FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Policing UK
Policing UK
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the optics of this are awful. not just the violence the guy is dishing out, but the failure of the other officers present to stop him commiting what looks like a crime. the female police officer is stood facepalming herself as she watches and is clearly realising what he is doing is utterly wrong but then fails to do anything about it. until the police realise that closing ranks is a form of corruption then public confidence will slide further downhill which is bad for the country." I wondered if the Police Officer with the Red hair didn't think to taser the officer kicking the two members of the public. She actually looked toi be in absolute shock at what she was witnessing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the optics of this are awful. not just the violence the guy is dishing out, but the failure of the other officers present to stop him commiting what looks like a crime. the female police officer is stood facepalming herself as she watches and is clearly realising what he is doing is utterly wrong but then fails to do anything about it. until the police realise that closing ranks is a form of corruption then public confidence will slide further downhill which is bad for the country. I wondered if the Police Officer with the Red hair didn't think to taser the officer kicking the two members of the public. She actually looked toi be in absolute shock at what she was witnessing. " it kinda looks like she's wondering wether she has any confidence in the police to be honest ... it wouldn't surprise me if she jacked her job after that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"the optics of this are awful. not just the violence the guy is dishing out, but the failure of the other officers present to stop him commiting what looks like a crime. the female police officer is stood facepalming herself as she watches and is clearly realising what he is doing is utterly wrong but then fails to do anything about it. until the police realise that closing ranks is a form of corruption then public confidence will slide further downhill which is bad for the country. I wondered if the Police Officer with the Red hair didn't think to taser the officer kicking the two members of the public. She actually looked toi be in absolute shock at what she was witnessing. it kinda looks like she's wondering wether she has any confidence in the police to be honest ... it wouldn't surprise me if she jacked her job after that" Me too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? " do you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you?" I haven’t made assumptions | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you?" Would it make any difference to your interpretation of this clip, cropped from a much longer incident, if she had in fact been punched in the face by one or more of the group fighting which triggered the police response in the first instance? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you? I haven’t made assumptions " neither have i | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The man on the floor was prostrate - unmoving - the male officer kicked him in the side of the face and then stomped on his head - then he moves to another member of the public who is sat with his hands behind his head not moving and shouts at him to get to the floor which he starts to do - he then kicks him, wrestles him further to the floor then hits him on the back of the head with his taser in his hand. NOTHING in both exchanges are defensible in any way whatsoever. To defend it in any way is just as indefensible. He has been roundly condemned by professionals from every walk of life. You should too. " I’m not questioning the act and how he shouldn’t have done that, I’m saying there was a lot going on that was despicable, yet you only single out the police, you could condemn the actions of all involved | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you? Would it make any difference to your interpretation of this clip, cropped from a much longer incident, if she had in fact been punched in the face by one or more of the group fighting which triggered the police response in the first instance?" do you have the extended version we can watch to make that judgement or is what you're implying supposition on your part? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you? I haven’t made assumptions neither have i" You said “ it kinda looks like she's wondering wether she has any confidence in the police to be honest ... it wouldn't surprise me if she jacked her job after that” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you? I haven’t made assumptions neither have i" "the female police officer is stood facepalming herself as she watches and is clearly realising what he is doing is utterly wrong but then fails to do anything about it." That is an assumption  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? do you? I haven’t made assumptions neither have i You said “ it kinda looks like she's wondering wether she has any confidence in the police to be honest ... it wouldn't surprise me if she jacked her job after that” " that's not assumption .... it's passing comment on what appears to be happening. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Would it make any difference to your interpretation of this clip, cropped from a much longer incident, if she had in fact been punched in the face by one or more of the group fighting which triggered the police response in the first instance?" now that IS an assumption | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The man on the floor was prostrate - unmoving - the male officer kicked him in the side of the face and then stomped on his head - then he moves to another member of the public who is sat with his hands behind his head not moving and shouts at him to get to the floor which he starts to do - he then kicks him, wrestles him further to the floor then hits him on the back of the head with his taser in his hand. NOTHING in both exchanges are defensible in any way whatsoever. To defend it in any way is just as indefensible. He has been roundly condemned by professionals from every walk of life. You should too. I’m not questioning the act and how he shouldn’t have done that, I’m saying there was a lot going on that was despicable, yet you only single out the police, you could condemn the actions of all involved" You are not questioning the act, yet you don't condemn it. It's the Police who hold the high ground, he's a fully trained firearms officer, carrying a gun, a taser, pepper spray and years of training in controlling the public - and he chose this violent route to go down? It's gratuitous violence at any measure. He'll be sacked from the force for this - and if it gets to court he'll be found guilty of it too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The man on the floor was prostrate - unmoving - the male officer kicked him in the side of the face and then stomped on his head - then he moves to another member of the public who is sat with his hands behind his head not moving and shouts at him to get to the floor which he starts to do - he then kicks him, wrestles him further to the floor then hits him on the back of the head with his taser in his hand. NOTHING in both exchanges are defensible in any way whatsoever. To defend it in any way is just as indefensible. He has been roundly condemned by professionals from every walk of life. You should too. I’m not questioning the act and how he shouldn’t have done that, I’m saying there was a lot going on that was despicable, yet you only single out the police, you could condemn the actions of all involved You are not questioning the act, yet you don't condemn it. It's the Police who hold the high ground, he's a fully trained firearms officer, carrying a gun, a taser, pepper spray and years of training in controlling the public - and he chose this violent route to go down? It's gratuitous violence at any measure. He'll be sacked from the force for this - and if it gets to court he'll be found guilty of it too." I do condone his action, I just don’t go around ignoring the whole picture to throw the police as a whole under the bus. That’s it from me, you won’t alter your blinkers and neither will I. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Personally while I totally understand the subsequent protests outside Rochdale Police Station, I am not comfortable with the shouts of “Allah Akbar” (sp?) which seems designed to fuel racist and societal unrest." You need to understand that Allahu Akbar more often means 'God is Greater' than these things and you. Not meaning a call to terror. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Would it make any difference to your interpretation of this clip, cropped from a much longer incident, if she had in fact been punched in the face by one or more of the group fighting which triggered the police response in the first instance? now that IS an assumption" No it isn't. It is a question. You can tell because it has a question mark at the end of the sentence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The man on the floor was prostrate - unmoving - the male officer kicked him in the side of the face and then stomped on his head - then he moves to another member of the public who is sat with his hands behind his head not moving and shouts at him to get to the floor which he starts to do - he then kicks him, wrestles him further to the floor then hits him on the back of the head with his taser in his hand. NOTHING in both exchanges are defensible in any way whatsoever. To defend it in any way is just as indefensible. He has been roundly condemned by professionals from every walk of life. You should too. I’m not questioning the act and how he shouldn’t have done that, I’m saying there was a lot going on that was despicable, yet you only single out the police, you could condemn the actions of all involved You are not questioning the act, yet you don't condemn it. It's the Police who hold the high ground, he's a fully trained firearms officer, carrying a gun, a taser, pepper spray and years of training in controlling the public - and he chose this violent route to go down? It's gratuitous violence at any measure. He'll be sacked from the force for this - and if it gets to court he'll be found guilty of it too. I do condone his action, I just don’t go around ignoring the whole picture to throw the police as a whole under the bus. That’s it from me, you won’t alter your blinkers and neither will I. " again . . . Nothing that went before should have resulted in what the officer did when he saw that . . . **********The man on the floor was prostrate - unmoving - the male officer kicked him in the side of the face and then stomped on his head - then he moves to another member of the public who is sat with his hands behind his head not moving and shouts at him to get to the floor which he starts to do - he then kicks him, wrestles him further to the floor then hits him on the back of the head with his taser in his hand.********* | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? " you're actually inviting me to make an assumption here ... then going on to criticise me for making an assumption that i haven't made. i'm commenting on the evidence in the video where an officer forcefully stamps on an area of the body that boxing has banned puches being thrown at for over a century because, 'rabbit punches' as they are known, regularly kill people. whatever the back story of this incident the optics are truly awful and extremely damaging to an institution that has already completely eroded confidence by the general public. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Would it make any difference to your interpretation of this clip, cropped from a much longer incident, if she had in fact been punched in the face by one or more of the group fighting which triggered the police response in the first instance? now that IS an assumption No it isn't. It is a question. You can tell because it has a question mark at the end of the sentence." i'll ignore any semantics after this. the question mark invites me to agree with that assumption. but i'll decline your invitation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Do you know if it was her who had her nose broken or not? you're actually inviting me to make an assumption here ... then going on to criticise me for making an assumption that i haven't made. i'm commenting on the evidence in the video where an officer forcefully stamps on an area of the body that boxing has banned puches being thrown at for over a century because, 'rabbit punches' as they are known, regularly kill people. whatever the back story of this incident the optics are truly awful and extremely damaging to an institution that has already completely eroded confidence by the general public. " It was a yes or no answer to my original question, nothing more and no way was it an invitation to make assumptions, there are far too many of those already | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Personally while I totally understand the subsequent protests outside Rochdale Police Station, I am not comfortable with the shouts of “Allah Akbar” (sp?) which seems designed to fuel racist and societal unrest. You need to understand that Allahu Akbar more often means 'God is Greater' than these things and you. Not meaning a call to terror." I know it is not a call to terror. But around the world it has been appropriated by islamic fundamentalist terror groups, so by association it is now seen by many as synonymous with terrorism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nope. Fuck around and find out. All of the incidents of 'police brutality' you see do not compare to all of the moments of 'police softness' you don't see. " spot on post of the day | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Personally while I totally understand the subsequent protests outside Rochdale Police Station, I am not comfortable with the shouts of “Allah Akbar” (sp?) which seems designed to fuel racist and societal unrest. You need to understand that Allahu Akbar more often means 'God is Greater' than these things and you. Not meaning a call to terror. I know it is not a call to terror. But around the world it has been appropriated by islamic fundamentalist terror groups, so by association it is now seen by many as synonymous with terrorism. " And in the west we all need to be a little more aware of the nature and habits of other cultures/religions and not jump to presumptive conclusions.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nope. Fuck around and find out. All of the incidents of 'police brutality' you see do not compare to all of the moments of 'police softness' you don't see. spot on post of the day " Have we added a new circle to the fab venn diagram? "Pro police brutality". Amazing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do condone his action " is that an autocorrect typo? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do condone his action is that an autocorrect typo?" It was lazy proofreading from me. It was don’t condone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do condone his action is that an autocorrect typo? It was lazy proofreading from me. It was don’t condone." thanks for that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The most disturbing thing about this story is how the narrative is manipulated by the msm. Yes, the Police actions looked heavy-handed in isolation, but what about the full picture? As I see it, if you assault a Police Officer then expect a robust response, and deservedly so." Isolating the incident plays right into the hands of those who are triggered easily, clicks init. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just seen the footage. Wow! That officer is toast. What could possibly have led him to take such action? There’s no excuse for that beyond a verified threat to life (ie it was an armed terrorist in the floor). “However, he [Andy Burnham] said he had since seen "the full footage" that showed a "fast-moving and complicated situation in a challenging location – it’s not clear cut".” Personally while I totally understand the subsequent protests outside Rochdale Police Station, I am not comfortable with the shouts of “Allah Akbar” (sp?) which seems designed to fuel racist and societal unrest." It has already been deemed a racist attack by 'the community'. It has also been told that if the officers aren't sacked and jailed 'there will be the biggest protests'. Whilst Allahu Akbar may not be literally interpreted as a call for terror, it most certainly is used in that manner. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The most disturbing thing about this story is how the narrative is manipulated by the msm. Yes, the Police actions looked heavy-handed in isolation, but what about the full picture? As I see it, if you assault a Police Officer then expect a robust response, and deservedly so." agree but from what iv heard it was 3 officers assaulted one female officer got a broken nose | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The most disturbing thing about this story is how the narrative is manipulated by the msm. Yes, the Police actions looked heavy-handed in isolation, but what about the full picture? As I see it, if you assault a Police Officer then expect a robust response, and deservedly so." At the time yes, the law gives the tools and training to rightly protect themselves and us the general public from the unlawful behaviours of others.. The law also rightly doesn't afford protection for an officer who might act unlawfully be that in the back of the police van or in the custody suite or in this instance as the guy is prone and offering no threat.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Personally while I totally understand the subsequent protests outside Rochdale Police Station, I am not comfortable with the shouts of “Allah Akbar” (sp?) which seems designed to fuel racist and societal unrest. You need to understand that Allahu Akbar more often means 'God is Greater' than these things and you. Not meaning a call to terror. I know it is not a call to terror. But around the world it has been appropriated by islamic fundamentalist terror groups, so by association it is now seen by many as synonymous with terrorism. And in the west we all need to be a little more aware of the nature and habits of other cultures/religions and not jump to presumptive conclusions. "I know from previous discussions you don’t seem to agree with the concept of “optics” but this is an example of some British Muslims not seeing how the chant has now been associated with a different, often anti-West, meaning. It is provocative. BTW I know it may just be a subjective view but your posting style saying “You need to understand” can come across as patronising or coming from a place of superior intellect. I’m sure that isn’t your intent | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I know from previous discussions you don’t seem to agree with the concept of “optics” but this is an example of some British Muslims not seeing how the chant has now been associated with a different, often anti-West, meaning. It is provocative. " Well. If it's optics at all, then that is the fault of the west, not of Muslims. Why should a Muslim not use a facet of his/her faith to express their belief that God is Greater than the act that they are protesting about - and that perhaps those who perpetrated will be judged by it? Muslims use the term in everyday life to express wonder at the rising or falling of a beautiful Sun/Set. At the birth of a child, as a greeting between each other. But also as a spoken measure of dismay of things witnessed. " BTW I know it may just be a subjective view but your posting style saying “You need to understand” can come across as patronising or coming from a place of superior intellect. I’m sure that isn’t your intent "As you say. Your subjective view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well. If it's optics at all, then that is the fault of the west, not of Muslims. Why should a Muslim not use a facet of his/her faith to express their belief that God is Greater than the act that they are protesting about - and that perhaps those who perpetrated will be judged by it? Muslims use the term in everyday life to express wonder at the rising or falling of a beautiful Sun/Set. At the birth of a child, as a greeting between each other. But also as a spoken measure of dismay of things witnessed." Urm only partly. All those videos posted by the Taliban as they behead people. ISIS. Hamas. Chanting away. Associating a traditional religious chant with acts of terrorism or horror and then posting that for the world to see creates a perception. So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well. If it's optics at all, then that is the fault of the west, not of Muslims. Why should a Muslim not use a facet of his/her faith to express their belief that God is Greater than the act that they are protesting about - and that perhaps those who perpetrated will be judged by it? Muslims use the term in everyday life to express wonder at the rising or falling of a beautiful Sun/Set. At the birth of a child, as a greeting between each other. But also as a spoken measure of dismay of things witnessed. Urm only partly. All those videos posted by the Taliban as they behead people. ISIS. Hamas. Chanting away. Associating a traditional religious chant with acts of terrorism or horror and then posting that for the world to see creates a perception. So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are." And those that promote them such as cleric's in a position to directly influence others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are." Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I know from previous discussions you don’t seem to agree with the concept of “optics” but this is an example of some British Muslims not seeing how the chant has now been associated with a different, often anti-West, meaning. It is provocative. Well. If it's optics at all, then that is the fault of the west, not of Muslims. Why should a Muslim not use a facet of his/her faith to express their belief that God is Greater than the act that they are protesting about - and that perhaps those who perpetrated will be judged by it? Muslims use the term in everyday life to express wonder at the rising or falling of a beautiful Sun/Set. At the birth of a child, as a greeting between each other. But also as a spoken measure of dismay of things witnessed. BTW I know it may just be a subjective view but your posting style saying “You need to understand” can come across as patronising or coming from a place of superior intellect. I’m sure that isn’t your intent
As you say. Your subjective view. "Disingenuous. Should any single person scream Allahu Akbar at the top of their lungs in any airport or sensitive crowded area in the USA or the Middle East (say, Dubai airport), security would be there in an instant, fully armed and possibly shoot first and ask questions later. Scream "Hello, gentlemen!" at the same volume and location and, at best, they'll call medics to haul your away. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. " What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. " Oh. I do fully understand that absolutely immature, sad yet often too common human response to a thing yet unproved. It's a thing that sends us down a track of our own making. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. Oh. I do fully understand that absolutely immature, sad yet often too common human response to a thing yet unproved. It's a thing that sends us down a track of our own making. " I don’t think it is immature though. I think the islamists have carefully crafted the association to deliberately drive those perceptions and cultivate anti-west sentiment. The protesters, regardless of their genuine intent, should IMO be cognisant of that so as not to inflame community tensions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. Oh. I do fully understand that absolutely immature, sad yet often too common human response to a thing yet unproved. It's a thing that sends us down a track of our own making. I don’t think it is immature though. I think the islamists have carefully crafted the association to deliberately drive those perceptions and cultivate anti-west sentiment. The protesters, regardless of their genuine intent, should IMO be cognisant of that so as not to inflame community tensions. " That works in its entirety in the opposite direction, too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. " How we perceive it is part of the issue, those who used it as they were committing atrocities would be more than happy with how some in societies view it and those of that faith who use it in fact even those who look like those who use it.. Bit like in the 70's when after some of the bombings carried out by PIRA the reaction by some was to attack anyone who had an Irish accent even if they were not of the catholic faith .. Those who seek to recruit for whatever cause and divide the societies we all live in are the ones who prosper from perceptions based largely on 'because of an attack' by them .. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. Oh. I do fully understand that absolutely immature, sad yet often too common human response to a thing yet unproved. It's a thing that sends us down a track of our own making. I don’t think it is immature though. I think the islamists have carefully crafted the association to deliberately drive those perceptions and cultivate anti-west sentiment. The protesters, regardless of their genuine intent, should IMO be cognisant of that so as not to inflame community tensions. That works in its entirety in the opposite direction, too. " Of course it does. The police officer clearly went OTT. But just as not all Muslims are bad neither are all police officers. To use your phrase, someone needs to be the adult in the room! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. Oh. I do fully understand that absolutely immature, sad yet often too common human response to a thing yet unproved. It's a thing that sends us down a track of our own making. I don’t think it is immature though. I think the islamists have carefully crafted the association to deliberately drive those perceptions and cultivate anti-west sentiment. The protesters, regardless of their genuine intent, should IMO be cognisant of that so as not to inflame community tensions. That works in its entirety in the opposite direction, too. Of course it does. The police officer clearly went OTT. But just as not all Muslims are bad neither are all police officers. To use your phrase, someone needs to be the adult in the room!" My OP didn't call for that - I said: ****Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public.**** It is this that needs addressing at a National level. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The police officer clearly went OTT. But just as not all Muslims are bad neither are all police officers. To use your phrase, someone needs to be the adult in the room!" I agree with you! The police are often grouped as “all” and it has been mentioned here already the amazing things they do everyday across the country is rarely mentioned. I’m surprised anyone would want to be a police officer in the UK, they are under armed in most instances, hardly supported by the people they try and protect and the salary is awful. Thankfully there are people who take up the challenge and work tirelessly to make our society a better and safer place and I’m thankful for that, if we think it’s bad now heaven only knows what it would be like without them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The police officer clearly went OTT. But just as not all Muslims are bad neither are all police officers. To use your phrase, someone needs to be the adult in the room! I agree with you! The police are often grouped as “all” and it has been mentioned here already the amazing things they do everyday across the country is rarely mentioned. I’m surprised anyone would want to be a police officer in the UK, they are under armed in most instances, hardly supported by the people they try and protect and the salary is awful. Thankfully there are people who take up the challenge and work tirelessly to make our society a better and safer place and I’m thankful for that, if we think it’s bad now heaven only knows what it would be like without them. " Seems you are selectively reading . . .the OP reads . . . My OP didn't call for that - I said: ****Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public.**** Point out the ALL Police to me? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The police officer clearly went OTT. But just as not all Muslims are bad neither are all police officers. To use your phrase, someone needs to be the adult in the room! I agree with you! The police are often grouped as “all” and it has been mentioned here already the amazing things they do everyday across the country is rarely mentioned. I’m surprised anyone would want to be a police officer in the UK, they are under armed in most instances, hardly supported by the people they try and protect and the salary is awful. Thankfully there are people who take up the challenge and work tirelessly to make our society a better and safer place and I’m thankful for that, if we think it’s bad now heaven only knows what it would be like without them. Seems you are selectively reading . . .the OP reads . . . My OP didn't call for that - I said: ****Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public.**** Point out the ALL Police to me? " Selective replying is what I did, hence the deleted part of the post that I wasn’t responding to.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So. Nobody said 'All Police' then. "I’m not at all sure you’ve fully understood that I was not replying to you or your OP in the post you’re referring to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So. Nobody said 'All Police' then.
I’m not at all sure you’ve fully understood that I was not replying to you or your OP in the post you’re referring to.
"Don't worry, I was selectively replying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first... "If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first...
If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again."Absolutely! These guys had already assaulted 3 officers, and were kicking-off in a public place. What if they'd managed to get the officer's firearms? In this situation, the Police have to de-escalate as quickly as possible, and by whatever means. In the US this guy would've been shot, no doubt about it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first...
If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again.
Absolutely! These guys had already assaulted 3 officers, and were kicking-off in a public place. What if they'd managed to get the officer's firearms? In this situation, the Police have to de-escalate as quickly as possible, and by whatever means. In the US this guy would've been shot, no doubt about it. "It’s fine that he stamped on his head because he could’ve shot him really isn’t the justification you think it is. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first...
If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again.
Absolutely! These guys had already assaulted 3 officers, and were kicking-off in a public place. What if they'd managed to get the officer's firearms? In this situation, the Police have to de-escalate as quickly as possible, and by whatever means. In the US this guy would've been shot, no doubt about it. "The trouble with what if is it's essentially bollocks, by all means deal with the threat to the firmest response especially as an officer had their nose broken and two others assaulted.. Use whatever lawful force is required to address whatever.. But if someone is on the floor prone and your covering them with a taser there is no lawful justification to then do what's been done.. None whatsoever regardless of how many what ifs .. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first...
If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again.
Absolutely! These guys had already assaulted 3 officers, and were kicking-off in a public place. What if they'd managed to get the officer's firearms? In this situation, the Police have to de-escalate as quickly as possible, and by whatever means. In the US this guy would've been shot, no doubt about it.
The trouble with what if is it's essentially bollocks, by all means deal with the threat to the firmest response especially as an officer had their nose broken and two others assaulted..
Use whatever lawful force is required to address whatever..
But if someone is on the floor prone and your covering them with a taser there is no lawful justification to then do what's been done..
None whatsoever regardless of how many what ifs .."End of. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv? "As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers? I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers?
I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer
"Shhhhh no one is interested in what "they" did wrong, it doesn't fit the agenda.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers?
I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer
"Makes you wonder why they were 'let out of custody' though. Huh? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers?
I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer
Makes you wonder why they were 'let out of custody' though. Huh?"Because if they were kept in custody, the local law-abiding community would probably torch the police station and everyone in it, then blame the police for not protecting the prisoners. If I was a Rochdale copper, I'd probably phone in sick for the next few days. Leave the "protestors" to it, then send in the council road sweepers in the morning to clear up the shit left behind. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers?
I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer
Makes you wonder why they were 'let out of custody' though. Huh?
Because if they were kept in custody, the local law-abiding community would probably torch the police station and everyone in it, then blame the police for not protecting the prisoners. If I was a Rochdale copper, I'd probably phone in sick for the next few days. Leave the "protestors" to it, then send in the council road sweepers in the morning to clear up the shit left behind." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So while all Muslims are clearly not remotely to blame, there are extremists who are. Until we learn that there were or are extremists protesting outside Rochdale Police Station while using the phrase, then let's not assume that that is what is being perpetrated by the protesters. What you need to understand (lol) is that it doesn’t matter what the protesters intent is, because of the perceptions now associated with the chant (due to how it has been used by extremists and terrorists) it will be seen by many as manifesting anti-west and anti-British sentiment. Oh. I do fully understand that absolutely immature, sad yet often too common human response to a thing yet unproved. It's a thing that sends us down a track of our own making. I don’t think it is immature though. I think the islamists have carefully crafted the association to deliberately drive those perceptions and cultivate anti-west sentiment. The protesters, regardless of their genuine intent, should IMO be cognisant of that so as not to inflame community tensions. That works in its entirety in the opposite direction, too. Of course it does. The police officer clearly went OTT. But just as not all Muslims are bad neither are all police officers. To use your phrase, someone needs to be the adult in the room! My OP didn't call for that - I said: ****Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public.**** It is this that needs addressing at a National level." You’re making the mistake of thinking our exchanges are related to anything else you have posted. They aren’t. You need to understand that I posted something reflecting how it made me uncomfortable (for reasons them discussed) and you responded to that post. My point is clear, that regardless of intent or whether perceptions are correct, Allah Akbar has been appropriated by Islamic extremists and terrorists and now has negative connotations. Using it outside Rochdale Police Station was very poor judgement (or deliberate). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first...
If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again.
Absolutely! These guys had already assaulted 3 officers, and were kicking-off in a public place. What if they'd managed to get the officer's firearms? In this situation, the Police have to de-escalate as quickly as possible, and by whatever means. In the US this guy would've been shot, no doubt about it. "From what I know, there was an attempt at taking away the police's firearms too. I understand that what the police officer did after the guy was rendered immobile is not legally defensible. But morally speaking, I can totally see why someone can lose his cool in that situation. Easy for people on the internet to comment on acting calm in these situations. But hard to do it in practice. As you said, in the US, it wouldn't have reached that point. I hope that the sectarian mob that protests outside the station has zero influence on the final decision on this case. But I also know that they will have an influence. These mobs have always achieved what they wanted to achieve in this country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If any of us had did this. Anything that had gone on before wouldn't have been justified in the eyes of the law this was self defence. In fact the officer in question would probably have arrested us and called an ambulance for our attacker. But only after he kicked our head in first...
If those guys had already demonstrated a willingness to attack and injure other police officers then I think a show of overwhelming force was more than justified to prevent them doing it again."No! The video clearly shows the guy in blue already on the floor (maybe tasered?) and seemingly incapacitated and THEN the officer kicks him in the head AND THEN stamps on his head. That is not reasonable force. IMO the only scenario where that level of force is justified is where there is a threat to life (ie the guy in blue has weapon or bomb). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv? "The citizens of Rochdale best lock-up their daughters then  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So you said already. "Who? What? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Listened to Andy Burnham today, as major thought it's worth listening too He said people need to see the whole picture of what happened before the clip etc He has a point imho. See it from start to finish which will happen if it goes to court. As for the protests? What are they meant to achieve? " The media need to release the whole video otherwise they are acting irresponsibly and fanning the flames. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
The citizens of Rochdale best lock-up their daughters then "That's been good advice in Rochdale for a few decades now  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
The citizens of Rochdale best lock-up their daughters then
That's been good advice in Rochdale for a few decades now "Don't worry, the police won't prosecute anyone! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Listened to Andy Burnham today, as major thought it's worth listening too He said people need to see the whole picture of what happened before the clip etc He has a point imho. See it from start to finish which will happen if it goes to court. As for the protests? What are they meant to achieve? The media need to release the whole video otherwise they are acting irresponsibly and fanning the flames." Now it's under investigation they can't. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Listened to Andy Burnham today, as major thought it's worth listening too He said people need to see the whole picture of what happened before the clip etc He has a point imho. See it from start to finish which will happen if it goes to court. As for the protests? What are they meant to achieve? The media need to release the whole video otherwise they are acting irresponsibly and fanning the flames." Which was my point earlier on another thread about the soldier who was stabbed, selective reporting causes a shit storm especially with easily triggered. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers?
I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer
Makes you wonder why they were 'let out of custody' though. Huh?
Because if they were kept in custody, the local law-abiding community would probably torch the police station and everyone in it, then blame the police for not protecting the prisoners. If I was a Rochdale copper, I'd probably phone in sick for the next few days. Leave the "protestors" to it, then send in the council road sweepers in the morning to clear up the shit left behind."Really, you think that’s why they weren’t kept in custody, because if they had been protestors would e burned down the police station with them in it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why has the suspended officer not been arrested for assault/gbh/threatening life. " Because that is the way things are normally done. Suspended. Reported. Investigated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Isn't it time that the Government set a wide-ranging investigation into the Police Force, UK. Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public. If you haven't seen the despicable incident at Manchester airport, then go look. Enough really should be enough. " The other day prostesteres were sprayed with an irritant substance at an anti Palestine demo by police and now I have read it is ok for the police to kick a person in the head, stamp on those heads. I have worked with violent criminals and it is a fact that if I am attacked it was my choice, I can seek justice after the fact but it is my choice to work with them, so no it is not acceptable to be like the attackers, but to be above them, the law should show that in the aftermath. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Isn't it time that the Government set a wide-ranging investigation into the Police Force, UK. Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public. If you haven't seen the despicable incident at Manchester airport, then go look. Enough really should be enough. The other day prostesteres were sprayed with an irritant substance at an anti Palestine demo by police and now I have read it is ok for the police to kick a person in the head, stamp on those heads. I have worked with violent criminals and it is a fact that if I am attacked it was my choice, I can seek justice after the fact but it is my choice to work with them, so no it is not acceptable to be like the attackers, but to be above them, the law should show that in the aftermath." No employee, Police, Prison Officer, Medics, whatever, should face violence in the course of their work. They have a right to get home safely to their families like the rest of us. Personally, I have no tolerance nor sympathy with people who feel entitled to inflict harm on those performing public duties. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More "protests" are expected in Rochdale tonight. Who wants a new tv?
As anyone asked these protesters what they think about the thugs being allowed out of custody and back into the community after they hospitalised 3 officers?
I would love to understand their views on that side of coin, we’ve heard plenty about what they think about the kick to the head officer
Makes you wonder why they were 'let out of custody' though. Huh?"Because they were bailed as is often the case on the offences they were arrested for. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why?" No, because the police are not judge and jury. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury." They are human though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though" So is the man whose head was stamped on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on." I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison " It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison " Do we know he put three police officers in hospital? Even if he did he was on the floor and posing no threat. He may well be a horrible violent man but that does not excuse what the police officer did to him. And yes, he is a human being. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him." Who is siding with anyone? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why?" Unless there is an incident of significance immediately prior to the video circulating, then why would you kick and stamp the head of a prisoner who is already restrained. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Top notch officer deserving of a commendation. “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” ― George Orwell. " Fyodor Dostoyevsky — 'A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens, but by how it treats its criminals.' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? Unless there is an incident of significance immediately prior to the video circulating, then why would you kick and stamp the head of a prisoner who is already restrained. " Quite so, we probably only seen 20 percent of the story, hence keep an open mind till all information is out in the open ... Common sense 2024 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison Do we know he put three police officers in hospital? Even if he did he was on the floor and posing no threat. He may well be a horrible violent man but that does not excuse what the police officer did to him. And yes, he is a human being." Even if he did | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Turns out the brother of the man whose head was kicked and stamped on, is a serving GMP officer." And the victim now reportedly has 'cyst on the brain' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Turns out the brother of the man whose head was kicked and stamped on, is a serving GMP officer." The officer is reported to have asked his supervisor that he shouldn't go into work because he is 'frightened'. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison Do we know he put three police officers in hospital? Even if he did he was on the floor and posing no threat. He may well be a horrible violent man but that does not excuse what the police officer did to him. And yes, he is a human being. Even if he did "A police officer’s job is to enforce the law, not exact revenge. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. " Some people are just horny for authoritarianism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. " Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone?" In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive!" “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind” - MK Gandhi | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason." Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive!" Nobody is happy with that. Some of us just don't and won't support police stamping on people's heads or even shooting them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident?" Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident?" Indeed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive! Nobody is happy with that. Some of us just don't and won't support police stamping on people's heads or even shooting them. " Even for self defense? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded." Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive! Nobody is happy with that. Some of us just don't and won't support police stamping on people's heads or even shooting them. Even for self defense?" When someone is lying face down on the floor it is not self defence to kick and stamp on their head. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other?" It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive! Nobody is happy with that. Some of us just don't and won't support police stamping on people's heads or even shooting them. Even for self defense? When someone is lying face down on the floor it is not self defence to kick and stamp on their head." If they hadn't got him lying face down and shot him the moment he attacked them, would you be making this argument? You know they could have easily closed the case saying that they had to do this as they were threatening the safety of the police and other people in the airport right? The thugs should be happy that they came out of this alive. Sure, attacking him after he was immobilised was uncalled for. But it definitely doesn't deserve such hatred towards the police officer. People thinking they can go after the police and get away with it is a much more serious issue. And that sectarian mob doing the protests? That's an even bigger issue. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished." Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Amazing to see people advocating for not only police brutality, but also the American system where the police shoot and kill their own citizens. What a time to be alive. Amazing to see that people are happy seeing public service workers being attacked and expect them to not respond in kind. What a time to be alive! Nobody is happy with that. Some of us just don't and won't support police stamping on people's heads or even shooting them. Even for self defense? When someone is lying face down on the floor it is not self defence to kick and stamp on their head. If they hadn't got him lying face down and shot him the moment he attacked them, would you be making this argument? You know they could have easily closed the case saying that they had to do this as they were threatening the safety of the police and other people in the airport right? The thugs should be happy that they came out of this alive. Sure, attacking him after he was immobilised was uncalled for. But it definitely doesn't deserve such hatred towards the police officer. People thinking they can go after the police and get away with it is a much more serious issue. And that sectarian mob doing the protests? That's an even bigger issue." No, he couldn’t just have shot him and it would’ve been case closed, it would’ve been murder, and it would’ve been far worse for the officer in question. People are not exhibiting hatred towards the police on here, they are holding them to account and expecting them to do their job. The police are not above the law, and saying the person whose head was kicked and stamped on while he was lying face down on the floor should be glad they are alive is disgraceful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power." It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No, he couldn’t just have shot him and it would’ve been case closed, it would’ve been murder, and it would’ve been far worse for the officer in question. People are not exhibiting hatred towards the police on here, they are holding them to account and expecting them to do their job. The police are not above the law, and saying the person whose head was kicked and stamped on while he was lying face down on the floor should be glad they are alive is disgraceful." They were police with firearms. It wouldn't be that hard to justify that they were going for his firearms and hence were a threat to public safety. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No, he couldn’t just have shot him and it would’ve been case closed, it would’ve been murder, and it would’ve been far worse for the officer in question. People are not exhibiting hatred towards the police on here, they are holding them to account and expecting them to do their job. The police are not above the law, and saying the person whose head was kicked and stamped on while he was lying face down on the floor should be glad they are alive is disgraceful. They were police with firearms. It wouldn't be that hard to justify that they were going for his firearms and hence were a threat to public safety." Police don't usually find it hard to justify a lot of things they do. Thank god people have cameras and record things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals." You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Give it a rest no one as seen the full video yet the guy it seems as given a interview already so can not be so injured but I like to think 98 % of the people if stopped by armed police would do as they was asked not start attacking them and trying to get there gun what would you be saying had they got the guns and started shooting. But that would have.been the police fault let’s wait till the full story and investigation been done remember they injured 3 police officers doing there jobs" As far as I’m aware he hasn’t given an interview, his solicitor (a thoroughly unpleasant chap) has. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police." Not all people should be afraid of police as is. But they should be definitely afraid of attacking the police? Especially armed ones. Criminals should be scared of police. They shouldn't be thinking "oh these weaklings! we can beat them up and they won't be able to do anything" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No, he couldn’t just have shot him and it would’ve been case closed, it would’ve been murder, and it would’ve been far worse for the officer in question. People are not exhibiting hatred towards the police on here, they are holding them to account and expecting them to do their job. The police are not above the law, and saying the person whose head was kicked and stamped on while he was lying face down on the floor should be glad they are alive is disgraceful. They were police with firearms. It wouldn't be that hard to justify that they were going for his firearms and hence were a threat to public safety. Police don't usually find it hard to justify a lot of things they do. Thank god people have cameras and record things." Yes, and if the thugs were going after the police police with firearms in a public place like an airport, I would consider any kind of response justified. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police." "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Isn't it time that the Government set a wide-ranging investigation into the Police Force, UK. Day after day, we keep reading and seeing despicable acts of Police brutality and lapses in basic dignity and care against the very people they are 'employed' to protect. The UK Public. If you haven't seen the despicable incident at Manchester airport, then go look. Enough really should be enough. The other day prostesteres were sprayed with an irritant substance at an anti Palestine demo by police and now I have read it is ok for the police to kick a person in the head, stamp on those heads. I have worked with violent criminals and it is a fact that if I am attacked it was my choice, I can seek justice after the fact but it is my choice to work with them, so no it is not acceptable to be like the attackers, but to be above them, the law should show that in the aftermath. No employee, Police, Prison Officer, Medics, whatever, should face violence in the course of their work. They have a right to get home safely to their families like the rest of us. Personally, I have no tolerance nor sympathy with people who feel entitled to inflict harm on those performing public duties." No one should, but it happens in the course of the work, and I cannot stamp on a persons head I would of been sacked. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap)." Respect isn’t the same as fear, it’s not even close. People who think it is have been watching too many gangster films. Respect is something that is earned, and incidents such as the one at the airport makes people lose respect for the police. As I’ve mentioned previously, in this country we are policed by consent, not fear. People should not fear the police, they should fear the result of being apprehended by the police, i.e. the sentence meted out by the courts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap)." The police aren’t the only thing standing between us and anarchy, that’s utter nonsense. If there were no police would you go out and steal whatever you wanted, beat people up or kill folk? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The most disturbing thing about this story is how the narrative is manipulated by the msm. Yes, the Police actions looked heavy-handed in isolation, but what about the full picture? As I see it, if you assault a Police Officer then expect a robust response, and deservedly so." ------------------------------------------------- He received a 'robust response', he was tapered and forcibly detained. He will have a day in court to be judged by his peers for any misdeeds. Police officers gilding the lily in the process of arrest is overstepping the mark in my opinion | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police." We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap)." --------------------------------------- They don't earn respect by brutalising members of the public or performing at a low standard. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap). The police aren’t the only thing standing between us and anarchy, that’s utter nonsense. If there were no police would you go out and steal whatever you wanted, beat people up or kill folk?" No I wouldn't, but plenty would, no doubt about it. In the sense that they are at the sharp end, the Police are indeed the only thing between us and anarchy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. " What laws have ‘liberals’ watered down? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap). The police aren’t the only thing standing between us and anarchy, that’s utter nonsense. If there were no police would you go out and steal whatever you wanted, beat people up or kill folk? No I wouldn't, but plenty would, no doubt about it. In the sense that they are at the sharp end, the Police are indeed the only thing between us and anarchy. " How many of your friends would steal things and mete out violence if there were no police? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap). The police aren’t the only thing standing between us and anarchy, that’s utter nonsense. If there were no police would you go out and steal whatever you wanted, beat people up or kill folk?" I myself wouldn't. But there of enough number of people who would, which will lead to a chain of events and eventually anarchy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. " There is a lack of respect for the Police, with few having a grasp of what they must contend with in the course of their duties. Take the new ITV 'comedy' series Piglets. Just a crass mocking of Police for cheap laughs. A grain of comfort is the OFCOM have been deluged with complaints. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How many of your friends would steal things and mete out violence if there were no police?" None of us would, immediately. But there will be gangs who realise that there won't be any consequences to their actions and start stealing and beating up people. Without police, we have no chance but to form gangs ourselves and indulge in the same thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. What laws have ‘liberals’ watered down?" ------------------------------------------ Those laws where people who have the power to restrict our freedoms have to be accountable for their behaviour | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A few rumours on twatter, that the men involved were already wanted by the police? If true does it depend on why? No, because the police are not judge and jury. They are human though So is the man whose head was stamped on. I was talking about the police, you're talking about a thug who put 3 officers in hospital, breaking a female officers nose, fighting with armed officers and is now parading around social media with a lawyer talking about brain injury and prosecuting the officers. You take your poison It's funny how people would side with thugs like that guy and would take every opportunity to shit on police who was put in a terrible spot by that thug. And then they will be surprised when police aren't strong enough to protect them. As someone said above, if it were the US, it wouldn't have even gone this far. Attacking the police would be the end of him. Who is siding with anyone? In this case, the fact that some thugs assaulted police officers is a much more serious issue than a police officer responding in kind. Yet everyone here seem to want action against the police officer for some reason. Surely we should want everyone to be held accountable for their actions in the incident? Yes, lets start with the thugs first. They are the bigger criminals in the incident. Not the police who responded. Why do you assume their guilt but not the police officer’s? Why not have them all be held accountable, rather than say it should be one before the other? It's clear that some police officers were assaulted? Legally speaking, yes, I don't see how the officer can escape without punishment. I am saying that the thugs going after the police is the bigger issue. And yet everyone seems to focus on getting the police punished. Because the police’s job is not to violently stamp on people’s heads, especially not when that person is lying face down on the floor and is posing no threat. It’s the police’s job to stop that sort of violence, and they are given powers above and beyond a regular person in order to do that. So when they commit the sort of offence that they should be stopping then I’m afraid they will be under more scrutiny as they are abusing their power. It's easy to sit on the internet and lecture about how the police shouldn't have done this and that. When you have thugs like them attacking you the way they did, adrenaline kicks in. Sure he could have handled it better. But no, that's not the bigger issue here. The fact that some thugs thought that police can be attacked and they can get away with it(which they are) is a bigger issue. You are building a society where the ones who are to stop crime aren't feared by criminals. You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. "No one should fear the police" Really? The police are the only thing that stands between us and anarchy. So yes, they should be feared - or at least respected (I know they are different things, but there's a lot of overlap). The police aren’t the only thing standing between us and anarchy, that’s utter nonsense. If there were no police would you go out and steal whatever you wanted, beat people up or kill folk? No I wouldn't, but plenty would, no doubt about it. In the sense that they are at the sharp end, the Police are indeed the only thing between us and anarchy. How many of your friends would steal things and mete out violence if there were no police?" I have no idea - largely because the notion is unthinkable. But I'd guess we'd have widespread lawlessness within days if the Police disappeared overnight. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. What laws have ‘liberals’ watered down? ------------------------------------------ Those laws where people who have the power to restrict our freedoms have to be accountable for their behaviour "The fact that someone can commit violence against police and walk around freely. The fact that child r&pists get out of prison in one or two years. Hell, in Germany, 9 guys gang r&ped a 15 year old girl. Eight of them didn't have to spend one day in prison. A woman who sent an insulting message to the r&pist was sent to prison for a day. Liberals have well and truly fucked up the justice system all over Europe that it's laughable at this point. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"People should not fear the police, they should fear the result of being apprehended by the police, i.e. the sentence meted out by the courts." Then why do they carry firearms? People should indeed fear the immediate consequence of violence and a failure to heed police warnings or attacking the police. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. " ************************************** And....., the guy seems to have the fastest growing 'brain cyst' on record...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. ************************************** And....., the guy seems to have the fastest growing 'brain cyst' on record......" The guy knows very well how to play the media and how to get the progressives behind him. The sad thing is that his tactics seem to be working. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. " It's got fuck all to do with feminism, did in law has just retired from the met and I think if she heard that line being used she might kick you in the nads.. No one at all on this whole thread is saying the guys who attacked the police don't deserve to be held to account or that the police should take that sort of behaviour.. There'll be no come back for them using necessary force to protect themselves and to subdued the assailants, deal with the situation etc and that's absolutely correct and right.. During the assault the police should never hold back in looking after each other and the general public but the law is there to protect everyone including them.. What happened after went beyond what is lawful, necessary and appropriate and that's the issue.. The whataboutery of liberals watering down the law, the ' he deserved it' etc is an over reaction.. To be honest I don't want to think about the type of society where we accept that the ones we pay to protect us can kick anyone's head and stamp upon it when the person isn't a threat because at some point it'll be one of your own.. And if you think that's bollocks look at unlawful deaths in police custody this past fifty years.. By a minority yes but often protected by colleagues.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. " which one of the two broke her nose ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. which one of the two broke her nose ? " In an incident like this, there's no time to ask "excuse my did you break my colleague's nose?". It needs firm and decisive action to protect officers and the public. That's what the guy got, and a good thing too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. which one of the two broke her nose ? In an incident like this, there's no time to ask "excuse my did you break my colleague's nose?". It needs firm and decisive action to protect officers and the public. That's what the guy got, and a good thing too. " so it's a looser consequence of one's actions. Just being involved in the incident justified being beaten up. Is there a limit to what the police could have done given their actions ? (I'm only just up... Have we got any update on what happened earlier ?) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. It's got fuck all to do with feminism, did in law has just retired from the met and I think if she heard that line being used she might kick you in the nads.. No one at all on this whole thread is saying the guys who attacked the police don't deserve to be held to account or that the police should take that sort of behaviour.. There'll be no come back for them using necessary force to protect themselves and to subdued the assailants, deal with the situation etc and that's absolutely correct and right.. During the assault the police should never hold back in looking after each other and the general public but the law is there to protect everyone including them.. What happened after went beyond what is lawful, necessary and appropriate and that's the issue.. The whataboutery of liberals watering down the law, the ' he deserved it' etc is an over reaction.. To be honest I don't want to think about the type of society where we accept that the ones we pay to protect us can kick anyone's head and stamp upon it when the person isn't a threat because at some point it'll be one of your own.. And if you think that's bollocks look at unlawful deaths in police custody this past fifty years.. By a minority yes but often protected by colleagues.." You criticise others for whataboutery and go on to point out unlawful deaths in police custody. Isn't that whataboutery? - Some thugs physically assaulted police officers with firearms. - One of them was a female. - They got beaten up by police in response. The first two issues are much more serious than the last one in my opinion. Anyone who started physical aggression is the root cause of issues like this. If this was just a case of someone selling dr&gs and the person did not try to physically assault the police, then I would be standing against the police. But those thugs started it first. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. which one of the two broke her nose ? In an incident like this, there's no time to ask "excuse my did you break my colleague's nose?". It needs firm and decisive action to protect officers and the public. That's what the guy got, and a good thing too. so it's a looser consequence of one's actions. Just being involved in the incident justified being beaten up. Is there a limit to what the police could have done given their actions ? (I'm only just up... Have we got any update on what happened earlier ?)" I don't think we have the full picture yet, but the incident seems to have started on an incoming flight and escalated in Arrivals area. It was a rolling brawl in a public area injuring officers and with an attempt to steal firearms. It needed a fast ending by any means possible. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. which one of the two broke her nose ? In an incident like this, there's no time to ask "excuse my did you break my colleague's nose?". It needs firm and decisive action to protect officers and the public. That's what the guy got, and a good thing too. so it's a looser consequence of one's actions. Just being involved in the incident justified being beaten up. Is there a limit to what the police could have done given their actions ? (I'm only just up... Have we got any update on what happened earlier ?) I don't think we have the full picture yet, but the incident seems to have started on an incoming flight and escalated in Arrivals area. It was a rolling brawl in a public area injuring officers and with an attempt to steal firearms. It needed a fast ending by any means possible." and it had ended. One fella was even sitting and then complying. I've not yet seen a copper justify this. That's my barometer for this being unnecessary force. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. It's got fuck all to do with feminism, did in law has just retired from the met and I think if she heard that line being used she might kick you in the nads.. No one at all on this whole thread is saying the guys who attacked the police don't deserve to be held to account or that the police should take that sort of behaviour.. There'll be no come back for them using necessary force to protect themselves and to subdued the assailants, deal with the situation etc and that's absolutely correct and right.. During the assault the police should never hold back in looking after each other and the general public but the law is there to protect everyone including them.. What happened after went beyond what is lawful, necessary and appropriate and that's the issue.. The whataboutery of liberals watering down the law, the ' he deserved it' etc is an over reaction.. To be honest I don't want to think about the type of society where we accept that the ones we pay to protect us can kick anyone's head and stamp upon it when the person isn't a threat because at some point it'll be one of your own.. And if you think that's bollocks look at unlawful deaths in police custody this past fifty years.. By a minority yes but often protected by colleagues.. You criticise others for whataboutery and go on to point out unlawful deaths in police custody. Isn't that whataboutery? - Some thugs physically assaulted police officers with firearms. - One of them was a female. - They got beaten up by police in response. The first two issues are much more serious than the last one in my opinion. Anyone who started physical aggression is the root cause of issues like this. If this was just a case of someone selling dr&gs and the person did not try to physically assault the police, then I would be standing against the police. But those thugs started it first." It's not whataboutery in that it's fact, it's happened sadly over the years so no on that your wrong.. Again as you seem not able to look at what went on, in the melee where they hit the police by all means deal with that to whatever they the police deemed appropriate and necessary using the means they rightly have.. Will say that again rightly have.. But when the guy is on the floor and as can be clearly seen is not a threat that's the issue, it's unlawful, not necessary and you can bet his rep won't be using the attack before as any sort of justification.. Mitigation, then yes of course.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You appear not to understand what policing with consent is. No one should fear the police, people should fear the consequences of breaking the law. The consequences of breaking the law are not decided by the police. We have a problem as a country, liberals have watered down law and order. Criminals should be afraid of the police, they’re not because they know people will stand up and literally fight their corners for them to get them off with a hefty compensation package too. His solicitor and the way they are parading around reminds of some b movie parody, and the media are lapping it up again. What laws have ‘liberals’ watered down?" Let’s start with law and order, and an example would be how you have pointed out that society wouldn’t be impacted by lawlessness if the police were not in place. Your reason for this, you and your friends wouldn’t break the law…. That thinking is so out there I don’t even know how to respond. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. which one of the two broke her nose ? In an incident like this, there's no time to ask "excuse my did you break my colleague's nose?". It needs firm and decisive action to protect officers and the public. That's what the guy got, and a good thing too. " No time to ascertain who it was, just to lash out in anger to get revenge, on someone, whether they did it or not. It’s a very good thing, for both you and everyone else, that you aren’t a police officer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Also a reminder that a woman was assaulted by these thugs. If you are a feminist and someone who wants more female officers in the force, that should be a bigger concern for you than a thug getting beaten up as a consequence to his own actions. It's got fuck all to do with feminism, did in law has just retired from the met and I think if she heard that line being used she might kick you in the nads.. No one at all on this whole thread is saying the guys who attacked the police don't deserve to be held to account or that the police should take that sort of behaviour.. There'll be no come back for them using necessary force to protect themselves and to subdued the assailants, deal with the situation etc and that's absolutely correct and right.. During the assault the police should never hold back in looking after each other and the general public but the law is there to protect everyone including them.. What happened after went beyond what is lawful, necessary and appropriate and that's the issue.. The whataboutery of liberals watering down the law, the ' he deserved it' etc is an over reaction.. To be honest I don't want to think about the type of society where we accept that the ones we pay to protect us can kick anyone's head and stamp upon it when the person isn't a threat because at some point it'll be one of your own.. And if you think that's bollocks look at unlawful deaths in police custody this past fifty years.. By a minority yes but often protected by colleagues.. You criticise others for whataboutery and go on to point out unlawful deaths in police custody. Isn't that whataboutery? - Some thugs physically assaulted police officers with firearms. - One of them was a female. - They got beaten up by police in response. The first two issues are much more serious than the last one in my opinion. Anyone who started physical aggression is the root cause of issues like this. If this was just a case of someone selling dr&gs and the person did not try to physically assault the police, then I would be standing against the police. But those thugs started it first. It's not whataboutery in that it's fact, it's happened sadly over the years so no on that your wrong.. Again as you seem not able to look at what went on, in the melee where they hit the police by all means deal with that to whatever they the police deemed appropriate and necessary using the means they rightly have.. Will say that again rightly have.. But when the guy is on the floor and as can be clearly seen is not a threat that's the issue, it's unlawful, not necessary and you can bet his rep won't be using the attack before as any sort of justification.. Mitigation, then yes of course.." That makes sense, so if the offending thug had gone down numerous times and sprung back up to have another go at assault with his head, feet etc, the mitigation would be to prohibit his movements but that hasn’t worked, so hit him hard enough to take the fight out of him to buy enough to time to restrain home properly. Would it be justified then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's not whataboutery in that it's fact, it's happened sadly over the years so no on that your wrong.. " Something being a fact doesn't mean it's not whataboutery. What I said is also a fact. " Again as you seem not able to look at what went on, in the melee where they hit the police by all means deal with that to whatever they the police deemed appropriate and necessary using the means they rightly have.. Will say that again rightly have.. But when the guy is on the floor and as can be clearly seen is not a threat that's the issue, it's unlawful, not necessary and you can bet his rep won't be using the attack before as any sort of justification.. " Yes, it's unlawful. But that's much less serious issue compared to the fact that some thugs deciding to physically assault police officers. We should be talking seriously about why these people thought they can physically assault police officers and get away with it first. Because if that becomes normal, our society will breakdown into anarchy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
