Students Rioting in London. - Page 35

Flyboy · 13-12-2010, 19:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque

I would support that as it would clear the crowd quite quickly especially with a few baton rounds for good measure.

And how would our police, behaving like the Chilean State Police be better on our streets. I thought you were all against an all encompassing police force. Does the fact that two people in that report died, not concern you?

---------- Post added at 20:03 ---------- Previous post was at 20:00 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

No they are not illegal ,nobody has said they are illegal

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-May-says.html

As quoted in many articles today the police have the choice if they want to use them they would not needa change in the law

What does...

Quote:

"As I speak water cannon has yet to be approved as a piece of equipment," she said.

"It requires legal and democratic oversight."

....mean?

Derek · 13-12-2010, 19:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

There's a video of it on the site. another officer has to pull the officer who did it away.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...onstrator.html

No footage however of batons being used and plenty of photographs of him being carried away from the action whilst someone else goads the police.

At the end of the day it wasn't safe for him where he was, he had to be moved and if he wasn't coming willingly then force has to be used and as I've said before countless times force looks a million times worse on camera than in reality.

13-12-2010, 19:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

So when the Home Secratary said:

When did she really mean?

She means that the head of whichever force wants to use them has to provide a good enough reason for ministers to approve it's use hence this

Quote:

Ministers will not stand in the way if senior officers wanted to use it, she said.

from my previous link

Flyboy · 13-12-2010, 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

There's a video of it on the site. another officer has to pull the officer who did it away.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...onstrator.html

And some are calling for these thugs to have a water canon; the mind boggles.

---------- Post added at 20:11 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek

I presume she meant that to be used as a matter of course then it needs to be home office approved much like the current generation of tasers. Other non-home office approved equipment and tactics can be used as long as the force can justify it. (like in the case of everyones favorite steroid monster shotgun suicide looney Raoul Moat)

Not in the same league but a similar vein do you think that a punch in the face is a home office approved technique? It's not but in some cases it's totally justifiable and legal.

Deleting my question and making fun of it makes no difference to your reply. What did she mean by:

Quote:

"It requires legal and democratic oversight."

Is pulling a paraplegic from a wheelchair totally justifiable as well? The reason I ask is, that there seemed to be some disagreement with the officers on the ground. For the life of me I can't possibly see were the justification would have come from though. Perhaps with your inside knowledge you could explain it.

Russ · 13-12-2010, 19:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Is pulling a paraplegic from a wheelchair totally justifiable a well? The reason I ask is, that there seemed to be some disagreement with the officers on the ground. For the life of me I can't possibly see were the justification would have come from though. Perhaps with your inside knowledge you could explain it.

With respect to Derek even I can see that.

Quote:

At the end of the day it wasn't safe for him where he was, he had to be moved and if he wasn't coming willingly then force has to be used and as I've said before countless times force looks a million times worse on camera than in reality.

Flyboy · 13-12-2010, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

She means that the head of whichever force wants to use them has to provide a good enough reason for ministers to approve it's use hence this

from my previous link

What does democratic oversight mean?

Derek · 13-12-2010, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And some are calling for these thugs to have a water canon; the mind boggles.

No it's the Police that might have access to it. Not the protestors.

I find it quite ironic the same people who moan and bitch loudly enough to stop the Police having the same riot control equipment the rest of the world uses scream and cry when the last resort, going hands on, happens.

Or would you prefer another Millbank? Or maybe leave the wheelchair bound in the front line whilst bricks, bottles and molotovs are thrown.

Sirius · 13-12-2010, 19:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And some are calling for these thugs to have a water canon; the mind boggles.

Sometimes force is needed to deal with the thugs that were at that so called protest.

The people throwing petrol bombs, setting fire or attempting to set fire to public property, trying to loot from shops, They all need to be dealt with and a soft touch will not suffice. There are a large amount of hooligans amongst the students and they need to be dealt with by using force there is no pretending otherwise. I say forget the kettling lets go back to the old way of dealing with thugs and hooligans that riot and lets see if they like that.

Bring on the water cannon, tear gas and if needed plastic bullets as a last resort. Oh and BTW i do mean what i posted before you ask another question.

Flyboy · 13-12-2010, 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

With respect to Derek even I can see that.

Quote:

At the end of the day it wasn't safe for him where he was, he had to be moved and if he wasn't coming willingly then force has to be used and as I've said before countless times force looks a million times worse on camera than in reality.

How in God's name, could what that officer did to this man, make him safer. If he wanted to get him to move; he was in a blooming wheelchair. What would you have done, bearing in the wheelchair.

Derek · 13-12-2010, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

What does democratic oversight mean?

Probably exactly the same level of justification required to issue officers with tasers and firearms which aren't standard issue. (yet)

---------- Post added at 20:19 ---------- Previous post was at 20:16 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

How in God's name, could what that officer did to this man, make him safer. If he wanted to get him to move; he was in a blooming wheelchair. What would you have done, bearing in the wheelchair.

Wheelchairs have brakes... If someone in one doesn't want to move you have to remove them from the chair.

I know this from experience. I also know people in their 80s can wield a walking stick like a wrinkly ninja.

Flyboy · 13-12-2010, 19:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek

No it's the Police that might have access to it. Not the protestors.

I find it quite ironic the same people who moan and bitch loudly enough to stop the Police having the same riot control equipment the rest of the world uses scream and cry when the last resort, going hands on, happens.

Or would you prefer another Millbank? Or maybe leave the wheelchair bound in the front line whilst bricks, bottles and molotovs are thrown.

And how is dragging a man from a wheelchair justified? What would be the most effective to get a man sitting in a wheelchair, to move out of the way?

13-12-2010, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

Protesting should always remain a democratic right.

Violent and criminal and generally thuggish behaviour associated with the protesting is what needs to be tackled here.

Agreed, and on the plus side water cannons would keep the streets nice and clean.

Just look how it swept the rubbish in to the gutter in the Chilean video

I really cannot see what certain posters issue is with them, the prote.. thugs light fires or attempt to, chuck flares, firecrackers etc and the water cannons would be the ideal antedote to this.

They put out the fires, disperse crowds, dampen thier enthusiasm to participate in violent disorder (ha ha, you see what i did there?).

Win win imo.

Russ · 13-12-2010, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

How in God's name, could what that officer did to this man, make him safer. If he wanted to get him to move; he was in a blooming wheelchair. What would you have done, bearing in the wheelchair.

I have no idea what I would do and more importantly neither have you.

Until you have been in the shoes of Derek and co you have NO idea how you would react and which resources you would use if confronted by a rabid crowd like that.

Don't give me any brown stuff about being a 'steward at a football match', that cannot be compared to a policeman in the thick of it with powers and actions at his disposal.

You just want to be anti-police and pro-lefty purely for the sake of it. If there was a nutter mob outside your house trying to attack you and your family, and the only option the police had to move them on was a water cannon, I'd bet my life savings you'd drop the lefty-act in seconds and be encouraging them to turn on the tap.

Flyboy · 13-12-2010, 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

Sometimes force is needed to deal with the thugs that were at that so called protest.

The people throwing petrol bombs, setting fire or attempting to set fire to public property, trying to loot from shops, They all need to be dealt with and a soft touch will not suffice. There are a large amount of hooligans amongst the students and they need to be dealt with by using force there is no pretending otherwise. I say forget the kettling lets go back to the old way of dealing with thugs and hooligans that riot and lets see if they like that.

Bring on the water cannon, tear gas and if needed plastic bullets as a last resort. Oh and BTW i do mean what i posted before you ask another question.

And bring our streets to the point where they reflect those seen in Burhma or Tibet, is the way to go? Do you think that the disabled or children, for example, are just collateral damage, perhaps?

Derek · 13-12-2010, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And how is dragging a man from a wheelchair justified? What would be the most effective to get a man sitting in a wheelchair, to move out of the way?

Assuming he was being cooperative then pushing him would be easiest. If he was being obstructive, and looking at his website where he comes across as a professional protestor who seems to have been beaten with the magic non-bruising batons, I don't think he would happily wheel himself away when asked.