Riots in London

[shetlandpeat]

Yup, no one should be above the law, even more so than those who enforce it.

There has been claims that some far right groups have been involved in some of the troubles, there was a discussion on it on the wireless tonight. As well as some religious groups, some capitalising, others just helpin folk.

 

The police have made errors in the past, as the way in which these disturbances evolve over the year, so must the police. There will be mistakes, as folk are just human.

My uncle was a policeman, he would have some tales about what he had seen throughout his life, I do not think he would want to be in the force now.

 

If the shooting of one person was the excuse for all this, imagine if guns were available to all legally.

 

I don't think immigration is the cause of these actions, unless you have a problem with immigration. These riots will be the start of other protests, it may be down to the footage shown on TeeVee. The EDL are planning marches on Tower Hamlets. As ever, there will be trouble. Their "tag" is being placed at some of the race crime sites in the country now.

[Njugle]

Master Twerto,

 

If a Police Officer in Tottenham behaved in any way unlawfully, my own opinion is he should face the same full weight of the law as that promised to these young roister-doisters partaking in the violence and destruction (and, of course, out and out theft!).

 

Your humble servant.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gang-suspect-killed-by-police-did-not-fire-his-gun-tests-show-2335134.html

[Sherlock]

But, for the sake of debate, were these Officers reasonably expected to wait until one of them had been shot by someone holding or carrying a firearm, before opening fire? I do not know the full circumstances, nor, I doubt, does any other party contributing here (including "The Independent" or any other newspaper).

 

However - once again, purely for debate - if what appears to be a loaded firearm, capable of killing, is presented at an armed Police Officer by an allegedly known gang member, who is fully aware of the presence of said Officers, and already suspects their intention to apprehend him (the text shortly before his untimely death), is it truly unreasonable to expect these Officers to defend themselves and discharge their firearms? Perhaps a warning was issued? I do not know. Do you? This was a man with known gang affiliations, apparently carrying what appeared to be a loaded firearm in a public place. Whether the starting pistol was capable of firing live rounds,

through modification, or not, is immaterial. At a reasonable range, with - for the sake of argument - what appears to be a firearm brandished or pointed at you, it would not be possible to divine the lethal or non-lethal nature of the handgun. Psychic powers are not standard Police issue.

 

Not quite Jean Charles de Menezes, in my opinion.

 

If it was a British patrol in Helmand Province, facing a suspected Taliban member in rather (and unfortunately) the same sort of situation, would you expect them to say, "Okay mate, we'll just wait for you to start shooting."?

 

There is often an accusation leveled that the Police are too quick to judge. I would level the accusation that some members of the public are equally too hasty in their desire to do likewise.

 

I do not know the facts here. If there is a crime, let it be dealt with. However, to those armchair lawyers and "bashers", I would direct you to the words of my signature. They remain true over 100 years after being first penned...

[Para Handy]

It would not mater Sherlock what the police did they would have been dammed if they did go in and banged a few heads together or did nothing. There seems to be no standard rules of engagement

 

And “Gang suspect killed by police did not fire his gun, tests showâ€

Whether he fired his gun or not is immaterial he had a gun.

 

T he man whose death was used as a spark for rioting and looting did not fire his weapon before being killedâ€

 

Oh! that makes it all right then.

 

 

 

Why was the silly fool wave a gun around? And with armed police there

It was his own fault and I have no sympathy for him

 

When a armed officer has few seconds to make the right call.

Not just them being shot at but bystanders also.

Say 1 out of a 1000 firearm incidents there is bound to be a situation like this.

The days of John Wayne riding into town and shooting the gun out of the bad guy’s hand!

Is just Hollywood scriptwriting.

I have had to use various types of gun in my time over the years . And I have been shot at.

That why even a well trained SAS trooper have a Killing House and fire hundreds of thousands of round a year, just to keep there skills at top notch. And they shoot two shots to the head.

[Sherlock]

Unfortunately correct, Master Handy. "Shoot to stop" means aiming for central body mass, i.e. the torso. Not the hand, arm, leg, foot, hat or any other area. As Master Handy points out, this is real life, not a spaghetti western. Anyone with a knowledge of guns, ammunition, their effect upon animate objects (such as hydrostatic or hydraulic shock effect), etc, will know that, in many cases, this makes such shots lethal.

 

Sad, yet true.

 

Your humble servant.

 

Post Scriptum

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatic_shock

[JustMe]

I have had a fairly low regard for certain sections of the police force ever since the miners strike. I honestly believe that they are as much thugs as the people they are meant to protect us from, that they sometimes attack innocent bystanders and that there is an attitude of "we say--you do" displayed by some police officers towards the public they are meant to serve. But I also believe that if an armed police unit is confronted by a person armed with a gun or even with what appears to be a gun then they are justified in assuming that the gun is loaded and that they, and others in the vicinity, are in danger and it is reasonable for them to shoot the person holding the gun.

[Gaepshot]

The shooting by police of Mr Duggan is being reported as the trigger for the riots. The family of Mr Duggan staged a peaceful protest. Protests to be successful require a party to come forward to protest to, no one was available to protest to so the family gave up and went home. The people who started the riots had no connection to the Duggan family, they saw an opportunity to engage in wanton destruction and looting, I doubt they ever even gave the Duggans a thought. The Duggan family have distanted themselves from the riots but unfortunately his death however legitimate will always be remembered as the trigger for the riots.

[OP8S]

 

I imagine they were set off by some "hyped up riot police" or "trigger happy plod" and were merely displaying their democratic rights to protest against the tyranny of the "plod".

Maybe I didn't make it clear in my post, or maybe you were all to ready to jump to the defence of your profession but in my post I thought that I had made it clear that my views on the violence & thuggery carried out by the rioters were not in any way incited by the police. The what was to be a peaceful demonstration was & rightly so, if the locals thought it neccessary. Every member of our society has the right to protest, on any issue.

All I was saying that the police have adequate powers of crowd control at their disposal & to provide them with any more on the basis of the most recent civil unrest would be a very worrying situation as they would then have these extra powers at their disposal should the country ever be united in disagreeing with any Gov. proposals & wish to take to the streets by way of protest. Exercising our right to demonstrate our opinions & the right to free speech.

I have no doubt that you carry out your occupation with the upmost tolerance, but the U.K Police force is like any other large organisation & I'm sure that you wouldn't disagree with me that not all employees share the same views & tolerance as you do. It would be niave to think that officers in the riot squads are not hyped up to a certain degree, if only to carry out the task at hand. As well as their being a minority that are & have been proven to be in the past rascist.

Whether it is in the Armed forces, or in the police-force there will also be a minority that could be described as trigger-happy for many reasons. It could be down to in-experience, or like I said before that they may be keen to try out their latest bit of kit. Situations that we have seen relayed to us threw the media we know very little about, unless we have been involved in similar situations ourselves. Maybe you have, I don't know, but through the chaos I'm sure that confusion could easily cause somebody to be hurt uneccessarily.

I was in no way knocking the actions of the police in these recent situations, simply pointing out that the police have enough weapons & methods of crowd control at their disposal already. It appears that they weren't used most efficiently at the time, which I think most of the country agree with & is something that those top ranking officials should be looking into.

[Styumpie]

After all, everyone knows it is always the Police to blame. Correct?

 

 

I blame the police .0001% for the riots on this occasion, They just provided the spark. Many areas of the country now are tinderboxes, volatile and ready to burst into flames at the slightest trigger, as is perfectly self evident on this occasion. The blame lands squarely on the shoulders of do gooder left wing politics which has decimated the country by stealth over the last decade and more. They are reaping what they have sown, once the cuts really begin to filter through and we get rid of the 180bn deficit, get ready for some real rioting, we aint seen nothing yet..

[EM]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gang-suspect-killed-by-police-did-not-fire-his-gun-tests-show-2335134.html

 

I am highly surprised by the following quote in the above article:

 

Forensic officers have told the IPCC it may not be possible to "say for certain" whether the handgun found near Duggan was fired.

My understanding of firearms forensics is that the science is, and has been for some time, very sophisticated in terms of determining whether or not guns have been fired, as well as by whom, and when. I therefore wonder why they are making this statement? Perhaps Mr Sherlock can tell me where my grasp of the efficacy of such forensics is wrong?

[Shetland_boys]

I blame eveything on human rights, 50 years ago if a child was cheeky to an adult he would get a smack, nowadays children can say and do what they want and get away with it . its not right, and thats why they grow up to be pilticks.

[JAStewart]

I blame eveything on human rights, 50 years ago if a child was cheeky to an adult he would get a smack, nowadays children can say and do what they want and get away with it . its not right, and thats why they grow up to be pilticks.

Oh, I see. For reference, UK incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into the Human Rights Act [uK] in 1998, so theoretically society was utterly immaculate and crime free before this, right?

 

Well, just for banter, here is a list of riots that have occurred in London alone since 1189:

 

* The Massacre of the Jews at the coronation of Richard I in 1189

* William with the long beard causes riots in 1196 when he preaches for the poor against the rich

* In 1221 riots occur after London defeats Westminster in an annual wrestling contest; ring-leaders hanged or mutilated in punishment.

* Rioting between goldsmiths and tailors in 1268

* In 1391 riots break out in Salisbury Place over a baker's loaf

* Evil May Day riot against foreigners takes place in 1517

* The 1668 Bawdy House Riots took place following repression of a series of attacks against brothels

* The Sacheverell riots in 1710, following the trial of the preacher, Henry Sacheverell

* In 1719 Spitalfields weavers rioted, attacking women wearing Indian clothing and then attempting to rescue their arrested comrades

* Riots in 1743 against Gin Taxes and other legislation to control the Gin Craze, principally the Gin Act 1736; rioting was fuelled by consumption of the drink itself

* The Massacre of St George's Fields in 1768 after the imprisonment of John Wilkes for criticising the King

* The Spitalfield Riots of 1769 when silk weavers attempted to maintain their rate of pay

* Gordon Riots against Catholics in 1780

* Old Price Riots, 1809 following a rise in the price of theatre tickets

* Spa Fields riots in 1816 when Spenceans met in support of the common ownership of land

* Attacks in 1830 against the Duke of Wellington in his carriage and on his home, for his opposition to electoral reform (also widespread in the countryside)

* In 1866 a riot took place in Hyde Park after a meeting of the Reform League was declared illegal

* In 1886 the West End Riots followed a counter-demonstration by the Social Democratic Federation against a meeting of the Fair Trade League.

* Brown Dog riots in 1907 when medical students attempt to tear down an anti-vivisection statue.

* The Battle of Bow Street happened in 1919 when Australian, American and Canadian servicemen rioted against the Metropolitan Police

* In 1932 the National Hunger March ended in rioting after the police confiscated the petition of the National Unemployed Workers' Movement

* In 1936 the Battle of Cable Street saw rioting against the Metropolitan Police as they attempted to facilitate a march by the British Union of Fascists

* The 1958 Notting Hill race riots between White British and West Indian immigrants.

* The Red Lion Square disorders happened in 1974 following a march by counter-fascists against the National Front.

A dispute arose between certain of the craft of the goldsmiths and certain of the craft of the tailors

The Justiciar...took proceedings against them in the King's behalf, saying that they, against the peace and their fealty to his lordship the King, had gone armed in the City, and had at night wickedly and feloniously wounded some persons, and had slain others, whose bodies, it was said, had been thrown into the Thames.

Chronicles of the Mayors and Sheriffs of London

* In 1977 the Battle of Lewisham occurred when the Metropolitan Police attempted to facilitate a march by the National Front

* The 1981 Brixton riot against the Metropolitan Police

* The 1985 Brixton riot against the Metropolitan Police after they shot the mother of suspect Michael Groce.

* In the Broadwater Farm riot of 1985, residents of Tottenham riot against the Metropolitan Police following a death during a police search

* Poll Tax Riots occurred in 1990 against the introduction of a poll tax.

* Welling riots, October 1993. A march organised by the ANL, the SWP and Militant resulted in riots against the Metropolitain police.

* The 1995 Brixton riot against the Metropolitan Police occurred after a death in police custody.

* The 1999 Carnival Against Capitalism riot

* The 2000 anti-capitalist May Day riot

* The 2001 May Day riot in central London by anti-capitalist protestors.

* In 2009 G-20 London summit protests occurred in the days around the G-20 summit.

* The 2010 UK student protests against increases in student fees and public sector cuts.

* The 2011 anti-cuts protest in London against government public spending cuts.

* The 2011 England riots, initially in London, following the police shooting of Mark Duggan in Tottenham

 

Damn Human Right Act, you've been around for years!

 

Crime and disorder are not modern phenomena. There's no strong evidence to suggest that hitting children works at all.

[trowie246]

I don't know who's to blame for what happened or what can be done about it but I think some of it had to do with youngsters now a days having more respect for a gangster criminal wearing lots of bling bling and carrying a loaded gun on him then for Mrs Miggin's who is up tae her oxters in pastry trying to earn a decent crust running the pie shop.

[viblir]

The recent “riots†are down to one thing, the chance to get something for nothing.

Shoplifting on a large scale, with a bit of hell raising thrown in for fun.

 

The Sub culture question:-

 

The growth of the benefit dependant population has continued to grow, (something for nothing) until it has reached a critical mass. Not all the rioters were but the majority were benefit dependent and young,

 

The only way to deal with this sub culture is going to be long and take a couple of generations, the same length of time that created it.

I am not calling for cuts in benefits, this would lead to more active criminality to make up the short fall (some would find work but most would not and see employment as a mugs game)

My first move would be to demand contraceptive implants prior to anyone going on any form of state funded benefits (both male and females) and to continue on benefits you need to continue receiving contraceptives implants. Within a couple of generations you will breed this drain on society out of existence.

[Sherlock]

Master/Mistress EM (forgive me, I know not which),

 

I am NOT a forensics ballistics or firearms expert, and so would not comment, lest I misinform you.

 

What I CAN say is twofold:

 

1) In any such examinations (there will be more than one ongoing) there will be a number of factors of critical importance. Foremost is contamination. The more public a space, the higher the risk of such occurring. Just a thought; and

 

2) Do not believe everything you see on Mr Logie Baird's gogglebox. It makes for an interesting storyline, whether on the streets of Las Vegas, New York or Miami, however - for the most part - they are no more than fiction (although it would be rather splendid to have such fine toys at one's disposal). Real life is rather significantly more problematic, and the facts more difficult to establish.