Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, ashbyj said:

But your saying that there is actual terrorist networks in the UK that threaten the publics safety, just on this occasion it wasn’t them. I’ll sleep better now.

I'm not and there are. I don't worry about them in the same way I don't worry about any else out my control or I wouldn't sleep at night either.

Posted
9 minutes ago, brucey said:

Depends on if the violence is targeted at a certain demographic, and if you're part of that demographic. 

 

Gang violence is least scary, as it's likely you won't get targeted unless you're involved in gang activities. 

 

Random violence (either from mental health issues or non-selective terrorists) is scariest for most people as it could affect them personally. 

 

Targeted/political violence can be more or less scary than random violence, depending on if you're visibly part of the targeted demographic making it more likely to happen to you than random violence. For example, skin colour, wearing religious/cultural garb, attending religious institutions, being visibly LGBT etc. 

 

I was thinking more medium/long term. You can manage political violence through lots of different techniques from intelligence, community initiatives and if need be, police and military action through the justice system. On the other hand, random acts of violence with no political motives are the sign of a very sick society. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, kenny said:

If it isn't terrorism, then the police will be less concerned by a follow-up attack from another group and won't be looking for a wider network.

I understand why such incidents need to be categorised, as you've suggested in your example.

Motive does need to be examined, defined and identified in all cases.

 

I wonder what parameters the authorities use? They cannot jump to conclusions if, for example, all the victims were white, that it was racially motivated.

 

Such conclusions are, however, understandable amongst the general public. Hence why most official announcements of this incident is of 'British nationals', as opposed to including the ethnicity of the perpetrators.

 

An attempt to diffuse any tensions perhaps?

 

Casting this line of thought beyond this incident however, I once heard a politician differentiate between a British citizen and a British passport holder.

 

I'm kinda getting where he was coming from, as time goes on.

 

That's a debate to be had away from this shocking incident however.

Posted
29 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

As an addendum to this whole sorry business, it's proven, yet again, just how much of a cesspit social media can be and how that could result in really damaging consequences. 

What kind of damaging consequences? 

Posted
4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

The same seen in the summer of 2024. Only perhaps worse. 

I’m confused mate but If you’re referring to the Southport stabbings, how is that a result of social media? 

  • Haha 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, ashbyj said:

I’m confused mate but If you’re referring to the Southport stabbings, how is that a result of social media? 

I'm referring to the riots that happened after that, which were IMO largely organised, driven and influenced by social media. 

 

In the current era, it doesn't appear to matter if something is true or not - it is incredibly easy to stir people into a cauldron of righteous fury that can then end up with people getting hurt. 

 

And the events of summer 2024 are only one example of that. 

 

That all being said, I don't envy anyone trying to solve that problem - places like China clearly have their solution but it hardly looks optimal. 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Just the one nutjob confirmed then 

I suppose if not a lone wolf terrorist attack we should be relieved. If nutjob or more sympathetic to be described as mentally ill the concerns will be what was known previously about the the suspect. 

Posted
15 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

I suppose if not a lone wolf terrorist attack we should be relieved. If nutjob or more sympathetic to be described as mentally ill the concerns will be what was known previously about the the suspect. 

It's 100% a terror attack, don't be fooled.

Posted
5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

As an addendum to this whole sorry business, it's proven, yet again, just how much of a cesspit social media can be and how that could result in really damaging consequences. 

and yet here you are

Posted
Just now, lcfc old boy said:

and yet here you are

Ha, well, compared to most parts of it this forum is an outpost of sane and reasoned discussion. 

 

Which (looking at any match thread) should tell you just how toxic the rest of it is. 

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, whoareyaaa said:

It's 100% a terror attack, don't be fooled.

It is hard to imagine someone flipping their lid within minutes of boarding a train rather than a pre planned act. Obviously people were terrorised but guess the investigation will focus on motive and what the bloke had been up to etc. 

Posted
49 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

It's 100% a terror attack, don't be fooled.

Needs to be a political motive for it to be declared as such

 

the suspect released is the fella of carribean descent

that leaves the attacker as a black British born man 


when the dust has settled, you may turn out to be right. For now, it could just be a nutter with a knife 

  • Sad 1
Posted

There was one witness saying that when police confronted him he was shouting "Kill me, kill me".  Possible suicide by cop?

 

This has shades of Nottingham.  Utterly tragic.

Posted
1 hour ago, whoareyaaa said:

It's 100% a terror attack, don't be fooled.

 

Fooled by who?

 

Mental illness is the more probable.

 

Paranoid schizophrenia is the most likely reason and that condition means a mood or situation can make a sufferer turn on a dime.

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...