aintforever Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 10 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said: Absolutely no way that any of them had an agenda? I expect everyone there had an agenda - to stop women being raped and killed, or feeling unsafe on the streets. I doubt any were there because they just liked lighting candles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 21 minutes ago, aintforever said: I expect everyone there had an agenda - to stop women being raped and killed, or feeling unsafe on the streets. I doubt any were there because they just liked lighting candles. Women gathering to say that they want loons not to kill or rape women will not stop loons raping or killing women. That was the only bona fide agenda, but it was a pointless one. Many of the women had different, mainly anti establishment, anti police, anti men, anti whatever, agendas. The farcical one was the women seeking to have police numbers reduced, without any thought that less cops makes everyone more vulnerable. Idiots. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, whelk said: It is not how it was reported from people who were there. But you struggled with any BLM protests. That’s fine and as I said Daily Mail take. ‘They we’re all this sort’ So you don’t believe the statement from the Met police then? by the way I didn’t struggle with the BLM protests, it was the situation with wallies on here denying there was any violence whatsoever only after being shown the considerable evidence of widescale disorder did they finally admit there was any even then it was dismissed as only a tiny minority, let’s not let that get in the way of the cause we were told, much like this is. Edited 17 March, 2021 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 21 minutes ago, egg said: Women gathering to say that they want loons not to kill or rape women will not stop loons raping or killing women. That was the only bona fide agenda, but it was a pointless one. Many of the women had different, mainly anti establishment, anti police, anti men, anti whatever, agendas. The farcical one was the women seeking to have police numbers reduced, without any thought that less cops makes everyone more vulnerable. Idiots. There was bound to be some people there with anti-men and anti-police views, it was a vigil for someone who was probably raped and murdered by a police officer. You always get a minority of extremists at these sort of things. Given the circumstances and the emotional nature of the occasion, a low key approach to policing obviously made more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKD Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 1 hour ago, whelk said: It is not how it was reported from people who were there. But you struggled with any BLM protests. That’s fine and as I said Daily Mail take. ‘They we’re all this sort’ I mean there are literally photos to prove there was a section with an anti men and police agenda.. I assume you mean the throwing objects bit...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKD Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 47 minutes ago, egg said: Women gathering to say that they want loons not to kill or rape women will not stop loons raping or killing women. That was the only bona fide agenda, but it was a pointless one. Many of the women had different, mainly anti establishment, anti police, anti men, anti whatever, agendas. The farcical one was the women seeking to have police numbers reduced, without any thought that less cops makes everyone more vulnerable. Idiots. Hang on, only Sunday you were saying this was in memory of a dead women and to make it political was ‘daft’. Glad youve now seen through them! Agree with the above though. Idiots is the best word to describe them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 4 minutes ago, SKD said: Hang on, only Sunday you were saying this was in memory of a dead women and to make it political was ‘daft’. Glad youve now seen through them! Agree with the above though. Idiots is the best word to describe them. The vigil itself was not political. The other stuff was a variety of people with their own different agendas. Some political, some not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 34 minutes ago, aintforever said: There was bound to be some people there with anti-men and anti-police views, it was a vigil for someone who was probably raped and murdered by a police officer. You always get a minority of extremists at these sort of things. Given the circumstances and the emotional nature of the occasion, a low key approach to policing obviously made more sense. Sounds like it was until they started having things thrown at them https://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-from-ac-helen-ball-following-events-in-clapham-common-423210 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg Posted 17 March, 2021 Share Posted 17 March, 2021 2 minutes ago, Turkish said: Sounds like it was until they started having things thrown at them https://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-from-ac-helen-ball-following-events-in-clapham-common-423210 Looking at the time line and various reports, the police sat back and soaked up loads for ages before they took a few away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 11 hours ago, Turkish said: Sounds like it was until they started having things thrown at them https://news.met.police.uk/news/statement-from-ac-helen-ball-following-events-in-clapham-common-423210 Looks like they were following Detective Super Cop aintclever's advice and let them light their candles and stuff, whilst waiting for them to get bored and disappear. The only flaw in his cunning plan is the ones that were there who were intent on causing trouble. How long should the police have waited for them to get bored? From the four arrests that were made - I think we've seen photos of all of them haven't we? - and the thousands of hours of body camera footage, have any of the officers present been suspended for the dispicable acts of police brutality we were told about? How many of those arrests for breach of the peace / breach of coronavirus legislation have resulted in no charges being brought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: Looks like they were following Detective Super Cop aintclever's advice and let them light their candles and stuff, whilst waiting for them to get bored and disappear. The only flaw in his cunning plan is the ones that were there who were intent on causing trouble. How long should the police have waited for them to get bored? From the four arrests that were made - I think we've seen photos of all of them haven't we? - and the thousands of hours of body camera footage, have any of the officers present been suspended for the dispicable acts of police brutality we were told about? How many of those arrests for breach of the peace / breach of coronavirus legislation have resulted in no charges being brought? The fact is their actions directly led to another mass gathering the following evening, which they stood by and let happen, so they have actually increased the risk of transmission and pissed off a load of soppy London women in the process. Brilliant policing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 44 minutes ago, aintforever said: The fact is their actions directly led to another mass gathering the following evening, which they stood by and let happen, so they have actually increased the risk of transmission and pissed off a load of soppy London women in the process. Brilliant policing. Glad to see you're fully onboard with it pal! I bet this is the kind of response from men that all those protests were hoping for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 11 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: Looks like they were following Detective Super Cop aintclever's advice and let them light their candles and stuff, whilst waiting for them to get bored and disappear. The only flaw in his cunning plan is the ones that were there who were intent on causing trouble. How long should the police have waited for them to get bored? From the four arrests that were made - I think we've seen photos of all of them haven't we? - and the thousands of hours of body camera footage, have any of the officers present been suspended for the dispicable acts of police brutality we were told about? How many of those arrests for breach of the peace / breach of coronavirus legislation have resulted in no charges being brought? I'm not sure anyone said anything about brutality? There's a big difference between a perceived overuse of force and smacking someone around unnecessarily. No one would have been suspended for the arrests made, at least not the couple I saw which were arguably heavy handed but would not be anywhere near worthy of suspending someone over. Also, I'm not sure how many people you think work in these departments but there's no way anyone has looked through thousands of hours of BWV footage since the weekend! They may have looked at the arrests but that would have been it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 7 minutes ago, The Cat said: I'm not sure anyone said anything about brutality? There's a big difference between a perceived overuse of force and smacking someone around unnecessarily. No one would have been suspended for the arrests made, at least not the couple I saw which were arguably heavy handed but would not be anywhere near worthy of suspending someone over. Also, I'm not sure how many people you think work in these departments but there's no way anyone has looked through thousands of hours of BWV footage since the weekend! They may have looked at the arrests but that would have been it. The Guardian did : https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/14/sarah-everard-vigil-police-extra-powers-met-brutal-women-priti-patel-protests Quote Given the Met’s brutal treatment of peaceful women, the timing of Priti Patel’s bill to boost policing of protests couldn’t be worse They then claim that the police 'man handled' peaceful women, which you would expect to be worthy of a suspension if proven to be true, surely? Quote The purpose of policing isn’t primarily enforcement, let alone brutality: it is to keep the peace. What happened on Saturday is now infamous, documented in widely shared images and videos of uniformed officers manhandling peaceful female protesters to the chants of “Shame on you”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 8 minutes ago, The Cat said: I'm not sure anyone said anything about brutality? There's a big difference between a perceived overuse of force and smacking someone around unnecessarily. No one would have been suspended for the arrests made, at least not the couple I saw which were arguably heavy handed but would not be anywhere near worthy of suspending someone over. Also, I'm not sure how many people you think work in these departments but there's no way anyone has looked through thousands of hours of BWV footage since the weekend! They may have looked at the arrests but that would have been it. Bit of a fuss over nothing. After the initial HOW DARE THEY STOP THE PEACEFUL VIGIL has died down and. Few facts emerge about the truth of what happened then suddenly all those screaming about how the evil police attacked innocent people back down and admit that actually it wasn’t quite like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 18 March, 2021 Share Posted 18 March, 2021 36 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said: The Guardian did : https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/14/sarah-everard-vigil-police-extra-powers-met-brutal-women-priti-patel-protests They then claim that the police 'man handled' peaceful women, which you would expect to be worthy of a suspension if proven to be true, surely? I'll check the regs tomorrow when I'm back at work but my understanding is that the Guardian are not the ultimate decision makers when it comes to deciding whether or not a police officer was brutal or not. Newspaper in sensationalising something to appease their readers shock. Also "manhandled" is too gender specific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 12 hours ago, The Cat said: I'll check the regs tomorrow when I'm back at work but my understanding is that the Guardian are not the ultimate decision makers when it comes to deciding whether or not a police officer was brutal or not. Newspaper in sensationalising something to appease their readers shock. Also "manhandled" is too gender specific. So, are you now agreeing that there was no police brutality and that the arrests that were made were lawful and did not include excess force? Or do you still maintain that the protesters who were arrested should not have been wrestled (apart from the mention of gender is that the same or different to 'man handled'?) to the floor and handcuffed? On 14/03/2021 at 16:24, The Cat said: The consequences of their actions though should not include being wrestled to the floor and handcuffed, that is in no way proportionate to the rules they were breaking. It was poorly handled. That much is obvious. Given that you now state that there 'wasn't anything anywhere near worthy of suspension' are you happy that : 1. The use of force was lawful 2. There were no other means (that hadn't already been exhausted) apart from the use of force 3. The minimum level of force was used Or do you still maintain that one or more haven't been reached, if so, which one and what would be the likely outcome for an officer who hadn't followed the rules if it wasn't worthy of a suspension? On 14/03/2021 at 19:20, The Cat said: There are 3 core questions that should be considered before using force to effect an arrest. You could argue they haven't all been reached in this situation, especially shoving a woman around who was trying to pick up her glasses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 Let it go Weston. You are not cut out to understand policing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 2 hours ago, whelk said: Let it go Weston. You are not cut out to understand Fair comment 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 2 hours ago, whelk said: Let it go Weston. You are not cut out to understand policing We've been through this before 😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 4 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: So, are you now agreeing that there was no police brutality and that the arrests that were made were lawful and did not include excess force? Or do you still maintain that the protesters who were arrested should not have been wrestled (apart from the mention of gender is that the same or different to 'man handled'?) to the floor and handcuffed? Given that you now state that there 'wasn't anything anywhere near worthy of suspension' are you happy that : 1. The use of force was lawful 2. There were no other means (that hadn't already been exhausted) apart from the use of force 3. The minimum level of force was used Or do you still maintain that one or more haven't been reached, if so, which one and what would be the likely outcome for an officer who hadn't followed the rules if it wasn't worthy of a suspension? Seriously I can't be arsed to reply to all of that, but if someone is sat on the ground quietly and they are then wrestled to the floor then yes it would be an overuse of force in my opinion. There's a lot of stages to go through before someone is suspended, it would have to pretty serious for that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 On 17/03/2021 at 19:07, aintforever said: There was bound to be some people there with anti-men and anti-police views, it was a vigil for someone who was probably raped and murdered by a police officer. You always get a minority of extremists at these sort of things. Given the circumstances and the emotional nature of the occasion, a low key approach to policing obviously made more sense. This persons occupation is irrelevant, he didn't carry out the crime in the course of his work, like the George Floyd crime. So protestors who focused on the police were idiots and there was no need for the police to be mindful of the optics. If it remained a peaceful vigil maybe it would have been policed accordingly but it didn't, whose fault is that, I dont know but normally there is blame on both sides. So given that we are in the middle of a lockdown, that we are all fucked off so anything that jeopardises opening up is wrong. So maybe people haven't got much sympathy for the protesters that hi-jacked this memorial. They protest and then moan about it being policed and like a bunch of self-indulgant privileged karens demand Dick's head. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 2 hours ago, The Cat said: Seriously I can't be arsed to reply to all of that, but if someone is sat on the ground quietly and they are then wrestled to the floor then yes it would be an overuse of force in my opinion. Agree 100%. Did that happen on Saturday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said: Agree 100%. Did that happen on Saturday? Ask Turkish nicely he might show you a picture he found on Google Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 54 minutes ago, whelk said: Ask Turkish nicely he might show you a picture he found on Google Funny isn't it. When it supports the argument then it's LOOK AT THESE DISGRACEFUL IMAGES. When it doesn't it's just someone finding a picture of google. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 Hi Turkish. Pretty please, can you show a picture of someone quietly sitting on the ground last Saturday, who is then wrestled to the floor by a police officer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 19 March, 2021 Share Posted 19 March, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said: Hi Turkish. Pretty please, can you show a picture of someone quietly sitting on the ground last Saturday, who is then wrestled to the floor by a police officer? I googled it many times but disappointingly couldn’t find anything. I assume it’s the evil right wing media refusing to post any images of young girls sitting quietly as given the hysteria there must have been hundreds of them bullied but the nasty police just sitting there doing nothing other than holding a candle Edited 19 March, 2021 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedArmy Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 (edited) Few questions to be answered in how they handled today’s peaceful protest. Where’s the same level of anger and disgust at the behaviour of the met then chaps? Edited 20 March, 2021 by RedArmy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 This case is interesting : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-56459217 Quote A probationary police officer who assaulted a woman in a "terrifying" attack has been given a curfew, prompting criticism he was not jailed. Obviously we aren't aware of ALL the facts but the write up by the BBC suggests that he 'grabbed and manhandled' Emma whilst he was drunk, forcing her to the floor, which must have been horrific for her and the guy is an idiot. The theme of the story seems to be that the police officer should receive a longer sentence purely based on the fact that he was a police officer. That doesn't sound right to me. Whilst on duty, yes, police officers should be held to higher standards, but should the same apply whilst off duty? At the time of the attack, it would have been a case of drunk idiot wrestles woman to the ground and presumably that is what the sentence is based on. Emma claims that she found out later that he was a police officer (although the article doesn't say how much later), and that is what made the impact more severe for her. Should police receive longer sentences or is the fact that the treatment they are likely to receive in prison enough pennance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedArmy Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 Predictable silence from the usual suspects who will be out in force the next time anyone dares to tell the woke brigade to stop breaking the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whelk Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 2 minutes ago, RedArmy said: Predictable silence from the usual suspects who will be out in force the next time anyone dares to tell the woke brigade to stop breaking the law. Are you going to give any context? Was it an anti vaccine fucking idiot? Don’t know why point you are attempting to make 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: This case is interesting : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-56459217 Obviously we aren't aware of ALL the facts but the write up by the BBC suggests that he 'grabbed and manhandled' Emma whilst he was drunk, forcing her to the floor, which must have been horrific for her and the guy is an idiot. The theme of the story seems to be that the police officer should receive a longer sentence purely based on the fact that he was a police officer. That doesn't sound right to me. Whilst on duty, yes, police officers should be held to higher standards, but should the same apply whilst off duty? At the time of the attack, it would have been a case of drunk idiot wrestles woman to the ground and presumably that is what the sentence is based on. Emma claims that she found out later that he was a police officer (although the article doesn't say how much later), and that is what made the impact more severe for her. Should police receive longer sentences or is the fact that the treatment they are likely to receive in prison enough pennance? They should be prosecuted as if they were a normal member of the public, the law is no different for a serving officer. The difference is they are more likely to get sacked than if they say, worked in an office or a shop or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, RedArmy said: Predictable silence from the usual suspects who will be out in force the next time anyone dares to tell the woke brigade to stop breaking the law. If you had added the explanatory text to the image when you originally posted it, it would have helped. At first view I just thought you had just selected a random image from GOOGLE. The fact that Laurence Fox was among the marchers would have been justification enough for a bit of Police 'activity'. Edited 20 March, 2021 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 22 hours ago, Turkish said: I googled it many times but disappointingly couldn’t find anything. I assume it’s the evil right wing media refusing to post any images of young girls sitting quietly as given the hysteria there must have been hundreds of them bullied but the nasty police just sitting there doing nothing other than holding a candle This is the one that doesn't look great. They are just sat there and then get wrestled to the floor. We know that happened to the redhead because we've all seen the pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 2 hours ago, RedArmy said: Predictable silence from the usual suspects who will be out in force the next time anyone dares to tell the woke brigade to stop breaking the law. How do you know that the guy in the picture is not ‘woke’? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 1 hour ago, The Cat said: This is the one that doesn't look great. They are just sat there and then get wrestled to the floor. We know that happened to the redhead because we've all seen the pictures. If you were pulled over by traffic police and behaved the same way, you’d get the same treatment. I’m not sure how people really expect the Police to react, if they repeatedly refuse to comply with a direct instruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 2 hours ago, The Cat said: This is the one that doesn't look great. They are just sat there and then get wrestled to the floor. We know that happened to the redhead because we've all seen the pictures. The bandstand where people were gathering around, speeches were being made from. Seems like rather than that Being innocent victims it was the eye of the storm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 20 March, 2021 Share Posted 20 March, 2021 (edited) What makes me laugh is ex-hooligan types who always seem to have a problem with other social groups getting into scrapes with police. It's like they are jealous that their badge of honour is geting shared around to such an extent that they have to start defending the police. Edited 21 March, 2021 by Jonnyboy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 12 hours ago, The Cat said: This is the one that doesn't look great. They are just sat there and then get wrestled to the floor. We know that happened to the redhead because we've all seen the pictures. To be fair, you can see the police talking to them for a good 20 seconds of that 45 second video (and doubtless lots longer before the edit). I'm assuming they were explaining (over and over) that if they don't move on and stop breaking the coronavirus act, they will have no choice but to arrest them - but obviously we can't hear that. However, I imagine these breaches have been heard in court by now, so presumably, if they were sat there all peaceful and innocent, the judge / magistrate would have thrown the case out wouldn't they? Not seen that in the news yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 33 arrests yesterday at protests in London. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56469687 Quote Thousands of people have attended anti-lockdown demonstrations in London, after MPs urged the government to allow peaceful protest during lockdown. Crowds marched from Hyde Park to Westminster, with at least 33 arrests by police, mostly for Covid breaches. Are these ones good arrests or bad arrests, given that there were men, women and children present? Not a lot of masks in view and pretty much zero social distancing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 17 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said: This case is interesting : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-56459217 Obviously we aren't aware of ALL the facts but the write up by the BBC suggests that he 'grabbed and manhandled' Emma whilst he was drunk, forcing her to the floor, which must have been horrific for her and the guy is an idiot. The theme of the story seems to be that the police officer should receive a longer sentence purely based on the fact that he was a police officer. That doesn't sound right to me. Whilst on duty, yes, police officers should be held to higher standards, but should the same apply whilst off duty? At the time of the attack, it would have been a case of drunk idiot wrestles woman to the ground and presumably that is what the sentence is based on. Emma claims that she found out later that he was a police officer (although the article doesn't say how much later), and that is what made the impact more severe for her. Should police receive longer sentences or is the fact that the treatment they are likely to receive in prison enough pennance? No one in that article is saying he should get a tougher sentance because he is a cop, just that he should get a tougher sentance full stop. With out the full facts its hard to conclude on the sentance, but what is disgraceful is that after pleading guilty he hasn't been sacked already. The lady has said that the knowledge that he is a cop has made it harder for her. I can understand that. The event can't be dismissed as the actions of a drunken idiot, that just completely undermines what the lady went through and that way of thinking is part of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said: To be fair, you can see the police talking to them for a good 20 seconds of that 45 second video (and doubtless lots longer before the edit). I'm assuming they were explaining (over and over) that if they don't move on and stop breaking the coronavirus act, they will have no choice but to arrest them - but obviously we can't hear that. However, I imagine these breaches have been heard in court by now, so presumably, if they were sat there all peaceful and innocent, the judge / magistrate would have thrown the case out wouldn't they? Not seen that in the news yet. Yes they were talking to them. No they shouldn't have dragged them to the floor and cuffed them. There were loads of people not socially distancing that evening and breaking covid restrictions but they didn't arrest everyone. If they'd acted differently then it wouldn't have made the news and there wouldn't have been such a negative response. The Met has a very tough time with public perception anyway and this sort of thing certainly doesn't help that. All officers are taught to weigh up situations using Betari's Box and the National Decision Model and abide by the principles in the Code of Ethics which says the following: "I will only use force to the extent that it is necessary, proportionate and reasonable in the circumstances." "I will behave in a manner which does not undermine public confidence in policing." "You should ask yourself whether a particular decision, action or omission might result in members of the public losing confidence in the policing profession." My argument is that in this case it was not. That's my perspective. Anyway, that's me done on this conversation. Weston, you should come over to the main board and talk about Saints sometime, because it's pretty strange that we're on a football forum but all I see you do is post in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 (edited) More heavy handed policing https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-bristol-56477887?__twitter_impression=true they should have just let the innocent protestors carry on smashing things up then go home when they got bored Edited 21 March, 2021 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 Horrendous scenes in Bristol and it's being largely ignored in the news and on social media. Crazy. This new bill doesn't even affect protests that much, it only gives the police the right to set start and finish times and control noise levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 5 minutes ago, Saint_clark said: Horrendous scenes in Bristol and it's being largely ignored in the news and on social media. Crazy. This new bill doesn't even affect protests that much, it only gives the police the right to set start and finish times and control noise levels. Dont worry Soggy, aintclever and co will be on here in a minute to deny any violence and blame to police for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 Let me preempt them and ask for justification for these scenes. PXL_20210321_213111371.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKD Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 42 minutes ago, Turkish said: More heavy handed policing https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-bristol-56477887?__twitter_impression=true they should have just let the innocent protestors carry on smashing things up then go home when they got bored You can always tell if it’s a left or right wing protest by the chants from the crowd (other than the pink hair, of course). The left haven’t quite nailed them yet as shown by the ‘shame on you’ chants in this video. They’re the sort of type to shout ‘the referee needs glasses’ at a football match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 4 minutes ago, SKD said: You can always tell if it’s a left or right wing protest by the chants from the crowd (other than the pink hair, of course). The left haven’t quite nailed them yet as shown by the ‘shame on you’ chants in this video. They’re the sort of type to shout ‘the referee needs glasses’ at a football match. The other thing you can guarantee is if it was football or Far right they’d be falling over each other in a rush to condemn it, they’d track all of them down and be banged up probably for a couple of years each Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat Posted 21 March, 2021 Share Posted 21 March, 2021 1 hour ago, Saint_clark said: Horrendous scenes in Bristol and it's being largely ignored in the news and on social media. Crazy. This new bill doesn't even affect protests that much, it only gives the police the right to set start and finish times and control noise levels. It was lead story on BBC News just now. The noise level bit is quite interesting because it gives powers to prevent a protest if anyone could be disturbed by the noise. Whether that's a good thing or not is open for debate. Absolute idiots in Bristol, hope that anyone involved in injuring an officer or damaging police property is arrested and charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan The Flames Posted 22 March, 2021 Share Posted 22 March, 2021 9 hours ago, Saint_clark said: Horrendous scenes in Bristol and it's being largely ignored in the news and on social media. Crazy. This new bill doesn't even affect protests that much, it only gives the police the right to set start and finish times and control noise levels. Of course it wasn't ignored by the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now