London and UK riots (started in Tottenham 10:30PM, 6th Aug)

sensibleken

superfish wrote: »

no problem just give me a machine gun and an army and il get right on it :pac:

how delightfully 'internet hard man' of you

3ndahalfof6

prinz wrote: »

The same muppets who get up in arms about a few digs like that wouldn't say a thing if it was the other way round and a cop was getting beaten/killed.

if i seen 10 humans attacking 2 cops i would think it completely wrong,

but my guess is it would not happen they would be hangin back and know they were in a pickle and get the fook out of there,

have a look back on the 1st few nights, will you get me the video where there are 2 cops getting kicked and busted on the head by 10 humans

Seachmall

joseph brand wrote: »

The cops took it easy the first few days, but the rioting scum just had to keep pushing it. You keep pushing, this is what you get. I suppose you think they should have been polite to these dirtbags?

The cops did **** all the first few days. In this instance they should've thrown the scumbag in the back of a van and let him spend a night in the cells if they were full sure he was partaking in the riots. Even get him convicted for theft/vandilism/whatever. You think he gives a **** about a few smacks? I've taken worse beatings than that and had little more than a few cuts and bruises the next morning.

This isn't a case of the bleeding heart brigade, it's a case of people doing their jobs to sort this out but instead of worsening the situation (what do you think is gonna happen when rioters see that video given they already argue they're fighting the injustice of police brutality?)

Paparazzo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Or they could, you know, stop pandering to the almost taxless upper class and stop targeting the already downtrodden first whenever cuts have to be made?
How about instead of closing that youth centre you halve the subsidies given to the Royal Opera House for instance? The people who frequent it can WELL afford to fund it themselves.

I've an idea on how these guys could get money. They could go out and work.

Amirani

prinz wrote: »

The same muppets who get up in arms about a few digs like that wouldn't say a thing if it was the other way round and a cop was getting beaten/killed.

I would be completely up in arms about a cop getting beaten up and would be supportive of any means of defense they used. I have no problem with the actions of the police in shooting the Duggan lad earlier in the week as it was purely defensive.

These police in the video were in no way defensive however, it was pure aggression. The lad wasn't going anywhere and wasn't in process of looting. He was standing still and they all decided they'd lay into him. That's not fair justice by any means. Same way as Ian Tomlinson wasn't: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson

prinz

Barrington wrote: »

Companies create jobs..

Like the LIDL we saw smouldering away a few days ago..

hatrickpatrick

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Can you outline all these cuts that were supposed to be affecting these people?

And do you really believe that every penny of taxpayers' money should be directed to keeping scumbags from rioting? Society as a protection racket, huh? Sure close the hospitals too, and the schools. Who needs culture. Just give these people whatever they want so they don't riot again. We cab work so they don't have to.

Am I supposed to answer this genuinely, or does that count as "Feeding the trolls"? Where did I mention closing hospitals and schools? Ridiculous strawman is ridiculous. Hospitals and schools benefit EVERYBODY, not just a particular already well off section of society.

Taxpayer's money should be spent in areas which need it, not propping up those who are perfectly capable of surviving on their own WITHOUT government intervention.

superfish

sensibleken wrote: »

how delightfully 'internet hard man' of you

how did you know I was on red tube ?

Monty Burnz

Barrington wrote: »

Government funded projects to entice foreign companies to start up, expansion of public services and facilites.

Which must be paid for by taxpayers.

Barrington wrote: »

The government can do a lot to help create jobs, whether those jobs are public service or not. Hell, getting the 2012 Olympics brought a lot of construction jobs alone. Improving broadband etc can bring in more companies. Cheaper tax rates etc.

Right - the best a government can do is create a business-friendly environment and stand back. That's what they have been doing with mixed success for the last 20 years or so.

Barrington wrote: »

Companies create jobs. The government can help more companies to set up. And if the public had more money with tax cuts, banks giving out money, better benefits, then companies would need more staff as people would be spending more.

Agreed - but are we looking for tax rises to fund grants for businesses and create new public services, or tax cuts to put more money in the pockets of the citizens?

hatrickpatrick

niallsparky wrote: »

I would be completely up in arms about a cop getting beaten up and would be supportive of any means of defense they used. I have no problem with the actions of the police in shooting the Duggan lad earlier in the week as it was purely defensive.

LOL. Talk about jumping to conclusions without evidence?!
So you're saying you'd be pissed if a cop got beaten up by someone else, but not if someone else got beaten up by a cop? Where do you see evidence that the Duggan shooting was in self defense? Share it please, the rest of us haven't seen it.

sensibleken

Seachmall wrote: »

The cops did **** all the first few days. In this instance they should've thrown the scumbag in the back of a van and let him spend a night in the cells if they were full sure he was partaking in the riots. Even get him convicted for theft/vandilism/whatever. You think he gives a **** about a few smacks? I've taken worse beatings than that and had little more than a few cuts and bruises the next morning.

This isn't a case of the bleeding heart brigade, it's a case of people doing their jobs to sort this out but instead of worsening the situation (what do you think is gonna happen when rioters see that video given they already argue they're fighting the injustice of police brutality?)

who cares. They didnt give the guy that big of a beating. he got up right away and hung around a bit.

A survey today said one third were in favour of live amuntion being used, i dont think any significant number will give a crap about one person receiving a few slaps

Yahew

Barrington wrote: »

Government funded projects to entice foreign companies to start up, expansion of public services and facilites. The government can do a lot to help create jobs, whether those jobs are public service or not. Hell, getting the 2012 Olympics brought a lot of construction jobs alone. Improving broadband etc can bring in more companies. Cheaper tax rates etc.

:rolleyes: This is pointless, they are building the Olympics right now, in one of the biggest construction booms in Europe, and they have to employ immigrants. The idea that the gangster influenced uderclass would work there is unfounded.

Companies create jobs. The government can help more companies to set up. And if the public had more money with tax cuts, banks giving out money, better benefits, then companies would need more staff as people would be spending more.

London has no problem with job creation. It has a problem with people not doing those jobs.

YouTookMyName

Robbing Poundland

Monty Burnz

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Am I supposed to answer this genuinely, or does that count as "Feeding the trolls"? Where did I mention closing hospitals and schools? Ridiculous strawman is ridiculous. Hospitals and schools benefit EVERYBODY, not just a particular already well off section of society.

Taxpayer's money should be spent in areas which need it, not propping up those who are perfectly capable of surviving on their own WITHOUT government intervention.

There is no way that opera would survive at a high level without some subsidy, same as many other arts. How much culture do you propose sacrificing at the altar of chav pacification?

Does it occur to you that handing them what they get already and expecting nothing back might be a part of the problem here?

Happyman42

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Can you outline all these cuts that were supposed to be affecting these people?

And do you really believe that every penny of taxpayers' money should be directed to keeping scumbags from rioting? Society as a protection racket, huh? Sure close the hospitals too, and the schools. Who needs culture. Just give these people whatever they want so they don't riot again. We cab work so they don't have to.

Generation upon generation have been marginalised and disenfranchised, that is beyond doubt and you can find numerous studies if you look for them.
You cannot put these events down to one round of cuts, you have to do the research.... if it was a genuine question.
If the government just push these people back into the ghettoes (brick and mortar and mindset ones) then expect it to erupt again and again. Sooner or later somebody or some government is going to have to deal with these people as people, not as chavs or scumbags etc etc. In fact remedial work will have to be done on those who call others Chavs or Scum...just like what was done with words like Queer, ******, Paddy, Mick etc

prinz

Seachmall wrote: »

The cops did **** all the first few days. In this instance they should've thrown the scumbag in the back of a van....

That simple. Just call the local station and ask them to send a van up just like that... meanwhile take a couple of cops to watch him before this van arrives, ignoring any calls they get to move on down the street to stop more criminals? Forgot how easy it is to manage that kind of situation tbh.

niallsparky wrote: »

These police in the video were in no way defensive however, it was pure aggression. The lad wasn't going anywhere and wasn't in process of looting.

Wasn't in the process? For all we know they could have gotten a call to say those lads were walking away from a crime scene. Seriously now, they might have gone a bit over the top, but what should they have done?

Amirani

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

LOL. Talk about jumping to conclusions without evidence?!
So you're saying you'd be pissed if a cop got beaten up by someone else, but not if someone else got beaten up by a cop? Where do you see evidence that the Duggan shooting was in self defense? Share it please, the rest of us haven't seen it.

Have you read the series of posts I was responding to? Duggan had a the gun, it's fairly ****ing obvious it was self defense.

hatrickpatrick

Paparazzo wrote: »

I've an idea on how these guys could get money. They could go out and work.

50 applicants for every vacancy in Tottenham. Great plan, I can't believe no one has ever thought of that before.

MagicSean

Seachmall wrote: »

Police aren't paid to be emotional. Their job is to remain objective enforcers of the law, once they over-react like this they become no more than vigilantes with shiny badges and should be prosecuted by those who actually fulfill their job roles.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure those scumbags deserved a good hiding but it's not the police's job to give it to them. Police are given powers normal civilians aren't and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent once they abuse that power.

People like you have no idea what they want from the police force. You get on your high horse about police having emotional responses then you probably do the same in a situation were they don't show compassion or understanding. You can't have it both ways. Two ends of a spectrum. As long as police are human they will lean towards one of the two.

Seachmall

sensibleken wrote: »

who cares. They didnt give the guy that big of a beating. he got up right away and hung around a bit.

A survey today said one third were in favour of live amuntion being used, i dont think any significant number will give a crap about one person receiving a few slaps

I'm in favor of live ammunition being used, I'm not in favor of a sole officer bringing his personal gun with him.

I'm not in favor of police using their own discretion to overstep their boundaries and beat someone. If he turns out to have done nothing (I didn't see any crime happening and I've personal experience with people being 100% sure you've committed a crime and calling the police only for it to be shown no crime was even committed).

Amirani

prinz wrote: »

That simple. Just call the local station and ask them to send a van up just like that... meanwhile take a couple of cops to watch him before this van arrives, ignoring any calls they get to move on down the street to stop more criminals? Forgot how easy it is to manage that kind of situation tbh.

Wasn't in the process? For all we know they could have gotten a call to say those lads were walking away from a crime scene. Seriously now, they might have gone a bit over the top, but what should they have done?

Restrain him an throw him in a van. Only way to be sure he doesn't get involved in anything else for the rest of the night. Surely if the police thought what he did was serious enough there's an obligation on them to arrest and charge him anyway? I've nothing against police using for when necessary but I don't think it was necessary in this situation, they had the situation under control.

sensibleken

Happyman42 wrote: »

Generation upon generation have been marginalised and disenfranchised, that is beyond doubt and you can find numerous studies if you look for them.
You cannot put these events down to one round of cuts, you have to do the research.... if it was a genuine question.
If the government just push these people back into the ghettoes (brick and mortar and mindset ones) then expect it to erupt again and again. Sooner or later somebody or some government is going to have to deal with these people as people, not as chavs or scumbags etc etc. In fact remedial work will have to be done on those who call others Chavs or Scum...just like what was done with words like Queer, ******, Paddy, Mick etc

You know, it is customary, not to mention good manners, for you to back up your own arguements with said studies and not expect others to do it for you. Otherwise it comes accross as nonsense

prinz

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Taxpayer's money should be spent in areas which need it, not propping up those who are perfectly capable of surviving on their own WITHOUT government intervention.

So besides the Royal Opera House what else should be cut? You do realise that not every fan of opera is rolling in cash right? Or is that more of the usual stereotypical gibberish.

Monty Burnz

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

50 applicants for every vacancy in Tottenham. Great plan, I can't believe no one has ever thought of that before.

Clearly if you live in Tottenham, you can't be expected to travel more than a mile to find work. :rolleyes:

hatrickpatrick

Monty Burnz wrote: »

There is no way that opera would survive at a high level without some subsidy, same as many other arts. How much culture do you propose sacrificing at the altar of chav pacification?

Does it occur to you that handing them what they get already and expecting nothing back might be a part of the problem here?

Do you think it's a coincidence that this flare up happens as the cuts are hammering the lowest classes the most, with education getting more expensive, youth centres and activities being closed, and depressed areas getting virtually no investment?

Luxuries and necessities are not the same thing. Hence why anyone who compares cutting funding for upper class pastimes to "closing schools and hospitals" literally hasn't got a clue what they're talking about.

I appreciate culture just as much as anyone else, but for f*cks sake isn't it obvious, given the choice between cutting cultural spending or slapping another £5,000 on students tuition fees, which is the lesser of two evils?!

Penn

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Agreed - but are we looking for tax rises to fund grants for businesses and create new public services, or tax cuts to put more money in the pockets of the citizens?

The government can afford to do **** all. Cut the tax so people have money to spend, and due to fear, they still might not spend it. Raise taxes, and new companies may not survive because no-one can afford to buy.

And that's my point about not listening to what the rioters have to say. The government knows what they want, they just can't give them everything they want. Trust me, I'm not saying the UK government is doing a good job. I'm not an economist by any stretch. But there is only so much they can do with what they have, and they can't give everything to everyone.

Sure, apart from the opportunistic rioters who are just out for what they can grab, some people are rioting because they're angry at their situation. But it's not a situation which can be fixed any time soon, and they're doing nothing but dragging other people down with them by destroying their businesses, probably raising insurance costs and costing the government money.

MagicSean

niallsparky wrote: »

Typical scumbags on power trips. Kicking people who are lying on the ground :mad:

At 1.04 in the video you can see why. The cop throws something away, most likely the weapon the little **** had.

Seachmall

Seanbeag1 wrote: »

People like you have no idea what they want from the police force. You get on your high horse about police having emotional responses then you probably do the same in a situation were they don't show compassion or understanding. You can't have it both ways. Two ends of a spectrum. As long as police are human they will lean towards one of the two.

I know exactly what I want from the police force: I want them to do their job, the job outlined by society. An individual officer's discretion under no circumstances over-rules the pre-determined wants of society.

If society decide it was just after-the-fact then that's fine with me, but it's not a situation that should arise unless under extraordinary circumstances. This was not extraordinary circumstances (I'm taking about this incident, not the riot as a whole).

prinz

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

50 applicants for every vacancy in Tottenham. Great plan, I can't believe no one has ever thought of that before.

50 applicants for every vacancy lol. They have it tough alright. For the rest of us it was 1 applicant for every 1 vacancy of course. There are sectors in the Irish economy where 50 applicants to every vacancy would be a godsend. The people aren't out burning down Lidl's etc however. Btw just how exactly does looting and destroying business contribute more vacancies?

niallsparky wrote: »

Restrain him an throw him in a van. Only way to be sure he doesn't get involved in anything else for the rest of the night..

Restrain him, and then what? Wait around for a couple of hours holding his hand waiting for a van to come? Which may or may not be petrol bombed/stoned etc on the way?

Paparazzo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

50 applicants for every vacancy in Tottenham. Great plan, I can't believe no one has ever thought of that before.

Olympic stadium is being built 5 miles away. They have to import workers. London is a big place with an underground. Are youre saying there's no work available in London, or just none that's handy for people in tottenham to walk to?
Work is available if you want it.