Fop 1 Posted April 15, 2009 Author Share Posted April 15, 2009 I've always found a gut punch to be a good opener. http://www.met.police.uk/recruitment/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 38829 Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 I've always found a gut punch to be a good opener. http://www.met.police.uk/recruitment/ :o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 Probably handed her a metal pole so she could hit him with it and only be politely told to calm down. Clearly there were 100 better ways to handle and diffuse that situation. Unfortunately your love of woman beating seems to be clouding your judgement of "proportional force". Clearly. The one you would have used will do. Any one that didn't start with backhanding her in the face would be a good start. I thought so. Once you can deal with someone without having to back hand them in the face Chris, the world is your oyster. Non-contact riot police are go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 15, 2009 Author Share Posted April 15, 2009 Probably handed her a metal pole so she could hit him with it and only be politely told to calm down. Clearly there were 100 better ways to handle and diffuse that situation. Unfortunately your love of woman beating seems to be clouding your judgement of "proportional force". Clearly. The one you would have used will do. Any one that didn't start with backhanding her in the face would be a good start. I thought so. Once you can deal with someone without having to back hand them in the face Chris, the world is your oyster. Non-contact riot police are go. We already have them in some circumstances. Out of interest what would have been acceptable (to you) to be done so the woman if she had say twatted the policeman on the head with a pole or hoyed a section of metal fencing at him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 We already have them in some circumstances. Out of interest what would have been acceptable (to you) to be done so the woman if she had say twatted the policeman on the head with a pole or hoyed a section of metal fencing at him? I'd like to see that person arrested....but in a crowd of thousands, if they scarper, it's understandable if they aren't. What's your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 15, 2009 Author Share Posted April 15, 2009 We already have them in some circumstances. Out of interest what would have been acceptable (to you) to be done so the woman if she had say twatted the policeman on the head with a pole or hoyed a section of metal fencing at him? I'd like to see that person arrested....but in a crowd of thousands, if they scarper, it's understandable if they aren't. What's your point. So just saying "calm down, please calm" down in the first case and doing nothing at all in the second wouldn't be acceptable then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9015 Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 just curious, but itf, hypothetically, the poor bloke had been pushed over by the crowd and had died... would the police still be culpable. I mean, they didn't quickly disperse the disturbance did they. It's weird how shit just doesn't happen any more. There must be blame, there must be someone to put on the front page and throw rocks at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 just curious, but itf, hypothetically, the poor bloke had been pushed over by the crowd and had died... would the police still be culpable. I mean, they didn't quickly disperse the disturbance did they. It's weird how shit just doesn't happen any more. There must be blame, there must be someone to put on the front page and throw rocks at. No, but then making the choice to physically attack someone is rather different to that. Which is the reason why smacking someone because you didn't like the t-shirt they were wearing is assault, but failing to throw yourself in front of someone about to be hit by a car is fine. Ironically of course the tactics used at the G20 were the exact opposite of dispersement, they where all about holding and holding and holding (even totally innocent people that had every right to be there about their normal business were simply contained and told they could not leave - as the fella that died was in fact), many were held for more than 9 hours (with no food, water or toilet facilities) before they were let go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17828 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 According to the Metro the lass that was clobbered is using Max Clifford as her 'agent' for a bunch of profit-making interviews. Canny, I would have thought that might have gone against her anti-capitalist values like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Anyone would think the Police were under pressure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3986 Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 According to the Metro the lass that was clobbered is using Max Clifford as her 'agent' for a bunch of profit-making interviews. Canny, I would have thought that might have gone against her anti-capitalist values like. She wants to be careful - I've seen some of those cop shows on Bravo where coppers threaten to nick people for assault just for touching them - I wouldn't put it past them to charge her with assault for pushing/slapping the copper's back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 According to the Metro the lass that was clobbered is using Max Clifford as her 'agent' for a bunch of profit-making interviews. Canny, I would have thought that might have gone against her anti-capitalist values like. She wants to be careful - I've seen some of those cop shows on Bravo where coppers threaten to nick people for assault just for touching them - I wouldn't put it past them to charge her with assault for pushing/slapping the copper's back. And yet hitting them on the head with a pole and/or hoying metal fencing at them is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 17, 2009 Author Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 17, 2009 Author Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. The ways of The Force are mysterious, but will overcome all in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17828 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Seems reasonable, unless you think Jediism really is a religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 17, 2009 Author Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Seems reasonable, unless you think Jediism really is a religion. Oppression of peoples belief? That shouldn't be allowed! One man's Yahweh is another man's Yoda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Seems reasonable, unless you think Jediism really is a religion. Believing in an external force (for good) clearly ain't atheism is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17828 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Seems reasonable, unless you think Jediism really is a religion. Believing in an external force (for good) clearly ain't atheism is it? Sorry, I thought Jediism related to the ficticious Star Wars series created by George Lucas. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted April 17, 2009 Author Share Posted April 17, 2009 When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Seems reasonable, unless you think Jediism really is a religion. Believing in an external force (for good) clearly ain't atheism is it? Or evil, don't forget the Evil...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Re: this lass - She's a bint but the policeman in question shouldn't have lost his temper basically. But she was asking for it - quite literally in the sense that she wants to make a name for herself by the sounds of it. And I'm not one to think the British police are beyond reproach by any means but the actions of some officers in difficult and pressured circumstances shouldn't colour the attitude of people to the Police as a whole. Sadly though, for many people, that will be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 (edited) When the Jedi take over, all will be well. Love the way they combined it with atheists dumb fucks. Seems reasonable, unless you think Jediism really is a religion. Believing in an external force (for good) clearly ain't atheism is it? Sorry, I thought Jediism related to the ficticious Star Wars series created by George Lucas. My bad. Bit like the bible then. You dopey cunt. Edited April 17, 2009 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3986 Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Re: this lass - She's a bint but the policeman in question shouldn't have lost his temper basically. But she was asking for it - quite literally in the sense that she wants to make a name for herself by the sounds of it. And I'm not one to think the British police are beyond reproach by any means but the actions of some officers in difficult and pressured circumstances shouldn't colour the attitude of people to the Police as a whole. Sadly though, for many people, that will be the case. I agree but they aren't helping themselves very much - there is a case in the Guardian where 2 coppers deleted photos from an Austrian tourist's camera (the bloke was a weird bus/transport spotter) quoting anti-terror laws. Their spokesman then says quite rightly that they don't have the right to do this. This means either they've been wrongly briefed by their superiors (either through genuine mistake or malicious intent) or they honestly think that the new laws give them carte blanche to act like twats. I think getting things out in the open and having a good look at how they do things is overdue - I think what these incidents can do in a positive way is to stop the "unquestioning respect" that a lot of British people have for authority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Re: this lass - She's a bint but the policeman in question shouldn't have lost his temper basically. But she was asking for it - quite literally in the sense that she wants to make a name for herself by the sounds of it. And I'm not one to think the British police are beyond reproach by any means but the actions of some officers in difficult and pressured circumstances shouldn't colour the attitude of people to the Police as a whole. Sadly though, for many people, that will be the case. I agree but they aren't helping themselves very much - there is a case in the Guardian where 2 coppers deleted photos from an Austrian tourist's camera (the bloke was a weird bus/transport spotter) quoting anti-terror laws. Their spokesman then says quite rightly that they don't have the right to do this. This means either they've been wrongly briefed by their superiors (either through genuine mistake or malicious intent) or they honestly think that the new laws give them carte blanche to act like twats. I think getting things out in the open and having a good look at how they do things is overdue - I think what these incidents can do in a positive way is to stop the "unquestioning respect" that a lot of British people have for authority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now