one or start a new thread... the michael brown verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing was bad enough the eric garner verdict not to indite a policeman for his killing in new york last july.... of which the verdict came down last night... is truely stunning i implore you to read about the case... the video of what happened... the coroners report and the reaction.... this is the case that will end up changing opinions of how minorities are treated by police.... Has Obama come of the golf course to talk about this and the Ferguson case? I honestly dont know if you are being flippant about the Eric garner case.... if you are you really need to know the facts... because it is really a headscratcher......" I wasnt being flippant at all. I have watched the news with Eric Garner and think the police reaction was way over the top. From what I understand, a chokehold is not permitted, but it certainly looks as though that is what the cop who jumped on his back was doing. Garner was a monster of a man, but 5/6 cops to restrain him? Seems excessive, especially when you have one strangling him, one on his chest and another standing on his face! All NY police are being retrained on restraining techniques now because of this case. My comment about Obama is purely, that with the civil unrest in Ferguson and now the scenes in New York, all centred around accusations of racist  cops killing black suspects, you'd think that Obama is in a unique position as the countries first black President to diffuse the tension with stating he agrees with the findings of the judges, or to insist on further investigation.
Maybe he has already done this? If he has, I havent seen or read about it on the news.
I have read that during his Presidency, that he has played more rounds of golf than Tiger Woods. I have also seen polls that he is considered the worst President since WWII.
I see him as another Blair. Nice smile, good at speeches, but with no substance at all.
Going back to Garner, I hope his family get some justice, as watching the video of him calling out that he cant breathe must be massively distressing for them! | |||
"I was watching a Police fly on the wall documentary a couple of nights ago, it had videos from around the world not just the UK. Missed the beginning but was really impressed with the tactics used by the police in one country to capture a bank robber. Basically he had an arsenal of weapons had thousands of pounds of cash hed just just stolen and he had hostages at gunpoint in the bank. He requested a big motorbike to escape on before hed let any hostages free. He got the bike made his escape and tore off down the street at high speed, however police had made safe an area further out of town and as the robber approached they drove a car out in front of him which he hit and somersaulted down the road, he was quickly overpowered and arrested without any danger to the police or public, so the question is do you think our police should adopt these tactics instead of chasing criminals at high speed all over the country where many escape due to the persuit being too risky. I personally would like to allow the police to be more aggresive in apprehending criminals we are far too soft on them absolute garbage. The police have quite a lot of power as it is, they can already be very aggressive if they have the justification to do so. I'm not sure what you mean by being more aggressive? what are they not allowed to do now that you would like them be allowed to do? " I think i may have not stated clearly what i was trying to get across and this thread is now being used to slate the police in generall which was not my intention. If you read my original post its about an escaping armed bank robber and the method used to apprehend him. This method only caused injury to the robber and no one else, my question was should our police use methods like this to apprehend joy riders or criminals to prevent long dangerous car chases which can and do injure the public and the police, some are called off as to dangerous and the criminals get away to commit more crime. So in answer to your question id like to see more aggresiive tactics used when safe to do so to stop criminals escaping and not more aggresion against a shop lifter or a guy caught with cannebis | |||
"I was watching a Police fly on the wall documentary a couple of nights ago, it had videos from around the world not just the UK. Missed the beginning but was really impressed with the tactics used by the police in one country to capture a bank robber. Basically he had an arsenal of weapons had thousands of pounds of cash hed just just stolen and he had hostages at gunpoint in the bank. He requested a big motorbike to escape on before hed let any hostages free. He got the bike made his escape and tore off down the street at high speed, however police had made safe an area further out of town and as the robber approached they drove a car out in front of him which he hit and somersaulted down the road, he was quickly overpowered and arrested without any danger to the police or public, so the question is do you think our police should adopt these tactics instead of chasing criminals at high speed all over the country where many escape due to the persuit being too risky. I personally would like to allow the police to be more aggresive in apprehending criminals we are far too soft on them absolute garbage. The police have quite a lot of power as it is, they can already be very aggressive if they have the justification to do so. I'm not sure what you mean by being more aggressive? what are they not allowed to do now that you would like them be allowed to do? I think i may have not stated clearly what i was trying to get across and this thread is now being used to slate the police in generall which was not my intention. If you read my original post its about an escaping armed bank robber and the method used to apprehend him. This method only caused injury to the robber and no one else, my question was should our police use methods like this to apprehend joy riders or criminals to prevent long dangerous car chases which can and do injure the public and the police, some are called off as to dangerous and the criminals get away to commit more crime. So in answer to your question id like to see more aggresiive tactics used when safe to do so to stop criminals escaping and not more aggresion against a shop lifter or a guy caught with cannebis" Fair play, OP. You have been very specific there, as opposed to the general idea of more aggressive policing. Personally I'd advocate use of police helicopters to apprehend those you talk about. Much safer. How practicable, I'm not sure but certainly safer | |||
