jasey

Probably by the same time you're able to use your eyes and brain together

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

The guy that hit the Police officer over the head with a pole, should he have his eyes gouged out?
Im not having a dig this time just honestly curious about the balance.

jasey

You see Tim - this is where you're getting us all wrong.

Anyone who actually assaults a police office deserves whatever they get - but just because they've had a hard day they can't go round killing soft targets.

Can't speak for everyone but I'll defend the right of anyone to defend themselves - but just because you wear the police unifrom doesn't give you the right to go round assaulting people !

mrtheedge2u2

If the copper would of got up and blinded him I would not of cared as the guy deserved it.

This is my point, uniform or not, act like a **** and you pay the price of your actions

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

Jasey

And this is the first point we agree on. I am not saying for one second if he is guilty then he should be let off but I am just very keen for the full facts and hearing to be made public before I make a decision.
Its easy to jump to conclusions and we are all guilty of it, In this case if you are for the most point Pro police your inclination is to defend the police and visa versa.
The whole thread was a joke from the start. I could talk rubbish about anything that was still under investigation and it would stir up emotion.
Just out of interest are you blue or green? nothing to do with the post I just want to bitch about Boruc.

and mrtheedge2u2
I couldnt agree more, When I was in the services I was taught this very very important motto
Act like a ***** and your gonna get fu$%ed!

billythekid

Really, I think you are one of those people...

First off before I get flamed, this has nothing to do with the actual incident this thread talks about directly, I am just talking in general terms.

"Riot" an offence to be technical, I guess I misused the term myself...

Section 1 Public Order Act 1986. The term is used to describe a gathering of people (12+) with threats of unlawful violence. (note threats not actual violence). There is a very wide scope for this to apply, which can even be inferred by the way the 12+ people are acting, i,e its down to the actual actions of a few in the group not all.

The term "Common purpose" is often used.... but we are talking about statements and court etc here so lets put this to one side for now. The way the force the police can use changes, they can use force on any person in the group, assuming the officer sees a reason to use the force and the force is reasonable.

So if there are 20 people throwing bottles and a chap runs to the front of the line but *without* a bottle in his hand you could find that chap would get a baton / dog / punch etc etc etc anyway.

He might just have been going for a jog... but it could happen. Would the police be wrong, no they would not. Like I said I am talking about public order situations on the whole not the actual london case.

For those on here who understand the chain of command in public order situations you will know what it takes to get to the situation where level 1 serials are being deployed with dogs.

HTH

jasey

Well I reckon if Tomlinson had done to a policeman what was done to him he'd be staring a murder charge in the face.

Still you are right of course - we should wait for the results of the full enquiry - but there's no fun in that .

as for Blue or Green - I'm Red - AFC all the way - don't assume all Jockanese are Huns or Tims - not that I'm Jockanese of course .

Anyway - what's Boruc been up to now ??

Timwinner

iTrader: (3)

Just have a feeling he is going to throw away the league. Poor bloke My Mrs is a Tim hence the reason I have been brainwashed into believing its a Hun or Tim thing.
Looks like you will have a bit or Europe next season.

jasey

Tim's are much nicer than Huns .

Celtic will win the League - Huns & Hearts 2nd & Third .

Aberdeen will be lucky to finish 5th the rate they're going !

Better leave this now so we can let the thread get back on topic

riosingh

Firstly I'd like to say there’s no need to call the police names, I know you feel angry but calling police pigs is no different from calling solders pigs. The Police wear the Queens uniform and take the Queens shilling and are paid to do a job, and like their counterparts on the battle field they sometimes cross the line.

But the only way to keep the Police under check is to push back when consider something unjustified, the reason our Police is so reasonable compared to forces in other parts of the world is because we keep them in check, Public opinion demands it.
Police are humans, and history teaches us that when humans are given power they are corrupted by it.

So they have to be answerable to us, they are given a very difficult job to do, they are giving powers to do these jobs, and when they overstep the mark, they should pay for it.

The two instances which were captured on video were clear examples of them overstepping the mark. The girl in the video was clearly pissing the policeman off by shouting in his face, but if someone pisses you of, or doesn’t do as their told, you cant justify launching an attack on them.

A few years ago I was working in Tanzania, and one day just driving around with my mind else where I overtook a Landrover, Unfortunately this Landrover was in convoy with the Landrover in front, so the two land rovers boxed me in (both were Tanzania Police Force). About 10 policemen got out and tried to drag me out of my car, fortunately for me they were too stupid to be able to undo my seat belt. So in the limited space available in the car they tried to punch me in the head, luckily being fat police men, the didn’t have much joy at this, my car was an automatic and the stupid African police men couldn’t take out my keys(it was in drive). They tried very hard to pull me out of the car, but I was safely strapped in, so the just had to make do with punching me in the head.
If they had a brain cell between them they would have dragged me out of the car and beaten the **** out of me, then confiscated my car.
Luckily I got away with a slightly soar cheek and four flat tyres (they bayoneted them).
Any way my point is, the Police force in this country, are much more reasonable, because they don’t walk around drunk with power,(unlike the Tanzania police force who walk around drunk on power, fake Jonny Walker, mariwana).

DCI Gene Hunt

The Police NEVER took the queens shilling, that expression is for the army only; so factually this entire reply is already wholly inaccurate.

riosingh

Ahh something new learnt.
There I was thinkin the queens shilling was being paid by the Crown, but it seems it refers to something in history. I'll have to Google it.

Devildog

Personally I would like to see the law changed to have verbal or physical abuse of a police man or woman legally met with a good kicking.

No need for it, and no need for thoise affected to be where they were. If a cop tels you to back off more than once, and you don't, you deserve whatever comes your way.

Its called not being a thick ****, and having a bit of common sense.

Half the protestors were probably not directly affected by the "cause" they were protesting for.

The guy who died had a history of years of alcohol abuse, 9 kids and lived in a hostel. Sure, he shouldn't have been pushed/hit the way he was, but its not like the police set about him and gave him the kicking of his life.

Sorry, but I'd rather have a few ***** get a kicking from time to time than have the police powerless to act.

riosingh

In the words of Master Obe One Kinoby,
Only the Sith believe in absolutes.

also this is my opinion mixed in with a funny story. Not wikapedia.

The Zohan

If you google it and learn something of British history you will find that it refers to the Army and Navy of the 1800's onwards. It was introduced as payment/inducemnt to join and also tricking people into joining. All part of our rich and colourful past.

It has absolutletey nothing to do with the Police who are not currently part of our military/armed forces anyway.

The Zohan

YUP!

DCI Gene Hunt

Errr... it is, you can't call soldiers pigs as again that's historically inaccurate. The terminology "pigs" dates back in 1809 when Sir Robert Peel entered the House of Commons. It's in relation to the fact that he imported Sandy Back pigs from Ireland into the UK and started to breed them in London (Tamworth). Fairly soon the link was made between a Peel pig and a policeman and the rest they say is history.

So as you'll appreciate you cannot refer to an army person as a pig.

The Zohan

That is true, you must refer to army personnel as child murderers and rapists according to some Luton based 'bothers'

It is getting like the Discovery Channel on SN!

DCI Gene Hunt

More like the feckin Disney Channel

jasey

Well - when they cross the line they become pigs.

I'm only using pigs because the swear filter blocks out bloody **** sucking ****y faced mother ****ing ******* .

Had the pig simply pushed the boy to the ground from the front I'd be saying fair dues - **** had it commng.

But to first assualt the guy with a batton (from behind), then push him (from behind) then leave the poor sod to die 5 minutes later - he becomes something i don't like getting on the sole of my shoes !

boomer

Whilst a few of us are taking some more history lessons, maybe you also want to have a read about the Peelian Principles that Sir Robert Peel (mentioned by DCI Gene Hunt above) developed a couple of hundred years ago:

1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

...and then compare them against the behavior of the police during the G20 protests!

mb

s70rjw

iTrader: (2)

Has society not changed over the last few hundred years too? Maybe as society becomes more violent, Police who are part of that society respond accordingly

The Zohan

As keeps getting mentioned , this is a small minority of Police and they will be dealt with.

Police atre there to serve the public, same as our politicans, the police police the UK with the consent of the public so will be keen to get this cleared up and sorted to the satisfaction of the public as part of the process.

hodgy0_2

are you suggesting society is more violent now, than in Peels day?

Leslie

Its not for the Army only. Don't forget the Navy and the RAF.

Les (feeling left out!)

DCI Gene Hunt

OK, I'll accept the Senior Service and the RAF by default

s70rjw

iTrader: (2)

I wasn't around in Peel's day, so I cannot comment. However over the past 24 years I have spent in policing I can categorically say yes. I hope that goes someway to answer your question. Bob

hodgy0_2

well I certainly defer to your experience Bob, and well done on 24 yrs

I don’t want to seem anti police on this thread

in all my dealings with the police (which thankfuly have been pretty limited, although I did let the drugs squad use my familly house in Kensal Rise as a stake out venue for a few days) they have been very helpful and polite

s70rjw

iTrader: (2)

I'ts reassuring to hear that you are happy with the service you have received. In the main, that is what police officers strive to do.
The events forming the topic of this thread are unfortunate. Whether what the officer did is right or wrong is a matter under investigation. The media hype and sensationalism does little to inspire confidence in officers to carry out the tasks they are paid to carry out. I hope your future contact with Police continues to be positive. Bob

boomer

...but even if society has become more violent (and i bow to your 24 years experience), surely item 6 "Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient." is the only principle affected by that change?

Even today, i think that these are a beautifully simple set of principles - he was indeed a wise man - Sir Robert!

mb