The police are trying to do a very difficult job in almost impossible circumstances if i had been there and been prevented from leaving while the police regained control i'd have found a quiet spot to wait it out. Seems any excuse to place the blame firmly with the police instead of the rioters causing havoc and mayhem
Huh? I've not "firmly blamed the police" at all. Also the point I was responding to was a point about "just leaving". I've simply explained why for many that wasn't an option.
I wonder if you and others would feel the same were this riot on a council estate over benefit cuts, would you think police brutality then? GENUINE people i believe shouldnt have a problem with the police regaining control over a violent situation, if they are forced to use violence to protect themselves and in the long run me, then im all for it and stuff the cry babies, youll want the police there if they were rioting outside YOUR house im sure.
Given that I'm a benefits claimant due to disability, I'd likely be in the middle of any such protest. And we wouldn't be having it on a council estate - it'd be in London, where the decisions are made. And yes, disabled people are getting REALLY angry at the government. We're constantly demonised both by government (IDS said we caused the deficit!) and the press. We're squeezed and put through dehumanising tests that have already been damned by an internal report, only to find they want to make the tests tougher. They're "reforming" benefits we depend on simply to be "progressive" (tip: if you hear "progressive" to describe a measure, it's inherently unfair, unjust and probably just plain mean).
But the government don't care about the likelihood of us protesting - we're largely too ill.
But then I suppose these days "benefits claimant" has become synonymous with "scrounging scum", so no wonder someone'd use them as an "even worse than students" example.
Huh? I've not "firmly blamed the police" at all. Also the point I was responding to was a point about "just leaving". I've simply explained why for many that wasn't an option.
Given that I'm a benefits claimant due to disability, I'd likely be in the middle of any such protest. And we wouldn't be having it on a council estate - it'd be in London, where the decisions are made.
But then I suppose these days "benefits claimant" has become synonymous with "scrounging scum", so no wonder someone'd use them as an "even worse than students" example.
Where did i say benefit claimants were "scourning scum and worse than students", dont put your feelings of what you "imagine" people are thinking about you onto me thanks they are your issue not mine. Its not the first time youve raised this either, when some people do that it feels like theyre going for the sympathy vote. Your personal issues about your situation arent my concern.
"The consequences" were nothing to do with what I just said. I was replying to someone saying they shouldn't be there.
And I still say they should accept the consequences.
Complaining that someone has been pushed over by the police during a violent protest means that they are old enough to put up with that, if they are old enough to go on the protest in the first place, bearing in mind that she would have known that there was every likelihood that this one would turn violent also.
Yes, they have a right to protest, as the police have a right to uphold the law during a period of civil disobedience.
Or are us disabled people not allowed to protest..?
Yes you are, but as I said above if you knowingly/willingly enter or remain in a riot then you have no right whatsoever to claim 'police brutality' as its your own fault for being there in the first place!
When they're old enough to vote they'll have a chance to f*ck things up for themselves.
You say that but a lot of the students demonstrating will have voted for the Lib Dems on the basis of their promise of no fee rises. A certain amount of civil disobedience is always going to be likely when people feel that the democratoc proscess has let them down.
just for one moment imagine that the police stood back and watched this all unfold and did nothing.. they whole of London would have been smashed up and some Royals might have been murdered.. Would we have praised the police ,,I think not.
You should have learned by now that the police can do no right.
They come down hard and they get criticised, they are soft and they get criticised.
I'd personally rather be criticised by the 'grease mob' though than the general public, government etc.
The only people complaining are those supporting the violence or with an anti-police agenda so I'm happy with that.
Just waiting for the usual jokers to turn up in this thread advocating the use of tasers & rubber bullets on the kids. As for people saying that protesters shouldn't have been there, the government has pretty much sold out their entire future! This 'deficit' isn't their fault, yet they're the ones paying for it? I don't blame them for protesting quite frankly.
Individual troublemakers should be arrested, if you kettle an entire crowd for 10+ hours, obviously people are going to get angry.
Please explain how:
Nothing upfront
Only pay back at 21k
Average of £30 a month paid back at average wage (23k) - Lower than currently
Average of £50-70 a month back at £30k - Lower than currently
Not paid back after 30 years, its wiped
How is that selling out thier future exactly? They get thier future by being able to go to uni without paying a penny upfront.
What do people think about the guy who was pushed out of his wheelchair?. Pretty poor by the police if it was an agressive tactic but they could have been trying to get him out of harms way so I really don't know.
originally I felt sorry for the students with the new fees ,, but to be honest dont students just look for anything to protest about.. Im not saying this is nothing but they love all these type of carry ons.. and thrive on it.
Nothing upfront
Only pay back at 21k
Average of £30 a month paid back at average wage (23k) - Lower than currently
Average of £50-70 a month back at £30k - Lower than currently
Not paid back after 30 years, its wiped
How is that selling out thier future exactly? They get thier future by being able to go to uni without paying a penny upfront.
Don't try and make sense and talk rationally mate, they can't compute that.
Neither can they get their greasy heads around the concept of "up to", with the higher rates for the very top universities.
Nothing upfront
Only pay back at 21k
Average of £30 a month paid back at average wage (23k) - Lower than currently
Average of £50-70 a month back at £30k - Lower than currently
Not paid back after 30 years, its wiped
How is that selling out thier future exactly? They get thier future by being able to go to uni without paying a penny upfront.
Those figures are lower than the rate im paying back certainly but its because they are taking over a longer period to cover the higher costs so its all relative.
It is quite clear that the Police should completely reassess how the deal with these protests. I don't condone the attacks on the police by protesters but from the reports I have seen and heard the Police are instrumental in some of the hostilities and exasserbating existing ones.
But as covered, many couldn't leave. They were contained.
If you couldn't leave when the trouble kicked off, what choice do you have but to remain? How is it your fault that you're still there when the only reason you're there is because the police won't let you leave?
THEN DON'T GO IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Its not like you where forced to go was it?
If you couldn't leave when the trouble kicked off
I don't believe that for a second, I bet they had ample opportunity to leave.
They got what they deserved, if they want to moan about it then join the line with the innocent residents of London who's windows, houses and/or cars where pointlessly damaged by some jumped up little shit.
So the actions of a minority of demonstrators gives police carte blanche to act in the way that they did ? They even dragged a disabled man from his wheelchair.
How very typical of you Deep Purple.
A sizeable minority, causing massive trouble.
I am satisfied that if the protesters carried out their protest peacefully, there would have been none of the trouble we saw.
You say that but a lot of the students demonstrating will have voted for the Lib Dems on the basis of their promise of no fee rises. A certain amount of civil disobedience is always going to be likely when people feel that the democratoc proscess has let them down.
Then they obviously don't understand politics. They voted for the Lib Dems who didn't win. Ergo, they don't get their wishes granted.
Less than a year with this government and the police have lost control of the streets. Under threat from highly dangerous children and disabled people in wheelchairs, they have appealed for extra weapons and powers to restore order.
Police brutality at protests is going to be a common theme over the next four years.
Then they obviously don't understand politics. They voted for the Lib Dems who didn't win. Ergo, they don't get their wishes granted.
No-one won the last election. No party has a mandate. Only the Lib Dems signed personal pledges to vote against tuition fees in parliament - and they didn't say they'd only do it if they were elected as the government.
Dont put words in my mouth, i said nothing of the sort and its not appreciated. I stated my friends were able to leave and yours could have found a quiet corner to sit it out, which is nothing like what youve posted.
Quiet corner to sit it out - there weren't any. They were contained into a small space with little room, and they weren't being allowed out.
im sorry your anti police stance is blinding you,
What anti-police stance? Even the police officers on this forum can't accuse me of having an anti-police stance, because I don't have one.
What was that about putting words in others mouths..?
can you answer my question please? would you want to police to use water cannons and cs gas to defend you, a disabled man in your home from rioters outside it? yes or no.
Watercannons? And wreck the contents of the houses? lol.
THEN DON'T GO IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Its not like you where forced to go was it?
It's not like those who were peaceful went there to be violent, is it? Are you saying that the violent should be allowed to claim the protest as theirs?
They had a right to be there. They had a right to be treated as a peaceful protester, provided they were one. Many weren't treated as such despite being so.
I don't believe that for a second, I bet they had ample opportunity to leave.
They were kettled - ie, contained, detained and not allowed to go anywhere.
So if you "don't believe it", then that's something you'd need to take up with the Met, because your belief is wrong.
They got what they deserved, if they want to moan about it then join the line with the innocent residents of London who's windows, houses and/or cars where pointlessly damaged by some jumped up little shit.
Hang on, let's reverse your own logic there for a moment to show you how ludicrous it is...
THEN THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE LIVED THERE! Everyone knows London is where protests happen, so if you don't want protests to happen near your home, don't live in a city centre!!! It's not like they were forced to live there, was it?!?!? (See how plain dumb that logic is?)
I don't for a minute support violence or criminal damage - and I totally support the police in going after those that were involved in any. However, that still doesn't remove my belief in the right to freedom to protest. No violence muppets are going to take that right from me, or you.
And I still say they should accept the consequences.
Complaining that someone has been pushed over by the police during a violent protest means that they are old enough to put up with that, if they are old enough to go on the protest in the first place, bearing in mind that she would have known that there was every likelihood that this one would turn violent also.
Yes, they have a right to protest, as the police have a right to uphold the law during a period of civil disobedience.
Considering the violence at the previous protests, anyone who went on this one without expecting trouble must be pretty stupid or incredibly naive.
Or they didn't want the violent to be able to dictate who can protest and when.
Think about it - if everyone stayed away from protests because an element got violent, then all that a group that is opposed to the protester's cause would need to do is go on that protest and be violent, thus preventing any future protests on the subject.
Considering the violence at the previous protests, anyone who went on this one without expecting trouble must be pretty stupid or incredibly naive.
My friends admitting to feeling somewhat naive, they couldnt believe the organised hate mongering, men using mobile phones to co-ordinate the chanting and missle throwing, texting even to say where the fewest police were and were they could get through faster it was organised violence on an enormous scale hidden within the "students", who were basically used as a front for those people.
Then they obviously don't understand politics. They voted for the Lib Dems who didn't win. Ergo, they don't get their wishes granted.
The Lib Dems could have voted against the increase in fees as promised. Its not the increase in fees that so much bothers me as the size of the increase, perhaps a smaller increase would have been more palatable.
STILL think?
Now unless you can find me saying that I find the police brutal for considering or using watercannons, then you're a hypocrite.
I know[/b you won't find anything like that, because I've not said it. You're making things up. You're putting words in my mouth.
youve not answered the question, youre complaining about police brutality im asking you would you complain if they were protecting you and your home, all your posturing isnt answering the question so ill repeat it, the lines been broken do you want the police to protect you and your home by whatever means neccessary or not?:rolleyes:
Comments
But the government don't care about the likelihood of us protesting - we're largely too ill.
But then I suppose these days "benefits claimant" has become synonymous with "scrounging scum", so no wonder someone'd use them as an "even worse than students" example.
Where did i say benefit claimants were "scourning scum and worse than students", dont put your feelings of what you "imagine" people are thinking about you onto me thanks they are your issue not mine. Its not the first time youve raised this either, when some people do that it feels like theyre going for the sympathy vote. Your personal issues about your situation arent my concern.
They got off lightly. If I were in charge, those little buggers would have got a water cannon and CS spray straight in the face.
Like the majority of people in this country, I have no sympathy left for them.
Complaining that someone has been pushed over by the police during a violent protest means that they are old enough to put up with that, if they are old enough to go on the protest in the first place, bearing in mind that she would have known that there was every likelihood that this one would turn violent also.
Yes, they have a right to protest, as the police have a right to uphold the law during a period of civil disobedience.
No its not, I was telling you why they should not be there IMO - which is what you asked, unless I'm missing something.
Yes you are, but as I said above if you knowingly/willingly enter or remain in a riot then you have no right whatsoever to claim 'police brutality' as its your own fault for being there in the first place!
You say that but a lot of the students demonstrating will have voted for the Lib Dems on the basis of their promise of no fee rises. A certain amount of civil disobedience is always going to be likely when people feel that the democratoc proscess has let them down.
Im not sure but i dont think anyones ever died from "police brutality" at the hands of a water canon, i think they should have used them a lot more.
You should have learned by now that the police can do no right.
They come down hard and they get criticised, they are soft and they get criticised.
I'd personally rather be criticised by the 'grease mob' though than the general public, government etc.
The only people complaining are those supporting the violence or with an anti-police agenda so I'm happy with that.
Nothing upfront
Only pay back at 21k
Average of £30 a month paid back at average wage (23k) - Lower than currently
Average of £50-70 a month back at £30k - Lower than currently
Not paid back after 30 years, its wiped
How is that selling out thier future exactly? They get thier future by being able to go to uni without paying a penny upfront.
Nonsense. I neither support the violence nor have an anti-police-agenda.
That's just an attempt at smearing those with opposing views. It's as factual as me saying you want Sharia Law because of your stance on policing.
Don't try and make sense and talk rationally mate, they can't compute that.
Neither can they get their greasy heads around the concept of "up to", with the higher rates for the very top universities.
Those figures are lower than the rate im paying back certainly but its because they are taking over a longer period to cover the higher costs so its all relative.
THEN DON'T GO IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! Its not like you where forced to go was it?
I don't believe that for a second, I bet they had ample opportunity to leave.
They got what they deserved, if they want to moan about it then join the line with the innocent residents of London who's windows, houses and/or cars where pointlessly damaged by some jumped up little shit.
A sizeable minority, causing massive trouble.
I am satisfied that if the protesters carried out their protest peacefully, there would have been none of the trouble we saw.
Then they obviously don't understand politics. They voted for the Lib Dems who didn't win. Ergo, they don't get their wishes granted.
Police brutality at protests is going to be a common theme over the next four years.
Quiet corner to sit it out - there weren't any. They were contained into a small space with little room, and they weren't being allowed out.
What anti-police stance? Even the police officers on this forum can't accuse me of having an anti-police stance, because I don't have one.
What was that about putting words in others mouths..?
No, I'd prefer a line. It's not like those who were peaceful went there to be violent, is it? Are you saying that the violent should be allowed to claim the protest as theirs?
They had a right to be there. They had a right to be treated as a peaceful protester, provided they were one. Many weren't treated as such despite being so. They were kettled - ie, contained, detained and not allowed to go anywhere.
So if you "don't believe it", then that's something you'd need to take up with the Met, because your belief is wrong. Hang on, let's reverse your own logic there for a moment to show you how ludicrous it is...
THEN THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE LIVED THERE! Everyone knows London is where protests happen, so if you don't want protests to happen near your home, don't live in a city centre!!! It's not like they were forced to live there, was it?!?!? (See how plain dumb that logic is?)
I don't for a minute support violence or criminal damage - and I totally support the police in going after those that were involved in any. However, that still doesn't remove my belief in the right to freedom to protest. No violence muppets are going to take that right from me, or you.
good.
/thread end?
Think about it - if everyone stayed away from protests because an element got violent, then all that a group that is opposed to the protester's cause would need to do is go on that protest and be violent, thus preventing any future protests on the subject.
My friends admitting to feeling somewhat naive, they couldnt believe the organised hate mongering, men using mobile phones to co-ordinate the chanting and missle throwing, texting even to say where the fewest police were and were they could get through faster it was organised violence on an enormous scale hidden within the "students", who were basically used as a front for those people.
The Lib Dems could have voted against the increase in fees as promised. Its not the increase in fees that so much bothers me as the size of the increase, perhaps a smaller increase would have been more palatable.
youve not answered the question, youre complaining about police brutality im asking you would you complain if they were protecting you and your home, all your posturing isnt answering the question so ill repeat it, the lines been broken do you want the police to protect you and your home by whatever means neccessary or not?:rolleyes: