So Tottenham burns!

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's a middle-aged ex con gang member just been interviewed on Sky News and has pretty much put his finger on the same problems most sensible people have in this thread...

Prisons are too soft and need to get back to being prisons.

Lack of parental discipline.

Lack of discipline in schools.

Pretty much straight front he horse's mouth.
 
Laudrup said:
An organisation chided for being incompetent, showing favouritism towards the police, long delays in resolving cases, and important decisions left to people with little to no legal experience or training.

To me that sounds a recipe for disaster. Plus don't they have a significant percentage of staff being ex-police officers or ex-police civilians?
Click to expand...

You have absolutely no idea have you?
 
Laudrup said:
Well now we know he didn't fire the gun the next step will be to find out if he threatened them with the gun, so it is a pretty important aspect of the event.
Click to expand...

If you have armed police pointing gins at you, you should not make them nervous. Now I wasn't there but I am pretty sure that if he had put his hands over his head straight away and done what they said straight away he would be alive. For some reason, he was shot, and that is probably because he looked like he would use his gun.

What would you do as a copper in that situation, let him fire first?
 
TCR4x4 said:
I seem to remember about a year ago, a madman in a taxi went on a shooting spree killing many many people. The Police were deeply critised for not responding fast enough and not shooting this man dead at the earliest oportunity.

Now we have a case where a man allegedly had a loaded firearm. The Police responded quickly and effectively with thankfully no further loss of life.
Guess what, they get critised again for shooting an "innocent" man.

So what would you rather?

Let someone with a gun kill 5,10, 15 people before being taken down, or get it over with before they have a chance to kill your wife, maybe your mother or father, maybe your son or daughter.

If you have a gun, real or otherwise in a public place, expect that day to be your last.
I fully support the Police in shooting this guy and am sick of all these soppy do gooders moaning.
FFS, open your eyes and join in with the real world.
Click to expand...

Great point!
 
Laudrup said:
How much solace do you think people from these communities take in the fact that an MP has served a quarter of his jail sentence for fiddling his expenses? I doubt a lot of them at the sharp end of disorder fear prison anyway. Maybe if it was the prison from Midnight Express, but a UK prison? I don't foresee it.
Click to expand...

Come on, most people have probably abused things over the years. Ok, we may have only nicked the odd biro and pack of A4 from work but its still theft. An MP fiddling expenses is far less danger to us than any of the scum in the riots. And so you really think that these scum were thinking about the MP? Of course not, they were thinking back to last time they got caught with a knife of down for assault and got a £50 fine!
 
Quote:
“I hope the three-year jail sentence handed down to Woods sends out the clearest possible message that the consequences for those who are found to have live or imitation weapons on the railway are severe.”

what 3 years is nothing, not going to stop someone who is already breaking the law.

Lets look at the laws he is already breaking

possession of an illegal firearm
possession of illegally held ammuntion
possession of a loaded firearm in a public place
possessions of an uncovered firearm in a public place.
Click to expand...
As I see it, this is one of the major problems. Illegal possession of a firearm carries a mandatory sentence of 5 years, but the Courts routinely hand down much lesser sentences.

For example, there was the pikey who blew his own finger off (while trying to remove a wart) with a stolen shotgun - and he got a suspended sentence...

I've just listened to the PM telling us all that everything will change but nothing will alter. He will give the police new powers that they don't need but he won't U-turn on the police cuts.

He promises that the guilty will be punished but doesn't say where the extra prison places will come from.
 
CT said:
There's a middle-aged ex con gang member just been interviewed on Sky News and has pretty much put his finger on the same problems most sensible people have in this thread...

Prisons are too soft and need to get back to being prisons.

Lack of parental discipline.

Lack of discipline in schools.

Pretty much straight front he horse's mouth.
Click to expand...

If that doesn't prove Laudrup wrong I don't know what does.
 
Garry Edwards said:
As I see it, this is one of the major problems. Illegal possession of a firearm carries a mandatory sentence of 5 years, but the Courts routinely hand down much lesser sentences.

For example, there was the pikey who blew his own finger off (while trying to remove a wart) with a stolen shotgun - and he got a suspended sentence...

I've just listened to the PM telling us all that everything will change but nothing will alter. He will give the police new powers that they don't need but he won't U-turn on the police cuts.

He promises that the guilty will be punished but doesn't say where the extra prison places will come from.
Click to expand...

Thanks Gary, couldnt remember if it was 5 or 10 years, still can not understand the support that illegal firearm possession is getting in this thread.:shrug:
 
cambsno said:
If you have armed police pointing gins at you, you should not make them nervous. Now I wasn't there but I am pretty sure that if he had put his hands over his head straight away and done what they said straight away he would be alive. For some reason, he was shot, and that is probably because he looked like he would use his gun.

What would you do as a copper in that situation, let him fire first?
Click to expand...

That depends on whether it's a Plymouth or a London; the former can be positively headbanging!
 
Catdaddy said:
So in one breath, you're advocating adherence to guidelines, and then in the next, you're flatly accusing the police of corruption when, for all you know, they quite probably stuck to the same guidelines, but had a split-second in which to make the decision as to whether they're under threat or not. Could you cope with that kind of responsibility?

And answer me this - if you saw a couple of hoodies running up YOUR road carrying brand new LCD monitors (probably from the warehouse down the bottom of your road) while YOUR kids are playing outside, hopping into a new Lexus with their gear and taking off, what would YOU think? Who would YOU be calling for?
Click to expand...

When you don't adhere to guidelines and learn from them you have injuries or deaths on your hands like Blair Peach or 30 years later Ian Tomlinson, plus all the other sketchy ones in between. The rules aren't there just to protect you, but the officers. If you want to blindly believe all to be well then fine, but I'll stick to my healthy skepticism given the distant and recent history.

As for your TV/Lexus example you raise a good point. If I don't call the police then they will more than likely never be caught. Don't forget the police are the public who are being paid to dedicate their full time attention to duties that are incumbent on us all. The question you should be asking is would people call they or a close member of their family had been the subject of unreasonable behaviour from the police?
 
Last edited:
cowasaki said:
You have absolutely no idea have you?
Click to expand...

When 100 lawyers resigned in 2008 they said it was partly due to:

"inconsistently poor quality of decision-making at all levels" of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

It's even in the Daily Mail if that helps?
 
Davec223 said:
Thanks Gary, couldnt remember if it was 5 or 10 years, still can not understand the support that illegal firearm possession is getting in this thread.:shrug:
Click to expand...
Well, my view is that anyone who isn't 100% opposed to illegal firearm possession must be stark staring bonkers...

We have a system in this country that makes it pretty easy for respectable, law abiding people to acquire firearms for legitimate purposes, i.e. sporting use, pest control and humane destruction. And there are systems in place to ensure that those of us who have S.1 firearms are also capable of using them safely.

That leaves the criminals, and my view is that anyone who is in illegal possession of any kind of firearm is a major threat to the public and needs to be removed from society and locked up, no exceptions.

The police do their bit, the Courts need to do their bit too, and if there isn't enough prison capacity for them then the Government need to do their bit and provide it.

My guess is that the people who are 'understanding' of criminals who have guns just have no idea of how dangerous guns can be in the wrong hands.
Even the smallest bullet in the photo below, a .22 rimfire, is capable of killing at a distance of over 1 mile - don't even ask about the potential of the full metal jacket .308 in the same photo...
showphoto.php

And anyone who thinks that the police can shoot to disarm have been watching too many movies - even highly skilled civilian shooters, with years of experience, can't do that. That's why the police fire multiple shots at the torso when they need to fire at all.

I'm not an unqualified supporter of the police. They sometimes get it wrong, they sometimes cover up their wrongdoing or mistakes, and they sometimes let the public down - but they do their best.

Edit: Photo not showing, here's a link
 
Laudrup said:
When 100 lawyers resigned in 2008 they said it was partly due to:

"inconsistently poor quality of decision-making at all levels" of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

It's even in the Daily Mail if that helps?
Click to expand...

see post 1530. The reality of all this is that you have some issues and you are completely wrong.

I've been in the Daily Mail too :razz:
 
Garry Edwards said:
We have a system in this country that makes it pretty easy for respectable, law abiding people to acquire firearms for legitimate purposes, i.e. sporting use, pest control and humane destruction.
Click to expand...

We must be careful with definitions. Any of those quoted could be construed as legitimizing the shooting of looters and rioters by the general public! :D
 
cowasaki said:
see post 1530. The reality of all this is that you have some issues and you are completely wrong.

I've been in the Daily Mail too :razz:
Click to expand...

Mount a defence then. If you only want to thrust and parry when it suits all you had to do was say so.
 
Garry Edwards said:
a .22 rimfire, is capable of killing at a distance of over 1 mile - don't even ask about the potential of the full metal jacket .308 in the same photo...here's a link
Click to expand...

I may be one of the few people on the forum who has seen the results firsthand. If you've been in the A&E Department of any large American trauma centre, you'll know what I mean. That is aside to what you might witness on the streets (having once come home to a dead body in the parking lot - gunshot to the head). I go cold at the sight (or sound) of a gun.
 
Garry Edwards said:
Well, my view is that anyone who isn't 100% opposed to illegal firearm possession must be stark staring bonkers...

We have a system in this country that makes it pretty easy for respectable, law abiding people to acquire firearms for legitimate purposes, i.e. sporting use, pest control and humane destruction. And there are systems in place to ensure that those of us who have S.1 firearms are also capable of using them safely.

That leaves the criminals, and my view is that anyone who is in illegal possession of any kind of firearm is a major threat to the public and needs to be removed from society and locked up, no exceptions.

The police do their bit, the Courts need to do their bit too, and if there isn't enough prison capacity for them then the Government need to do their bit and provide it.

My guess is that the people who are 'understanding' of criminals who have guns just have no idea of how dangerous guns can be in the wrong hands.
Even the smallest bullet in the photo below, a .22 rimfire, is capable of killing at a distance of over 1 mile - don't even ask about the potential of the full metal jacket .308 in the same photo...
showphoto.php

And anyone who thinks that the police can shoot to disarm have been watching too many movies - even highly skilled civilian shooters, with years of experience, can't do that. That's why the police fire multiple shots at the torso when they need to fire at all.

I'm not an unqualified supporter of the police. They sometimes get it wrong, they sometimes cover up their wrongdoing or mistakes, and they sometimes let the public down - but they do their best.

Edit: Photo not showing, here's a link
Click to expand...

Again Gary, I am in full agreement, I spent 10 years working in the firearms industry in this country until about 7 years ago.

The trouble is the courts do not sentence accordingly, I was involved in a police case a few years back where the guy who when the police raided he place had 80 converted blank firers and others were forensically linked to several murders, he was also convicted of drug offences, he got 9 years.

A great risk to public safety, absolutely, long enough sentence? No way.
 
im just left of center on authoritarian end. that was a surprise.
 
Laudrup said:
Didn't 50,000 want Clarkson as PM? Couldn't they find someone to start it who knew the difference between loose and lose?
Click to expand...

Is that the best you can do?
 
Laudrup said:
Didn't 50,000 want Clarkson as PM? Couldn't they find someone to start it who knew the difference between loose and lose?
Click to expand...

he makes more sense than some in this thread though. and yes, I mean you.:nuts:
 
Lindsay D said:
I may be one of the few people on the forum who has seen the results firsthand. If you've been in the A&E Department of any large American trauma centre, you'll know what I mean. That is aside to what you might witness on the streets (having once come home to a dead body in the parking lot - gunshot to the head). I go cold at the sight (or sound) of a gun.
Click to expand...


I'd pretty much bet that you aren't.
 
gramps said:
Is that the best you can do?
Click to expand...

I think you should be aiming that question at the e-petitioners. It'll be good when this junk gimmick throws up something funny to debate though so I'll give it a modicum of credit.

matty said:
he makes more sense than some in this thread though. and yes, I mean you.:nuts:
Click to expand...

I have no doubt Clarkson's politically incorrect opinions, which he has to a deadline for money, would go down well on here.
 
I've got to say that I think that the concept of removing the offenders' benefits is absolutely barking as well, to the point that anyone who has signed it has effectively condemned themselves to being labelled as idiotic and reactionary. A few people on here have expressed support and yet regularly lambaste the Daily Mail for the stories that it runs.

Remove the benefits from a part time scrote and you are almost guaranteeing turning him into a full time, hardcore criminal.

I can't stand the little turds but

a) benefits are cheaper than a prison cell
b) more muggings will equal more fatalities and/or serious injuries

It's a seriously badly thought out idea which smacks of a knee jerk reaction.

Yes social engineering is required to fix the problem, but let's do it properly and have a sustainable solution, not a mindless half arsed one.
 
Laudrup said:
I think you should be aiming that question at the e-petitioners.
Click to expand...

Why, they are the ones that are paying the money in taxes, they have the right to question how it's being wasted.
 
massive social engineering will be required, looking at the people that have been going through the courts, its not just the subculture of young scrotes, there appears to be a large quantity of older scrotes too - actions and reactions again, there is no real punishment for people, and thats the fault of the handwringing dogooders who want to hug criminals, understand their issues, connect with them, and tell us that the criminals are actually the victims in all this. etc.

anyway im out of this now, ive made the fact that im a politically incorrect dinosaur...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top