Also in the news

[nnfox]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

The thing that is politically motivated is the police closing ranks in order to protect the corrupt and criminally responsible (regardless of intent) individuals within them and making the prosecutor afraid of holding them accountable in the first place. 

 

If bringing forward prosecutions even in the face of all that is dangerous, then frankly bring on the danger. It's the right thing to do.

But I don't think in this case there is any closing of ranks to protect corrupt and criminal officers.  Honestly, I believe they are dismayed that two of their colleagues have been put in this situation through doing their job in a way that most of their colleagues would have acted.  The truth is, any single one of those officers could be on the receiving end of their treatment.

 

Politicians might be able to have some sway in policing at a strategic level through policy and funding, but they must stay out of operational matters.  And that includes applying pressure to disregard the rule of law and scapegoat two officers to appease the will of a section of society.  This is not a step forward, it's a big jump backwards.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, nnfox said:

But I don't think in this case there is any closing of ranks to protect corrupt and criminal officers.  Honestly, I believe they are dismayed that two of their colleagues have been put in this situation through doing their job in a way that most of their colleagues would have acted.  The truth is, any single one of those officers could be on the receiving end of their treatment.

 

Politicians might be able to have some sway in policing at a strategic level through policy and funding, but they must stay out of operational matters.  And that includes applying pressure to disregard the rule of law and scapegoat two officers to appease the will of a section of society.  This is not a step forward, it's a big jump backwards.

Well, I guess we see this situation entirely differently then.

 

AFAIC the police, riot or no, had and have a duty of care towards any citizens not presenting a direct threat to them and as such they are criminally negligent at best and criminally malicious at worst. Either way, criminal - and so their colleagues are IMO wilfully looking to impede accountability for them, and if that is indeed the way any of them would done their job given the situation then either all of them, the ones that gave them the orders, or both, are wrong.

 

I take the point about the action probably being legal in the letter of the law, but sometimes folks stop to think about whether something is legal or illegal so much they don't stop to think about whether it's right or wrong. But then I say that as a pretty fierce advocate of jury nullification, so hey.

[WigstonWanderer]

17 minutes ago, nnfox said:

But I don't think in this case there is any closing of ranks to protect corrupt and criminal officers.  Honestly, I believe they are dismayed that two of their colleagues have been put in this situation through doing their job in a way that most of their colleagues would have acted.  The truth is, any single one of those officers could be on the receiving end of their treatment.

 

Politicians might be able to have some sway in policing at a strategic level through policy and funding, but they must stay out of operational matters.  And that includes applying pressure to disregard the rule of law and scapegoat two officers to appease the will of a section of society.  This is not a step forward, it's a big jump backwards.

Whatever excuses you want to make, bullying an old man is not a good look.

[Sly]

I’ve seen so much hypocrisy on social media.

 

An example from one person:

 

1 - Stay in, stop the virus, save lives

 

2 - Clap for the NHS

 

3 - I can’t believe people are meeting up, they’re not from the same households! No social distancing! 

 

4 - Dominic Cummings needs sacking, he broke the rules.

 

5 - All police are brutal, this is how they do it. #EndPoliceBrutality

 

6 - We need to protest #BlackLivesMatter

 

7 - We were acting peacefully today (various photos of large crowd).

 

8 - You can’t tar us all with the same brush, blame the few that vandalised / throw objects at the police. 

9. I really hope I can go on my holiday in 5 weeks. Any idea if flights / hotels will open?
 

———————

 

For me, the media need to be held accountable for a lot of this. They magnify in on a situation and blow it all out of proportion. 
 

99% of police are great; they don’t deserve the treatment that they are currently receiving in these situations.

 

99% of protestors acted in a civilised manor and didn’t cause civil unrest.

 

99% of us agree with the reasoning for the protestors. Large numbers are on the fence regarding if it’s the right time to undertake these, given the current pandemic.
 

It’s the small % of people that have instigated this. Deal with the root cause of the problem. They are the ones that are causing this.

 

 

[nnfox]

36 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Well, I guess we see this situation entirely differently then.

 

AFAIC the police, riot or no, had and have a duty of care towards any citizens not presenting a direct threat to them and as such they are criminally negligent at best and criminally malicious at worst. Either way, criminal - and so their colleagues are IMO wilfully looking to impede accountability for them, and if that is indeed the way any of them would done their job given the situation then either all of them, the ones that gave them the orders, or both, are wrong.

 

I take the point about the action probably being legal in the letter of the law, but sometimes folks stop to think about whether something is legal or illegal so much they don't stop to think about whether it's right or wrong. But then I say that as a pretty fierce advocate of jury nullification, so hey.

We clearly do see this differently, but that's fine.  I respect your view and realise that difference in opinions form the basis for healthy debate.  That's a good thing, right?

 

29 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Whatever excuses you want to make, bullying an old man is not a good look.

Images of an old man falling and cracking his head is not a good look, I never said it wasn't.  But something not looking good doesn't necessarily make it illegal.

Edited 7 June 2020 by nnfox

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, nnfox said:

We clearly do see this differently, but that's fine.  I respect your view and realise that difference in opinions form the basis for healthy debate.  That's a good thing, right?

 

You'd like to think so. There are few things upon which I will brook zero difference in opinion or write the person off as a self-interested sociopath - some, but only a very few (and at the very least understanding why that viewpoint is there should be made before reaching that conclusion). This ain't one of them.

 

11 minutes ago, Sly said:

 

For me, the media need to be held accountable for a lot of this. They magnify in on a situation and blow it all out of proportion. 
 

99% of police are great; they don’t deserve the treatment that they are currently receiving in these situations.

 

99% of protestors acted in a civilised manor and didn’t cause civil unrest.

 

99% of us agree with the reasoning for the protestors. Large numbers are on the fence regarding if it’s the right time to undertake these, given the current pandemic.
 

It’s the small % of people that have instigated this. Deal with the root cause of the problem. They are the ones that are causing this.

 

 

Begging pardon, but I think that the reason behind the protests mean that these two statements rather conflict with each other, unless I'm mistaken? People are getting rowdy precisely because the issue is systemic and more than a tiny minority of cops in the US are behaving badly and still more being complicit in it. And it has been going on for a long time.

[Sly]

14 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Begging pardon, but I think that the reason behind the protests mean that these two statements rather conflict with each other, unless I'm mistaken? People are getting rowdy precisely because the issue is systemic and more than a tiny minority of cops in the US are behaving badly and still more being complicit in it. And it has been going on for a long time.

I agree, I could have worded that better. It’s more about the point though. 
 

I get more frustrated with the media. They’ve been poking the bear with the George Floyd situation since it tragically occurred. They didn’t do this with the death of Tony Timpa, a white man held down and killed by police in a somewhat similar occurrence. They’ll be other occurrences, albeit this is the one that has been highlighted recently.

 

For me, it’s deeper than race, it’s what is deemed as acceptable behaviour in a given situation. What is excessive force? 

 

Would the media have given it the mainstream coverage, if George had been from any other “box” that they put people into? 
 

* LGBT

* Traveller

* Asian

* White

* Blonde

* Ginger

* Jewish

 

In some cases maybe yes, in others, maybe not. 

 

You deal with the minority that cause issues and we’ll live in a better world.

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, Sly said:

I agree, I could have worded that better. It’s more about the point though. 
 

I get more frustrated with the media. They’ve been poking the bear with the George Floyd situation since it tragically occurred. They didn’t do this with the death of Tony Timpa, a white man held down and killed by police in a somewhat similar occurrence. They’ll be other occurrences, albeit this is the one that has been highlighted recently.

 

For me, it’s deeper than race, it’s what is deemed as acceptable behaviour in a given situation. What is excessive force? 

 

Would the media have given it the mainstream coverage, if George had been from any other “box” that they put people into? 
 

* LGBT

* Traveller

* Asian

* White

* Blonde

* Ginger

* Jewish

 

In some cases maybe yes, in others, maybe not. 

 

You deal with the minority that cause issues and we’ll live in a better world.

TBH it's a wide-ranging discussion that probably merits a more knowledgeable mind than mine on the topic.

 

However, to give my own answer to the questions above:

 

- I think the US fuzz often do use brutally excessive force across the board and that's often indicative of cultural differences over there and it needs to be addressed. However...(and this leads into the second point)

- It's a matter of statistical fact that US police are involved in these brutally excessive incidents against black people at a disproportionate rate compared to other ethnic groups. That's the core issue here (admittedly it seems to rather get lost among everything else going on) and it suggests a fundamental problem that needs to be addressed. Among demographics in general, I'd suggest that LGBT people are also subject to mistreatment at an elevated rate, but I have no hard stats for that right now.

 

I can understand the frustration with the media as it appears to be playing "favourites", but I would submit that this is a pretty bad issue that has been simmering for some time, has been left unaddressed. and so the more it is focused on by media, politicians and populace alike the sooner it might get fixed in a successful fashion to the benefit of all.

Edited 7 June 2020 by leicsmac

[BKLFox]

10 hours ago, Izzy said:

The video of that policeman on the horse going straight into that lamppost. Jezzus. 

And were they cheers from the protesters, maybe not all but certainly heard a few which has made me even angrier about how it’s all turning out.

[nnfox]

24 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

TBH it's a wide-ranging discussion that probably merits a more knowledgeable mind than mine on the topic.

 

However, to give my own answer to the questions above:

 

- I think the US fuzz often do use brutally excessive force across the board and that's often indicative of cultural differences over there and it needs to be addressed. However...(and this leads into the second point)

- It's a matter of statistical fact that US police are involved in these brutally excessive incidents against black people at a disproportionate rate compared to other ethnic groups. That's the core issue here (admittedly it seems to rather get lost among everything else going on) and it suggests a fundamental problem that needs to be addressed. Among demographics in general, I'd suggest that LGBT people are also subject to mistreatment at an elevated rate, but I have no hard stats for that right now.

 

I can understand the frustration with the media as it appears to be playing "favourites", but I would submit that this is a pretty bad issue that has been simmering for some time, has been left unaddressed. and so the more it is focused on by media, politicians and populace alike the sooner it might get fixed in a successful fashion to the benefit of all.

The killing of George Floyd has served as a catalyst for raising the issue of racism, particularly in the USA.  America is a country built on slavery and land-grabs from Native Americans.  The underlying problem, I believe, is that the whole country is institutionally racist.  The police are a focal point for the frustration as all too often it is the police, dealing with the sharp end of the wedge, that manifest that racism into physical acts.  But that only tells part of the story.  Health, education, jobs, benefits, opportunity and more all contribute to the racism debate and should be discussed at length.

 

Are all Americans racist? No. Are all American cops racist? No. It's a small minority.  Given that the police are recruited from the general public, it is obvious that some cops will be racist.  Then, the actions of the police are easier to pick up on though as they are often a single, dramatic event.  Not a slow burning, almost unnoticeable carousel that has been compounded over many years.

 

If the US government passed a law tomorrow saying that under no circumstance can a police officer make physical contact with a black person, the issue of racism would not be solved.  Not by a long way.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, nnfox said:

The killing of George Floyd has served as a catalyst for raising the issue of racism, particularly in the USA.  America is a country built on slavery and land-grabs from Native Americans.  The underlying problem, I believe, is that the whole country is institutionally racist.  The police are a focal point for the frustration as all too often it is the police, dealing with the sharp end of the wedge, that manifest that racism into physical acts.  But that only tells part of the story.  Health, education, jobs, benefits, opportunity and more all contribute to the racism debate and should be discussed at length.

 

Are all Americans racist? No. Are all American cops racist? No. It's a small minority.  Given that the police are recruited from the general public, it is obvious that some cops will be racist.  Then, the actions of the police are easier to pick up on though as they are often a single, dramatic event.  Not a slow burning, almost unnoticeable carousel that has been compounded over many years.

 

If the US government passed a law tomorrow saying that under no circumstance can a police officer make physical contact with a black person, the issue of racism would not be solved.  Not by a long way.

So the police are merely a reflection of the way society is over there? Yeah, I can see what you mean. Institutionalised at more than one level, then.

 

Of course it's going to take more than addressing just the "excessive force" part of it - there needs to be an entire shift on the ethos of police themselves, and, if what you say is right, on a great deal of society, too.

[leicsmac]

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/501258-trump-signs-order-removing-environmental-review-for-major-projects

 

Yes, Biden isn't anywhere close to ideal. But he likely wouldn't do something like this.

[urban.spaceman]

21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/501258-trump-signs-order-removing-environmental-review-for-major-projects

 

Yes, Biden isn't anywhere close to ideal. But he likely wouldn't do something like this.

If he does win he’s going to spend four entire years reversing the damage.

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

If he does win he’s going to spend four entire years reversing the damage.

That seems to be the case, yes.

 

I just hope he doesn't mess with the Artemis Program - if there's one thing alone that this administration has done right, that is it.

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, BKLFox said:

And were they cheers from the protesters, maybe not all but certainly heard a few which has made me even angrier about how it’s all turning out.

It angers me that people not knowing what they are out in the street for are taking the message away from that that do know what they're there for and what the protests are for. 

 

Too many people seem to have seen this as a way to 'fight back' physically as opposed to peacefully marching as is allowed. 

 

If anyone cheers for a police officer getting clothes-lined by a traffic light at quite a high speed, and not perhaps going to help her, they're just as bad as those cops we saw who walked past the old man. 

 

People want to see change and equality and compassion and respect. Sometimes you have to give some out yourself first. There'd have been a far more positive message come out if everyone who saw this copper fly off the horse and went to see if she's okay. Not cheer or be celebrating someone could be seriously hurt.

[StanSP]

Some racist old bint on Facebook replied to a George Floyd article on one of the local groups saying there's been 'blatant racism shown against the police' after the protests here in UK

[Countryfox]

Anarchists and anti establishment protesters will take to the streets whatever the march is for ...  some may not really know what the march is about and probably couldn't give a shit anyway ...   their main triggers are fighting (especially the police who they see as servants of the powerful), causing damage, mayhem and looting ....      get selected bits of what happens caught by the media (or someones smart phone) and bobs your uncle !! ...   front page headlines for a week !!    Quite depressing.

[Trav Le Bleu]

8 hours ago, MPH said:

 

it’s ok to look at the bigger picture, but this IS a culturally diverse planet we live on and it’s ok for someone to have an identity that’s different to you... it’s also ok for them to object when their is a very specific grievance they feel attacks them personally. 

No.

 

Not when that's the only time you feel grief. If it's ok for someone to have an identity that's different to you, then you will be upset by bad things that happen to people that are different to you. I don't see that nearly enough.

 

I'm not saying there aren't people concerned about what happens amongst other races amongst this movement, of course there are, but if you only get upset when it gets personal... well I give in.

 

Not looking at the bigger picture is missing the point, big time!

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[Trav Le Bleu]

48 minutes ago, StanSP said:

It angers me that people not knowing what they are out in the street for are taking the message away from that that do know what they're there for and what the protests are for. 

 

Too many people seem to have seen this as a way to 'fight back' physically as opposed to peacefully marching as is allowed. 

 

If anyone cheers for a police officer getting clothes-lined by a traffic light at quite a high speed, and not perhaps going to help her, they're just as bad as those cops we saw who walked past the old man. 

 

People want to see change and equality and compassion and respect. Sometimes you have to give some out yourself first. There'd have been a far more positive message come out if everyone who saw this copper fly off the horse and went to see if she's okay. Not cheer or be celebrating someone could be seriously hurt.

The basic fact is that if people hadn't effectively been locked up for three months, this would not have had so much "support". Support is in inverted commas because I think a great many people involved don't actually care, they're just angry in general.

[Lcfc82]

Are the media allowed to criticise the Black Lives Matter protestors ? I try and avoid the news if possible due to how depressing it is.

just heard it described on the radio as a largely peaceful demonstration where social distancing was followed. The pictures I’ve seen from yesterday seem to imply the exact opposite.

seems people in the media are either scared to come out and criticise or have been told not to.

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52954697

 

Rick Scott in election year appeal-to-jingoism shocker. Marr should have properly pressed him on these "sources".

Edited 7 June 2020 by leicsmac

[Pliskin]

The attack on police in this country is what is concerning, my sister and my brother are both cops. One in the Met and one in West Midlands... my sister works in the violent sex offenders unit, she is a specialist sex offenders against children, she has seen countless cases go to court, countless sexual predators sent to prison for long sentences. Should she and others in her department be subjected to the same criticism as a cop in America? 
 

My brother is a firearms officer for West Midlands, he has never fired a bullet in any setting other than training, he’s been a fire arms officer for 15 years. He has done countless drug raids, raids of suspected terrorists houses and weapons raids, never once has he fired a bullet.

 

Where there is a problem with social equality in the uk, there are still a large number of people who’s prejudice keep them warm at night. But we as a country are no where near as bad as America and our cops are no where ****ing near the Americans. 
 

99% of our cops are excellent, you will always get one who isn’t, you’ll always get one who oversteps the mark, but when you **** up in the cops in this country, it opens a whole bag of worms and life can become a living hell, I know, because my brother was subject to a false and rather sinister complaint, so I to some extent understand how robust the professional  standards department is, even when the evidence in the end shows your innocence. 

 

So whilst I’m all for peaceful protesting for black lives matter, because it is important, I don’t like to see it as an excuse to attack our officers. There have been occasions where my sister has been left in tears due to not getting charging decisions in serious cases, my brother who whilst on his probation having to tell someone sitting in a loft with a noose around their neck why ending his life isn’t the answer, having never met him before or not knowing his background, my sister being assaulted my a man twice her size because she had no back up at the time, a man who subsequently had just beaten his wife up, should officers who care and go into work and slog their bollocks off daily, police don’t often get involved in forceful tangles, my brother often says its 10% action 90% paperwork, and when they do it is often scrutinised and found to be lawful.
 

For one bad cop there are a thousand good ones in this country trying their best to serve the public, with minimal tools to do their job they do so police will always support peaceful protests, but they have a job to do when the protestors overstep the mark, they have legislation to respect and act upon, they’re paid by us to uphold these laws, and they shouldn’t be assaulted and beaten for doing this. 
 

Visions of officers left on the ground in London after being bolted from their horse, which has been attacked is unacceptable, the officer in question apparently has a collapsed lung, shattered rib cage and a broken collar bone. 
 

Perhaps a few people should spend a few weeks shadowing cops so they can see things for themselves.

Edited 7 June 2020 by Pliskin

[leicsmac]

UK police absolutely, categorically, shouldn't be a target - this isn't about them at all, the Stephen Lawrence case and the look into "stop and search" policy and bolstered reform dealt with any kind of racism that might have been institutionalised there. The actions of the US police should be the sole and only focus, not score-settling over perceived slights over here.

 

Unfortunately it's always going to be the case that you will get a hardcore of nutters that don't get that memo or don't want to read it.

 

However, at the same time, there will be those who use those actions as an excuse to decry the whole movement and they shouldn't be listened to either.

 

There's some parallels with Extinction Rebellion (neo-Luddite dafties that they are) and the overall climate change/scientific policy movement, come to that.

 

 

[simFox]

37 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

 

That's just laughable!

 

Reminds me of this