Students Rioting in London.

[QUOTE=Flyboy;35137043]He was in a wheelchair, the clue is in "wheelchair."



In all the training I have had, I have never heard of anyone suggest that the most effective way of getting a disabled person to safety is tip them out the wheelchair and drag them across the road. Just think about it. You first of all have to tip them out, not that easy really. Then get them to let go of the chair. Then drag them, struggling, across a road. If we are to believe Derek about the brakes, what is wrong with,......ooh I don't know.....undoing the brakes, perhaps. Not that difficult to do, just a little lever.
QUOTE]


who said he was tipped ?,it certainly isn't very clear from that video that is another one of your anti police assumption

I am not, believe it or not, anti-police. I do an awful lot locally to support our police and help promote their reputation, I am a member of the local neighbourhood watch and I think on the whole our police do a fantastic job. What I am against, however, is anyone with authority, abusing that power. Like tipping disabled people out of wheelchairs, especially when a far more logical, effective and safer method is available.


are you serious ? every single time that a police thread comes up you are one of the most vocal to vilify them

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

But he wouldn't need to, would he? I can't imagine that the two policemen who were there would have been incapable of moving his wheelchair for him, do you.

Balance easiest and safest. If someone doesn't want to be moved you move them. End of story.

Would you be happier if he was cuffed to the chair to stop him moving his arms while he was wheeled away?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And by bringing in more draconian laws to suppress legal protest doesn't worry you?

What the hell are you talking about now? I swear your posts are getting more and more detached from reality as we go along. If people want to protest, as is their democratic right then get on with it.

But if people think they can riot while doing so then they deserve a water cannon.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I remember only just a few short months ago, the noises being made about the gradual curtailment of the right to free protest, where is that noise now?

The only noise around here is what you keep spouting about how you'd do it better than the police.

Tell you what, why not join up as a Special. In fact I know why not - you wouldn't last 2 minutes.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Tuftus

If they kick off and cause trouble, guess what?

They will get wet.

I don't think you understood, I was referring to the ones who weren't "kicking off." The vast majority of them who were taking part in peaceful protest. The ones who went to the places they were supposed to and went home without incident. Should they be considered to be justifiably suppressed?

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And how was doing what they did make him safer? Why didn't they simply wheel his chair away?

Maybe there were snooker balls incoming? Maybe lit flares? Maybe firecrackers? Maybe other debree?

Maybe, just maybe there was a clear and present danger to the wheelchair bound 'protester' that made the Police remove him for his own safety.

You and I were not there so i guess we will never know, apart from what the guy has said and by all accounts he is a 'professional protester' (from what I read earlier in the thread) so make of that what you will.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I don't think you understood, I was referring to the ones who weren't "kicking off." The vast majority of them who were taking part in peaceful protest. The ones who went to the places they were supposed to and went home without incident. Should they be considered to be justifiably suppressed?

Ah i see more more common sense is required ,the ones who weren't "kicking off" can simply go a different way to the ones who are "kicking off" and do there peacefull protesting else where whilst leaving the others to get wet

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by martyh

Flyboy ,i am going to try to cut through you're rabid hatred of the police with some common sense .To answer your first question ,

quite self evident but here you go ,it means that approval has to be given by ministers thats the democratic bit ,once the approval is given to the head of a particular force then he/she will have the authority to approve it's use ,which will be monitored (that's the oversight bit) by said ministers

From what I remember being told about "democratic oversight" (again the clue is in the question), it has to be debated via the democratic process. That means parliament, involving all parties, not just government ministers. Because if it was just the ministers of one party, that would not satisfy the "democratic" bit.

To answer the second question the person in the wheel chair was quite clearly being an idiot and refusing to move when told ,all he would have to do is stick his fingers through the wheels to stop the police from wheeling him away (again quite obvious) To prevent injury to said numpty in the wheel chair the police are quite correct in dragging him out of the chair imo ,and being a paraplegic does not give him any special leaway

You see it's quite simple realy

That was not that clear at all. The footage was very blurred and the audio was fragmented. That aside, there was no justifiable need to tip him out of his chair and drag him across the road. Simply wheeling him would have done the trick. Pulling his arms away from the wheels would have prevented him from obstructing them. That wouldn't have been that difficult for the two officers to have done.

---------- Post added at 20:58 ---------- Previous post was at 20:56 ----------

Originally Posted by Derek

It's a classic politician back covering exercise IMO
At the end of the day if needed the Met could deploy water cannons as soon as they get their hands on them. They could deploy baton rounds and CS tomorrow if need be without Parliament being able to stop them without amending legislation.



Funnily enough I don't think it's set in stone. It is however common sense which seems to be a concept you struggle with. I've removed people from places they don't want to be removed from.

It doesn't look pretty, it is necessary on occasion though.

I am sure you have and quite justifiably so, but have you ever tipped a paraplegic from a wheelchair and dragged him across the road?

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I don't think you understood, I was referring to the ones who weren't "kicking off." The vast majority of them who were taking part in peaceful protest. The ones who went to the places they were supposed to and went home without incident. Should they be considered to be justifiably suppressed?

No. I do not think that *you* understand.

The peaceful ones need not fear anything as they have not done anything wrong.

The ones that kick off get it. All along the lines of if you have not done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.

Is that clearer?

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Cobbydaler

Are you suggesting that the Police are politicised?

The people who would be targeted would be the perpetrators of offences...

They certainly have the capacity to be, just look at the miners' strike and you will have your answer. However, I am sure things are little different nowadays, but it can so easily change.

[Cobbydaler]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

And what about those, the vast majority, who are taking part in peaceful protest and demonstration? It seems an easy way for a government to quieten the masses, doesn't it.

Originally Posted by Cobbydaler

Are you suggesting that the Police are politicised?

The people who would be targeted would be the perpetrators of offences...

Notice you ignored my question.

Please stop pretending to be an impartial libertarian.

If it was an EDL / BNP protest targeting Labour party HQ, you'd be on here moaning that the Police didn't do enough...

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I am sure you have and quite justifiably so, but have you ever tipped a paraplegic from a wheelchair and dragged him across the road?

Let's imagine there was a car coming. Mr Wheelchair didn't know it was coming and wasn't listening to the cop who telling him to get out of the way. Cop tries to move him, Wheelchair reiterates he's not going anyway. Cop now has no time to remove the brakes, carefully wheel him to safety or whatever it is you're suggesting. Instead the only option left to the cop to get this guy out of the way of the car is to grab him out of the chair and out of the way of the car.

Hypothetical yes, dumbed down so maybe you'll understand it, definitely.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Cobbydaler

If it was an EDL / BNP protest targeting Labour party HQ, you'd be on here moaning that the Police didn't do enough...

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Russ

In all the training you've had, you have no idea what you would do in the situation because

a) you are not a police officer
b) you have never been a police officer
c) you have never been in that situation
d) you have never needed to physically remove someone for their own safety whilst surrounded but a riot, especially when they didn't want to be.

and

e) you are not a police officer

One doesn't have to be a police officer to have some common sense. It really is much easier to move someone, still in their wheelchair than drag them, struggling, across a road.

I don't know how much of that I believe but you seem to be living in a world of "Dixon of Dock Green" style policing. Reality check pal - life isn't like that. The police have to use force when needed and looking at an edited video clip or a still photo does not give you any idea of how to do it better.

But then neither do you, we can only speculate what the protester was saying, but the image of him being tipped out his chair and dragged across the road, was clear enough.

[QUOTE=Flyboy;35137064]From what I remember being told about "democratic oversight" (again the clue is in the question), it has to be debated via the democratic process. That means parliament, involving all parties, not just government ministers. Because if it was just the ministers of one party, that would not satisfy the "democratic" bit.

QUOTE]

so if you already know why ask and say that a change a law would be needed ,because that is quite clearly not the case

That was not that clear at all. The footage was very blurred and the audio was fragmented. That aside, there was no justifiable need to tip him out of his chair and drag him across the road. Simply wheeling him would have done the trick. Pulling his arms away from the wheels would have prevented him from obstructing them. That wouldn't have been that difficult for the two officers to have done.

Well from that "very blurred" footage (and it was i agree )you seem to have come to the conlusion that he was tipped out and totally unwilling to accept any other explanation

[nomadking]

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

There are pictures of him at the front of the 'battle lines' with people behind him, jostling him, carrying sticks(some dropped and visible on the ground), and covering their faces. One was even carrying, what seems to be a makeshift shield. His brother looks back at someone grabbing him from behind. They were hardly in the peaceful section. At the very least the Police would have been unable to take action on the people behind him as he would have been in the way,