Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

London Student protests - Wed 8th Dec+ Thurs 9th

Cobbles said:
No, we can't. (we being the vast majority - e.g. non-workshy; non-soap dodgers; non-anarcho-wankers; non-scrounging etc. etc. etc. folk who actually contribute something to the fabric of the nation).
Click to expand...

thatcher+spitting+image+3.jpg
 
detective-boy said:
As soon as other posters refrain from:

1. Throwing abuse in my direction on any thread involving policing issues (often before I have even posted).
2. Simply posting abuse, with not even an attempt to engage on the substantive issues.
3. Obsessively stalking me from thread to thread, making post after post after post with nothing but abuse and other slagging off.
4. Failing to read what I actually post, and thus misrepresenting entirely what I have actually said.
5. Not even bothering to try to read what I have posted and posting on the basis of what their prejudices tell them I would have thought / said.

i.e. ... er, no time soon ...

In slagging off Proper Tidy I am responding to their deliberate misrepresentation of what I have said - they are perfectly capable of understanding what I posted, they have simply chosen not to do so, which is tedious and annoying ... and so results in a robust response. If I thought for one moment that they genuinely had special educational needs and genuinely didn't understand the complexities of the issue I had posted about then I wouldn't dream of abusing them as I did.
Click to expand...

nee ner nee ner nee ner nee ner....
 
winjer said:
That tallies with what I was told by a Sergeant at the Victoria Embankment end of the bridge, he said the road was closed because "serious arrestable offences" (his exact words) had occurred and were being investigated.
Click to expand...
Oh dear ... another success for police continuation training ... there has been no such thing as a "serious arrestable offence" since 2005 (when the relevant provisions of PACE were amended and repealed by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act) ... :(

This was justification not only for the kettle, but also apparently to not allow me to stand on the road and take of a photo of the outer cordon. The specific power invoked being "Bronze says so".
Click to expand...
They were a bit more accurate with this bit: there is no specific power to move people around, contain them, etc. in order to prevent a breach of the peace - it is a Common Law power (probably a Common Law duty more accurately).
 
detective-boy said:
I will.

As soon as other posters refrain from:

1. Throwing abuse in my direction on any thread involving policing issues (often before I have even posted).
2. Simply posting abuse, with not even an attempt to engage on the substantive issues.
3. Obsessively stalking me from thread to thread, making post after post after post with nothing but abuse and other slagging off.
4. Failing to read what I actually post, and thus misrepresenting entirely what I have actually said.
5. Not even bothering to try to read what I have posted and posting on the basis of what their prejudices tell them I would have thought / said.

i.e. ... er, no time soon ...
.
Click to expand...

Be big enough to make the first step. Have the courage to rise above the abuse. Show the wisdom to see that you are not just replying to individuals – every post you make speaks to the whole thread.
 
detective-boy said:
I will.

As soon as other posters refrain from:

1. Throwing abuse in my direction on any thread involving policing issues (often before I have even posted).
2. Simply posting abuse, with not even an attempt to engage on the substantive issues.
3. Obsessively stalking me from thread to thread, making post after post after post with nothing but abuse and other slagging off.
4. Failing to read what I actually post, and thus misrepresenting entirely what I have actually said.
5. Not even bothering to try to read what I have posted and posting on the basis of what their prejudices tell them I would have thought / said.

i.e. ... er, no time soon ...

In slagging off Proper Tidy I am responding to their deliberate misrepresentation of what I have said - they are perfectly capable of understanding what I posted, they have simply chosen not to do so, which is tedious and annoying ... and so results in a robust response. If I thought for one moment that they genuinely had special educational needs and genuinely didn't understand the complexities of the issue I had posted about then I wouldn't dream of abusing them as I did.
Click to expand...

lol
 
detective-boy said:
I will.

As soon as other posters refrain from:

1. Throwing abuse in my direction on any thread involving policing issues (often before I have even posted).
2. Simply posting abuse, with not even an attempt to engage on the substantive issues.
3. Obsessively stalking me from thread to thread, making post after post after post with nothing but abuse and other slagging off.
4. Failing to read what I actually post, and thus misrepresenting entirely what I have actually said.
5. Not even bothering to try to read what I have posted and posting on the basis of what their prejudices tell them I would have thought / said.

i.e. ... er, no time soon ...

In slagging off Proper Tidy I am responding to their deliberate misrepresentation of what I have said - they are perfectly capable of understanding what I posted, they have simply chosen not to do so, which is tedious and annoying ... and so results in a robust response. If I thought for one moment that they genuinely had special educational needs and genuinely didn't understand the complexities of the issue I had posted about then I wouldn't dream of abusing them as I did.
Click to expand...

It doesn't make any odds whether it's a personal or collective decision to batter kids. It is still your lot battering kids. Proof, if we need more proof, that you have to be a cunt to be a copper. And as for your comments about kids deserving it, self defence is no offence. They have every right to defend themselves against police attacks, by whatever means necessary.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
Be big enough to make the first step. Have the courage to rise above the abuse.
Click to expand...
I have tried that several times. It has not the slightest effect. :(

And (worse) the mods make no effort to proactively deal with it ... so eventually I bite (and then, instantaneously and miraculously, the mods appear as if by magic and threaten me with a ban ...
 
Proper Tidy said:
They have every right to defend themselves against police attacks, by whatever means necessary.
Click to expand...
If those "attacks" are unlawful, sure ... but they are (for the most part) not.

If a crowd is using or threatening violence then the police have a duty to use whatever lawful, reasonable and necessary means that they have at their disposal to do so, including the use of reasonable and necessary force. That applies even if the crowd includes (or is even entirely made up of) "kids".

(Your entirely patronising depiction of "kids" as being incapable of making decisions for themselves and of being unable to present any threat to anyone at all, ever is pretty pathetic, by the way ... :rolleyes:)
 
detective-boy said:
If those "attacks" are unlawful, sure ... but they are (for the most part) not.

If a crowd is using or threatening violence then the police have a duty to use whatever lawful, reasonable and necessary means that they have at their disposal to do so, including the use of reasonable and necessary force. That applies even if the crowd includes (or is even entirely made up of) "kids".

(Your entirely patronising depiction of "kids" as being incapable of making decisions for themselves and of being unable to present any threat to anyone at all, ever is pretty pathetic, by the way ... :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...


stop making things up. This isn't the canteen.
 
detective-boy said:
If those "attacks" are unlawful, sure ... but they are (for the most part) not.

If a crowd is using or threatening violence then the police have a duty to use whatever lawful, reasonable and necessary means that they have at their disposal to do so, including the use of reasonable and necessary force. That applies even if the crowd includes (or is even entirely made up of) "kids".

(Your entirely patronising depiction of "kids" as being incapable of making decisions for themselves and of being unable to present any threat to anyone at all, ever is pretty pathetic, by the way ... :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...

How is indiscriminately running horses at, or whacking with truncheons, whoever is in the vicinity 'lawful'? I'm fairly confident that collective punishment isn't legally justifiable. Crowd control? Do me a favour. Police purposefully provoke crowd in order to justify further police violence, every single time. No attempt to 'control', purely to inflame.

Kids under 18 are unable to enter a credit contract, or get married without consent, or drink etc for a reason you numpty. Because they are kids. Go batter a toddler or something big man. Fucking kapo.
 
Proper Tidy said:
How is indiscriminately running horses at, or whacking with truncheons, whoever is in the vicinity 'lawful'? I'm fairly confident that collective punishment isn't legally justifiable.
Click to expand...
Collective punishment isn't lawful ... as I have already acknowledged. But it isn't collective punishment. A collective use of force (on a crowd as a group) is lawful - it is NOT a collective punishment but is a lawful action taken to prevent a breach of the peace, crime, etc. It can usually only usually be justified to a minor degree (pushing and shoving or whatever) and certainly not to the point where any significant injury is caused. That may include the use of horses in a way which will not involve any significant injury (such as them moving sideways at walking pace or moving forwards a short distance into a crowd, under control and at low speed, to break up a crowd or move it back - as has been seen in the majority of the footage of the student demonstrations).

Any more forceful action (such as the use of batons or the use of a mounted police charge at speed likely to cause significant injury) can only be justified on specific, individual grounds where there are reasonable grounds to believe that to do nothing would lead to a worse (or at least similar) level of injury or outcome.

Police purposefully provoke crowd in order to justify further police violence, every single time. No attempt to 'control', purely to inflame.
Click to expand...
That is not my experience in the vast, vast majority of cases. It is not the case in the vast, vast majority of footage taken of any crowd control situation (strangely the boring bits which don't kick off don't make the headlines ... but they DO still exist ... :rolleyes:).

Kids under 18 are unable to enter a credit contract, or get married without consent, or drink etc for a reason you numpty. Because they are kids. Go batter a toddler or something big man. Fucking kapo.
Click to expand...
They are also capable of assault, murder and other serious crimes ... :rolleyes:
 
detective-boy said:
If a crowd is using or threatening violence then the police have a duty to use whatever lawful, reasonable and necessary means that they have at their disposal to do so, including the use of reasonable and necessary force. That applies even if the crowd includes (or is even entirely made up of) "kids".
Click to expand...

If the police are using or threatening violence then the general public have a duty to use whatever lawful, reasonable and necessary means that they have at their disposal to do so, including the use of reasonable and necessary force. That applies even if a desk jockey ex plod tells you otherwise.
 
revlon said:
If the police are using or threatening violence then the general public have a duty to use whatever lawful, reasonable and necessary means that they have at their disposal to do so, including the use of reasonable and necessary force.
Click to expand...
They don't though.

If the police (or anyone else) is using LAWFUL force, any use of force in response to it WILL amount to a criminal offence of assault and a civil wrong of trespass to the person, rendering the person using the force liable to criminal conviction and being sued in the civil courts.

If the police (or anyone else) is using UNLAWFUL force, then any use of reasonable and necessary force in self-defence, or defence of another, or in the prevention of a crime (including assault) or in the making of a lawful arrest, will be likely to be found to be lawful.

As the police have many powers to use reasonable and necessary force, as they use reasonable and necessary force in a huge number of situations every day, and as they are almost invariably using powers based on more information than an observer has access to, it is extremely risky to decide that the use of force by the police is unlawful simply on the basis of what you observe. You are by far and away most likely to have got it wrong unless the circunstances are exceptionally clear cut and / or the amount of force being used by the police is grossly excessive.
 
I've been lurking about reading a few threads here though i've only just decided to join.
I'd like to voice respect and solidarity with the students/protesters who've took part.

Vive La Revolution!
 
Student protester who stroked police horse arrested. Could it get any more farcical than this?

A 25-year-old Bristol student was arrested in a dawn raid at his house and locked in a police cell for 12 hours after video evidence emerged of him stroking a police horse at an anti-tuition fees demonstration.
Click to expand...

Here we go.

Speaking about his time in the cells, Saville said: "There was no reason to come for me that early in the morning; the protest was three weeks before. And if we do live in a democracy then we should have a right to protest. But when I sat in the cell, I thought to myself, 'I don't want to be part of this any more.' I thought, 'Let the government make the cuts they want, I can't take this.' I gave up in that cell.
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/26/student-protester-stroked-police-horse?CMP=twt_gu
 
It was a C&p headline from the article, which I suspect is nearer to the truth, but we'll wait and see? Now off you trot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PR1Berske
Protests - further clampdowns
Replies
21
Views
1K
mihaly
M
S
London Anarchist Bookfair 2024
Replies
27
Views
842
ska invita
ska invita
E
8th October STWC
Replies
20
Views
969
Jeff Robinson
Jeff Robinson
C
Land Justice Fair-Make London a Commons! July 21st
Replies
11
Views
577
Sasaferrato
Sasaferrato
steeplejack
London Anarchist Bookfair 2023/24
23 24 25 26 27
Replies
800
Views
34K
smokedout
S
Back
Top Bottom