Say what you mean. Whose's climbed up on their "High Horse". Or is not advocating dangerous & counterproductive actions on a high horse.
At least I know next time I go out to dinner, I'll just climb up on a roof, throw some tiles about and endanger some lives, and generally be a pain in the ass, and then society will come and feed me...cool
So next time you'll go out to dinner you will...
spend 30 hours on an exposed rooftop, and then get arrested, taken into custody, and one would think, proscuted and then punished - just for a bucket of KFC? And you've think you've come out ahead in the game of life?
Well done with that critical thinking there.:rolleyes:
QUOTE: Riot police were blasted for their soft-handed approach today after feeding fast food to two yobs during a rooftop siege which brought chaos to a town centre.
Parts of Wrexham in north Wales were closed off for two days after the teenagers refused to come down from the top of a row of businesses.
Police officers who swarmed to the area were forced to wear hard hats and carry shields as the youths hurled slates, stones and glass onto the street below.
But scores of locals and business owners reacted with disbelief when the hooded yobs were provided with fast food, said to be KFC, instead of being apprehended.
No doubt the Heil wanted him to be shot down with an AK47 (especially if he was black, and/or a chav), and *if* he survived, sent to a maximum security prison WITHOUT FLAT SCREEN TVs and games consoles. It's ABsolutely disGUSTING.
I presume Dibble surmised (correctly) that a small amount of money spent on KFC would tempt the would be jumpers and vandalisers down than waiting for them to get tired or run out of roof slates.
No doubt the Heil wanted him to be shot down with an AK47 (especially if he was black, and/or a chav), and *if* he survived, sent to a maximum security prison WITHOUT FLAT SCREEN TVs and games consoles. It's ABsolutely disGUSTING.
If someone gets 6 months, the Heil are disgusted and want a year.
If someone gets 6 years, the Heil are disgusted and want 20 years
If someone gets 20 years, the Heil are disgusted and want life.
If someone gets life, the Heil are disgusted and want execution.
.
If someone gets executed, the Heil are disgusted and want them exhumed, so the can be re-executed. Every week.
I presume Dibble surmised (correctly) that a small amount of money spent on KFC would tempt the would be jumpers and vandalisers down than waiting for them to get tired or run out of roof slates.
Indeed. It sounds like some common sense was used and the situation was sorted with the minimum of fuss and expense.
No doubt the Heil wanted him to be shot down with an AK47 (especially if he was black, and/or a chav), and *if* he survived, sent to a maximum security prison WITHOUT FLAT SCREEN TVs and games consoles. It's ABsolutely disGUSTING.
I presume Dibble surmised (correctly) that a small amount of money spent on KFC would tempt the would be jumpers and vandalisers down than waiting for them to get tired or run out of roof slates.
While I agree with what you say, it was a good end to a situation without resorting to violence.
I just hope you would feel the same had it been you shop, house? and you were prevented from entering your premises for a few days. Or would you be jumping up and down demanding the Police take action or you will claim compensation from them!
My point is when did we start letting thugs and yobos run this country. I trust you would be all for the stand off had it been your house and the police told you to go stay in a hotel for a few days, at your expense, while they sit around and watch someone destroy your property, if you are that sort of person then "my hat's off to you, on your moral stance"
My point is when did we start letting thugs and yobos run this country.
Were these "thugs and yobos", arrested and taken into custody?
How exactly is performing a criminal act/s - running the country?
I trust you would be all for the stand off had it been your house and the police told you to go stay in a hotel for a few days, at your expense, while they sit around and watch someone destroy your property, if you are that sort of person then "my hat's off to you, on your moral stance"
I trust you would have taken steps which probably would have resulted in
A) more damage serious risk of injury and death to the people involved
C) and absorbing the costs associated with the above.
If you're that sort of person - then continue being a nobody on an Internet forum posting irrelevance.
What is the relevance of how "I would feel"? None whatsoever.
Conor I agree with you, and I like your moral stance that if you ever happened to come across a group of people smashing up your property/business/car you would be happy for the Police to just sit around watching.
I on the other hand would be filing a complaint to the Chief Constable asking why his officers stood around and watched while the law was being broken, it's similar to the riots a few years ago, the police stood and watched while property and buildings were destroyed.
Conor I agree with you, and I like your moral stance that if you ever happened to come across a group of people smashing up your property/business/car you would be happy for the Police to just sit around watching.
Really? Because it doesn't sound like it. Did you forget that you claimed I was on my "high horse" (if not, then who was on it?"
I on the other hand would be filing a complaint to the Chief Constable asking why his officers stood around and watched while the law was being broken, it's similar to the riots a few years ago, the police stood and watched while property and buildings were destroyed.
But you agree with me? So either you're a hypocrite or you don't understand what "agree" means?
To be honest not sure how it should be resolved, but I'm not the Police.
But you're going to complain anyway, despite being completely ignorant of ways to bring about a more successful resolution in a safe manner?
But it seems nowadays if there's a group of people causing trouble, the police are very reluctant to stop them.
Perhaps you should go and live in a police state then? One which tosses trouble makers off buildings?
If you want my non political correct answer I would of hosed them down.
Would of? What does that mean?
Hosed them down?
So you would have resorted to a course of action which could have increased the damage to the properties affect from high pressure water and water damage from holes in roofs etc?
Whilst then making it more likely that the people on the roof top slip and fall, resulting in serious injury and or death. Thus placing you liable for this result, both in a civil and criminal case.
Plus of course the cost to the NHS for medical care. Pneumonia maybe if nothing else.
That is a wonderful course of action. Perhaps you should stand for Parliment and turn this country into a police state?
In what way? Seriously, in what way does the usage of a bribe to end a situation like this and secure an arrest 'sum up pathetic Britain'?
Just to pick up on this again, does anybody have a link to something that suggests they WERE actually "bribed with KFC" to end the incident?
The actual report seems to state that they were given food the night before, as a gesture of good faith, and the incident didn't end until the following afternoon.
QUOTE: Riot police were blasted for their soft-handed approach today after feeding fast food to two yobs during a rooftop siege which brought chaos to a town centre.
Parts of Wrexham in north Wales were closed off for two days after the teenagers refused to come down from the top of a row of businesses.
Police officers who swarmed to the area were forced to wear hard hats and carry shields as the youths hurled slates, stones and glass onto the street below.
But scores of locals and business owners reacted with disbelief when the hooded yobs were provided with fast food, said to be KFC, instead of being apprehended.
There's never a sniper around when you need one, 2 Shots job done.
Just to pick up on this again, does anybody have a link to something that suggests they WERE actually "bribed with KFC" to end the incident?
The actual report seems to state that they were given food the night before, as a gesture of good faith, and the incident didn't end until the following afternoon.
It makes better headlines, and reasons for rage the way it is presented though.
So what if it happens in the US. What the hell has what happens in the US got to do with us here in the UK? Like the US law is the standard we should be aiming for. Its just as f'ed up as ours.
I was just replying to the poster that was kind of implying that the UK is the only place something this stupid would happen.
It isn't.
And it worked.
Comments
Is it that easy? Dammit, if it is, then why do we pay Anaethetist's an average of £70,000 a year?
Still glad to see another person willing to accept the legal responsibility for the potentially fatal or life changing results.
Or perhaps... feeding them prevented further damage and reduced the dangers of the situation?
Dam, knew there would be a down side, or maybe they'll give my wrist a slap and tell me not to be a naughty boy.
Say what you mean. Whose's climbed up on their "High Horse". Or is not advocating dangerous & counterproductive actions on a high horse.
So next time you'll go out to dinner you will...
spend 30 hours on an exposed rooftop, and then get arrested, taken into custody, and one would think, proscuted and then punished - just for a bucket of KFC? And you've think you've come out ahead in the game of life?
Well done with that critical thinking there.:rolleyes:
I presume Dibble surmised (correctly) that a small amount of money spent on KFC would tempt the would be jumpers and vandalisers down than waiting for them to get tired or run out of roof slates.
If someone gets 6 months, the Heil are disgusted and want a year.
If someone gets 6 years, the Heil are disgusted and want 20 years
If someone gets 20 years, the Heil are disgusted and want life.
If someone gets life, the Heil are disgusted and want execution.
.
If someone gets executed, the Heil are disgusted and want them exhumed, so the can be re-executed. Every week.
Indeed. It sounds like some common sense was used and the situation was sorted with the minimum of fuss and expense.
While I agree with what you say, it was a good end to a situation without resorting to violence.
I just hope you would feel the same had it been you shop, house? and you were prevented from entering your premises for a few days. Or would you be jumping up and down demanding the Police take action or you will claim compensation from them!
I'm not sure what your point is?
My point is when did we start letting thugs and yobos run this country. I trust you would be all for the stand off had it been your house and the police told you to go stay in a hotel for a few days, at your expense, while they sit around and watch someone destroy your property, if you are that sort of person then "my hat's off to you, on your moral stance"
Were these "thugs and yobos", arrested and taken into custody?
How exactly is performing a criminal act/s - running the country?
I trust you would have taken steps which probably would have resulted in
A) more damage
C) and absorbing the costs associated with the above.
If you're that sort of person - then continue being a nobody on an Internet forum posting irrelevance.
What is the relevance of how "I would feel"? None whatsoever.
I on the other hand would be filing a complaint to the Chief Constable asking why his officers stood around and watched while the law was being broken, it's similar to the riots a few years ago, the police stood and watched while property and buildings were destroyed.
Really? Because it doesn't sound like it. Did you forget that you claimed I was on my "high horse" (if not, then who was on it?"
But you agree with me? So either you're a hypocrite or you don't understand what "agree" means?
So how should this incident have been resolved?
But it seems nowadays if there's a group of people causing trouble, the police are very reluctant to stop them.
If you want my non political correct answer I would of hosed them down.
But you're going to complain anyway, despite being completely ignorant of ways to bring about a more successful resolution in a safe manner?
Perhaps you should go and live in a police state then? One which tosses trouble makers off buildings?
Would of? What does that mean?
Hosed them down?
So you would have resorted to a course of action which could have increased the damage to the properties affect from high pressure water and water damage from holes in roofs etc?
Whilst then making it more likely that the people on the roof top slip and fall, resulting in serious injury and or death. Thus placing you liable for this result, both in a civil and criminal case.
Plus of course the cost to the NHS for medical care. Pneumonia maybe if nothing else.
That is a wonderful course of action. Perhaps you should stand for Parliment and turn this country into a police state?
In what way?
I assume you'd have preferred the police to waste their time with a siege until the idiots starved to death?
I of seen quite a lot of people make this mistake.
Well the Police are the Police, and they resolved as they should have.
They would not risk sending people onto the roof, with the risk of injury or death, and they cant shoot them down with water or anything else.
Just to pick up on this again, does anybody have a link to something that suggests they WERE actually "bribed with KFC" to end the incident?
The actual report seems to state that they were given food the night before, as a gesture of good faith, and the incident didn't end until the following afternoon.
There's never a sniper around when you need one, 2 Shots job done.
It makes better headlines, and reasons for rage the way it is presented though.
It's quite surprising how many people are just running with that assumption, presumably without even reading the article linked in the OP.
It isn't.
And it worked.