Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
I seem to recall when that actually took place, one of the reasons arrests were not made at the time was that it could have inflamed the situation, which it doesn't take a genius to realise would be a very bad thing.
Now nomadking, could you please explain why you would have found it preferable for the police to turn a reasonably peaceful, if unpleasant, protest into a potential riot rather than gather evidence, track down those who have comitted crimes, and arrest them at a later date?
|
There was recently, a protest planned and initially approved by the police, but then stopped because of the potential for violence, not from those whose protest was approved, but others. The others were violent anyway even though the first protest didn't really materialize.
But the following month? If incitement is taking place then it has to be stopped there and then, to stop the incitement. It's no good allowing any incitement to take place and then taking action long after the event. If immediate action had taken place, then maybe there might be case for saying that media pressure wasn't responsible for the arrests but as the arrests, that did take place, happened a very long time(relatively) afterwards, there can't.