[Closed] So how close were we to guns pulled yesterday?

OK, which illegal tactics are they?

Kettling in circumstances of public disorder is perfectly legal - Austin (FC) & another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (2009)

Look it up and learn!

[url= http://www.politics.co.uk/news/legal-and-constitutional/liberty-fight-football-fans-rights-$1255571.htm ]Illegal police tactics on football fans[/url]

I also think that the tactics of whacking innocent students over the head with blunt objects would fall into the illegal. Then trying to deny that same person emergecy life saving treatment is apalling. Imagine if stdents blockaded hospitals and prevented others emergency treatment.

Human rights violations and unnessecary force are all part of the tactics. Both illegal.

Look it up and learn!

Well at least your not condesending in your blinkered beliefs 🙄

My Daughter was at one two weeks back where the Police was spraying people in the face with some type of spray.

The end of the day how long can an inocent person regardless of age be continuously hit without hitting back?

grantway - Member

The end of the day how long can an inocent person regardless of age be continuously hit without hitting back?

Ask one of the Policemen who were being set upon?

LOL Drudith

I know many police who have been well up for this
They loved it when they done the miners
and also when they stampede the printers stike at Wapping

The Police constantly hide there numbers and i have also known where
they swap them with others to throw identification

I take it your one of Camerons Angels

Let's just fund useful degrees and not bother with rubbish like media studies, art etc..

What an incredibly ignorant thing to say. assuming you actually meant it.

Have you any idea what a 'useless Media Studies degree' entails? Have you?

Jesus Haribo Christ. My 'useless Media Studies' degree has enabled me to gain knowledge in such diverse fields as Architectural Design, Cultural Production and Psychology. Just a couple of examples. My 'useless Media Studies Degree' has enabled me to use my skills and talents to benefit industries such as Special Needs Education, Physiotherapy and even a Mountain Biking event.

See, unless you actually have a real knowledge of what each and every degree entails, then you are unqualified to criticise, quite frankly. To suggest that the only degrees that are deserving of funding are those which seem to offer a direct economic benefit to profitable industries is just incredibly naive and blinkered.

So, in your obviously enlightened and objective view, what degrees are actually 'useful'?

one that gets you a job 😉

My Daughter was at one two weeks back where the Police was spraying people in the face with some type of spray

Would it be this?

[img] [/img]

[url= http://www.metro.co.uk/news/848467-toxic-extinguisher-fired-at-student-protesters-by-police-medic ]Halon extinguishers contain toxic elements such as bromine and fluorine, and have been linked to breathing difficulties, skin and eye irritation, dizziness and even unconsciousness.
[b]Metropolitan Police denied using the extinguishers for crowd control and said halon devices were chiefly deployed to put out fires on people.[/b][/url]

So, Metropolitan Police proved of lying, basically. Evidence? It's there. I don't think anyone can argue with that!

They loved it when they done the miners

funnily enough the stories I've heard about some of that from both ex NCB blokes I've worked with and ex police who were there seems to indicate that on the whole there was a lot of banter and sharing of cups of tea etc... to the point were the police had to get other forces in to prevent "fraternising with the enemy". (based on evidence from Stoke miners and police)

yes there were some bloody battles between the sides but to paint all of the police as a bunch of fascist thugs and all protesters as fluffy bunnies is such a simplistic and untrue view.

I've had my share of serious aggro the police and really don't like them, but we always has the theory that if you go for them and provoke them you can't then cry foul when they come hard and fast back.

there are fight loving yobs on both sides of the line, the difficulty is when they clash with non-combatants caught in the middle.

just out of interest how many people have also ended up with projectiles thrown at the police lines ending up falling short. I remember seeing some chap next to getting floored by a half brick thrown by a clown behind us. Not all head injuries are as a result of a batton charge

what degrees are actually 'useful'?

kelvin
celcius
farenheit

😀

Ajf

all you've offered me is a contention that the use of those powers by the police was illegal - No judgement, no ECHR ruling, just a contention by human rights group liberty and the FSF.

Now, unless you can produce a court judgement which shows that police used an illegal tactic, then you're swinging in the wind!

You see, if you'd had the intelligence to point me towards Laporte v Gloucestershire, you'd be on the right track, however that ruled that the search, prohibition from joining the protest and detention was legal, only the forced return to London was unlawful...

Effinsaftey

Yeah she says that was the stuff and from the off they was
spraying that constantly in peoples faces

You see, if you'd had the intelligence to point me towards Laporte v Gloucestershire, you'd be on the right track

You're very rude and patronising aren't you?

And why are you using completely different case to make your point? It doesn't make you look any cleverer you know.

Bunch of protestors prevented from travelling to an airbase where [b]US bombers[/b] were flying out from. Hmm, strange that, eh? 😕

Halon

A family of chemical gases, similar to CFCs, except they contain at least one bromine atom. The trade name 'halon' is applied to several of these chemicals, which are used as fire suppressants. They are inert, non-toxic, and evaporate without leaving any residue.

they are ozone depleters though so the police have increased global warming

You learn something new every day, eh Tazzy? 🙂

What have we learned from this thread?

What have we learned from this thread?

that there are strongly polarised views on both sides of the debate. the truth is likely to be the messy bit in the middle that nobody wants to examine to closely as it makes for uncomfortable thinking to believe that either innocent protesters of the police could actually want to provoke or attack each other whilst in the anonymity of a crowd.

nice to see you back elfin this place was quiet without you 😀

Now, unless you can produce a court judgement which shows that police used an illegal tactic, then you're swinging in the wind!

To be fair I can't produce a court judgement as it was settled out of court for large sums of money

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/25062010/58/premier-league-stoke-fans-win-police-payout.html

http://www.fsf.org.uk/news/Police_admit_unlawful_use_of_section_27_on_Stoke_fan.php

But they did admit it was unlawful.

Why should I have had to point you towards Laporte v Gloucestershire? You obviously know it has nothing to do with either football or student riots so albeit showing even more examples of bad policing, had nothing to do with the fact that the police has acted unlawfully with both football fans and students.

Also strangely you ask what illegal tactics they use, yet you obviously know that they do use illegal tactics in crowd control. So you could have answered your own question.

Found this on Halon gasses so what the **** are Camerons
Angles allowed to use it?

[url= http://www.kiddefiresystems.com/utcfs/ws-383/Assets/MSDS_Halon_1211.pdf ]null[/url]

So I dont think you'll find proper medical help to hand if
all these people fail to the exposure of Halon

James Welch, legal director at Liberty, said: “This is yet another example of overly broad powers being used inappropriately. If you give the police powers that are not tightly defined, they are going to abuse them.

Doesn't say they were illegal, just used inappropriately because they were too broad, ie. they were not proportionate - that does [b]not[/b]mean it was unlawful, only the press headline says that, and the police apology letters didn't accept unlawfulness, only that the powers were used erroneously!

Back to the subject:

I genuinely sympathise with any peaceful protesters who wanted to make their voices heard, but by taking part in an event that everyone knew was going to descend into violence and disorder, you put yourself in a position where you were likely to be kettled, and by not leaving when violence began, you've become part of the problem!

Only thing is Zulu-Eleven regarding Kettling The Police
Kept them held for more than Ten Hours.

And also Kettling started before trouble started

Only thing is Zulu-Eleven regarding Kettling The Police
Kept them held for more than Ten Hours.

Well, if people had been calm and well behaved, I would imagine they could have gone home much, much earlier!

And also Kettling started before trouble started

Blatantly not true, containment was only activated in at 15.30h - the paint bombs and violence began at 1400h!

to be fair it won't be halon 1211 as that was withdrawn from use in 2003 due to the envrionmental impact of it's use.

only exemptions for halon use are MOD and aircraft

is there such a thing as a peaceful protest. they all end in tears, stay away if you don't want to risk injury. what would have happened without the police presence? more or less injuries?

‘The pin is always removed so its use is instantaneous.

‘By design, these fire extinguishers are extremely sensitive and can easily be discharged by sudden movement or pressure.’

Well that explains it then.

And it was a bit of luck that the copper in the picture was pointing the fire extinguisher straight at the protesters, when it accidentally went off ....... and not at himself or any of his colleagues.

Funny that.

Oh come on Z-11 you're boring now. You've had yer say; had yer little ego-trip, now chill out feller.

I genuinely sympathise with any peaceful protesters who wanted to make their voices heard, but by taking part in an event that everyone knew was going to descend into violence and disorder, you put yourself in a position where you were likely to be kettled, and by not leaving when violence began, you've become part of the problem!

The vast majority went along to protest peacefully. The demonstration was hijacked by a tiny minority of violent thugs, intent on causing trouble. This led to the police using excessive force against a majority of otherwise mainly peaceful demonstrators, and employing unnecessary and provocative kettling tactics proven to be counter-productive in such situations.

Zulu; all you know is what you've read about in the right-wing press you've chosen to read. Don't try making out you're some sort of authority on such matters. You've allowed your prejudices to cloud your judgement of these events, and your bigotry is painfully obvious. Give it a rest mate.

Elfinsafety - Member

The vast majority went along to protest peacefully.

The demonstration was hijacked by a tiny minority of violent thugs, intent on causing trouble.

[s]Zulu[/s] Elfin; all you know is what you've read about in the [s]right-wing[/s] Left-wing press you've chosen to read. Don't try making out you're some sort of authority on such matters. You've allowed your prejudices to cloud your judgement of these events, and your bigotry is painfully obvious. Give it a rest mate.

TFTFY 🙄

Like I said before - if people had been calm and well behaved, and protested peacefully, I would imagine they could have gone home much, much earlier!

Anyone who went into parliament square was in breach of the agreed protest route, they entered into this of their own free will - with rights, go responsibilities!

anyone with half a brain knew that this was going to happen.

Of course. Same way as only a tiny minority of car drivers will drive like idiots. You don't see roads closed off as a result though do you? And people still die.

Look at Zulu: Sitting there thinking 'how can I get back at Elfin in a witty and sarcastic manner?'. Don't bother son. I'm more impressed at the massive poos my mate's nipper does.

And you ain't seen nothing yet. Wait until the unions put a large demo out at the same time along with a large scale strike.

I see serious civil unrest greater than the miners strike coming

a million people on the streets? perfectly possible[u]

Zulu-Eleven I was regarding to the protest Two weeks back!!

Regarding your times if your getting them from the media
I wouldnt take them as actual as there has been alot missed out

🙄

also think that the tactics of whacking innocent students over the head with blunt objects would fall into the illegal

Not exactly innocent are they the little oiks. Any person who thinks its acceptable to be hell bent on being violent and do criminal damage should expect to be met with the full force of the law. Its pretty straight forward really. And as for that Charlie Gilmour - well I hope he gets the book thrown at him.

Elfinsafety - Member
> anyone with half a brain knew that this was going to happen.
Of course. Same way as only a tiny minority of car drivers will drive like idiots. You don't see roads closed off as a result though do you? And people still die.

Yes, but when we go out on the roads - as drivers, cyclists or pedestrians, we know that there is a risk. We decide whether or not that is a risk worth taking. People going to these protests can surely assess the risk of there being disruption - and subsequent police action - and choosing to participate or not?

That is true Tamdem My friend is a tube driver he has
spoken about this strike.
Dont think this will lie here

so if you get run over on the road by a drunk driver we blame you as you knew the risk?
Not really sure what your point is? We should not do lawful acts because someone doing something unlawful near you may result in you getting hurt so best stay at home.

Wait until the unions put a large demo .......

You've got to wait a while yet.......it will be on 26 March 2011.

Look at Zulu: Sitting there thinking 'how can I get back at Elfin in a witty and sarcastic manner?'. Don't bother son. I'm more impressed at the massive poos my mate's nipper does.

You wouldn't have bothered mentioning it if it wasn't getting to you Napoleon 😉

Of course. Same way as only a tiny minority of car drivers will drive like idiots. You don't see roads closed off as a result though do you? And people still die.

And when the police close the motorway because there has been a crash, you don't see drivers getting out and throwing bricks at them either do you?

I don't recall seeing drivers stuck on a Scottish motorway in the snow last week getting out and rioting because the government hadn't cleared all the snow!

You wouldn't have bothered mentioning it if it wasn't getting to you Napoleon

Calling him Napoleon ? ......how fitting, I can well imagine you as Hodges ratty

[img] [/img]

[i]""I love this war Mainwaring"[/i]

The demonstration was hijacked by a tiny minority of violent thugs, intent on causing trouble.

I'm not sure that I agree. I rather suspect that there are some people out there for whom these cuts are more than an inconvenience or more than a future repayments headache.
The reality for some people is that these cuts, including the proposed cuts to EMA, which is apparently off the radar of middleclasstrackworld, represent the end of their futures. This is likely to invoke violent reactions in normally peaceful young people.
How do I know this ? Because I felt and acted exactly the same way during civil disturbances in the summer of 1981.
Push people too far and they push back. Don't like it ? Stop pushing.

Anyone who went into parliament square was in breach of the agreed protest route, they entered into this of their own free will - with rights, go responsibilities!

is there an iphone app that generates semi-legal sounding sequences of non-sensical phrases? I fear so...

I mean, where does the author get this stuff? How does part 1 of this nugget relate to the triumphant, smug yet unconnectable closer? I just don't get it. The author would clearly benefit from a bit of higher education, perhaps a philosophy degree, oh wait, there aren't any...what a shame 😯

But it's not as simple as that, is it? Many artists have no qualifications, and there are thousands of jobs in the British Film Industry where a degree isn't/wouldn't be necessary. As said before (possibly in another thread), training can be done "on the job" in the form of apprenticeships. I'm willing to bet that, back when the British Film Industry was much bigger, a very small percentage of employees were degree educated.

No mate, it's indeed a really complex one and I was a bit reluctant to open it up to be honest, so I'm not going to go off on one here. I think there are some things you need a few more years of education to do, for example being a doctor, or a lecturer teaching civil engineering or mathematics for example, but yes, much useful stuff can be learned on the job. Probably not molecular biology though, so the cure for cancer is probably not coming via YTS (showing my age there) 😀

OK, which illegal tactics are they?

You wouldn't have bothered mentioning it if it wasn't getting to you [b]Napoleon[/b]

Proof that Z-11 has, after failing to impress with his right-wing rhetoric and referererererences to unrelated court rulings, fallen back on resorting to personal insults. As predictable as the hangover I'll get if I drink too much beer. 🙄

Come on Labby; you can do better than that. You're disappointing us on this thread, actually. A pitiful performance.

Why not take up an entertaining hobby, ooh, like shooting, frinstance? Get rid of some of that pent-up rage?

I couldn't help s****ing at that video...........now I feel bad. Damn you yunki 🙁

Racist. 🙁

Zulu-Eleven - Member

"Anyone who went into parliament square was in breach of the agreed protest route, they entered into this of their own free will - with rights, go responsibilities!"

See this is interesting. Because they were exercising their right to demonstrate, but as you point out that right was being restricted. So if rights go with responsibilities, does that mean that with restricted rights go diminished responsibilities?

Interesting insight into police mentality ...

[url= http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/ruralshire-tactical-tees-available-now-for-christmas/ ]http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/ruralshire-tactical-tees-available-now-for-christmas/[/url]

My take on it is that the democratic right to protest about the fees,and the reasons for doing this,are now forgotten by the general public by the behaviour of the rioters.Nobody will remember WHY they were marching, EVERYONE will remember how it played out....Which suits the police

Nobody will remember WHY they were marching......

I'm pretty sure most people know it's about tuition fees.

I'm also pretty sure that the protests would hardly have got any mention by the media if they had been completely peaceful and uneventful affairs. I suspect that they would mostly have been ignored. That's not to say that violence and vandalism is a good thing of course, I just can't understand the logic which suggests that recent events have detracted from tuition fees.

In the last couple of weeks there has been U turns and major concessions by the government over tuition fees, as a direct result of the huge publicity.

And despite the fact that the policy was drawn up by two LibDem MPs, Alexander and Cable, the majority of LibDem MPs refused to support it. In fact two former LibDem party leaders and the current LibDem President, voted against the policy. In the end even some Tory MPs rebelled, and it turned out to be a far closer vote than anyone had anticipated.

I have absolutely no doubt at all that none of that would have happened if the policy had just been meekly accepted by students and school children and there had been no demonstrations. The demonstrations generated huge publicity, and undoubtedly had some positive and significant effect on the issue.

Which suits the police

And I don't why you think that it would "suit" the police if everyone forgot what the protests were about. Have the Police Federation got a policy of supporting massive increases in university fees then ?

well thats ilegal, shirley?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/12/student-protests-met-police-chief

I'm pretty sure most people know it's about tuition fees.

....................and cuts to EMA.

Arguably a bigger scandal than that of tuition fees but no one really seems to care.

EMA yes the pasty shops in town now will be gutted they have stopped this given the number of students constantly in them.

What I meant Ernie is that the strong arm tactics which were employed are to an extent,diluted and in some peoples eyes,justified by people swinging on union Jacks etc.The [b]members[/b] of the police fed certainly have a history of supporting tactics such as kettling etc.
I do think the violence overshadowed the real reason for the marches and has lost the issue some credibility,certainly in the eyes of people who are unlikely to be impacted by the fees,and I don't just mean members of Pink Floyd.Nobody who reads a tabloid is interested in the peaceful protest.
On another note; As a teacher, the EMA was a disaster from beginning to end.Supposed to ensure that the "less well off" could stay at school,while teaching them to take responsibility for their own learning i.e behave....Didn't work, I never heard of anybody losing it.

the pasty shops in town now will be gutted they have stopped this given the number of students constantly in them.

What ? the poor want to eat [b]and[/b] be educated ? Scum, deserve everything they (don't) get.

I never heard of anybody losing it

they all will soon

well thats ilegal, shirley?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/dec/12/student-protests-met-police-chief

I think it is legal, just branded unacceptable.

Which means unacceptable is acceptable if you would rather not get caught for beating people over the head.

....................and cuts to EMA.

Arguably a bigger scandal than that of tuition fees but no one really seems to care.

Which they are protesting about across the country today.

But this is all endemic of the governments wish to stifle the opportunity for people to be socially mobile.

Put obstacles in the way at every opportunity for people to try to

Tick...Tock.....awaits pupils kicking off....Tick...Tock. Maybe a complete boycott of classes this afternoon would get the message across 😀

But this is all endemic of the governments wish to stifle the opportunity for people to be socially mobile.

Put obstacles in the way at every opportunity for people to try to

Agreed.

🙄

Wondered where you'd got to, Labby! 😀

Not sure what your point is mind.

From DrJ's link above:

[url= http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/simon-hardy-student-violence-was-self-defence/ ]The irony of this whole situation is that the so called Kettle was designed to compensate for the fact that we (uniquely in Europe) are not equipped properly for public disorder. We have no water cannon, no baton rounds and no CS gas grenades. We don’t have these things because it disturbs the liberal conscience. [/url]

Hmm. Maybe that's why they (illegally) resort to using Halon gas fire extinguishers instead.

you mistook my opinion trail monkey
I was simply saying that they spend the money on things not related to their studies an it enables them to buy lunches in town rather than a cheaper alternative- packed lunch for example. I could have easily said they will need to get a cheaper mobile phone/contract now for example. Very few spend it on bus passes , books and pens so I am not sure how useful it is as an incentive - we will see how many dont register for the second year next Septemeber I doubt it will make much difference.
I am aware all surveys say it is useful before you post them up - IME people do like free money

(illegally) resort to using Halon gas fire extinguishers instead.

Now you see Elfin, there you go, throwing round specific allegations of illegality 🙄

On what basis do you say that using a fire extinguisher, even against a protester, is [b]illegal[/b]

where *in law* would it be illegal?

The police have an absolute duty to maintain public order - they, legally, are allowed to do anything they need to do so, up to and including lethal force if proportionate and necessary. They can use CS gas, tazers, baton rounds and water cannon if necessary - now then, if they can use all those things legally, on what basis do you make the claim that using a fire extinguisher is illegal?

C'mon, state a law which prohibits a police officer the use of halon gas fire extinguisher *if* he feels it is necessary to use one to distract, dissuade or divert someone in the process of keeping public order! You made a specific allegation of illegality, back it up!

From DrJ's link above:

[i]The irony of this whole situation is that the so called Kettle was designed to compensate for the fact that we (uniquely in Europe) are not equipped properly for public disorder. We have no water cannon, no baton rounds and no CS gas grenades. We don’t have these things because it disturbs the liberal conscience. [/i]

Hmm. Maybe that's why they (illegally) resort to using Halon gas fire extinguishers instead.

I suppose THIS is what they have in mind ...

[url= http://www.thelocal.de/national/20101006-30295.html ]http://www.thelocal.de/national/20101006-30295.html[/url]

on what basis do you make the claim that using a fire extinguisher is illegal?

Can you really not work it out ratty ? Are you [i]really[/i] that daft......or is it just all an act ?

Using the toxic gases from a fire extinguisher to disable a demonstrator is neither proportionate nor necessary and therefore illegal. In the same way as killing a guy walking home with his hands in his pocket is illegal.

Apologies Junkyard.

Fact remains, there will be less income coming in to low income households, which will have a negative effect on parents encouraging their kids to stay on in education.

You made a specific allegation of illegality, back it up!

Behave yourself Labby. Seriously; you'll do yourself a mischief.

Violence begets violence. The more extreme tactics the police use, the more violent the response. Hence the need for restraint. TBH the police are creating a rod for their own backs, by using such provocative tactics.

Using the toxic gases from a fire extinguisher to disable a demonstrator is neither proportionate nor necessary and therefore illegal.

toxic - well, we've covered that one, since its an INERT gas, do you understand that, inert means non-toxic - plus, by your own admission, the gas is [b]not[/b] being sprayed [b]at[/b] the demonstrator, its being sprayed [b]near[/b] the demonstrator, so, as I said, to divert or distract them!

Regardless spraying someone in the face with CS or Pepper to incapacitate them is, as is done on a daily basis by police officers [b]is[/b] perfectly legal, so on what basis do you allege that a non toxic gas is not legal - and you've still not got away from the fact that the police [b]are[/b] permitted to use CS gas (and have done so in mainland britain in the past) and have the clearance to use baton guns if [b]they[/b] feel it is necessary to do so.

In the same way as killing a guy walking home with his hands in his pocket is illegal.

Really, because we haven't seen anyone prosecuted for this "illegal" act have we Elfin?

The law is a binary process - its either legal, or its illegal, no ground inbetween - you've made specific allegations of illegality that you use to reinforce your anti police hyperbole, if you're going to make them, then be prepared for someone to shoot them down!

Violence begets violence

Leave it- it'll keep him occupied for a bit. He'll be off to dig up some obscure legal stuff he thinks proves his point. Keeps him happy I spose. 😕

Maybe a wealthy benefactor could donate some armour, shields etc to the grubby students?
Might even it up a bit and make for some entertaining viewing. I'm getting a bit bored of club/student head interfaces.

Hmm, I was thinking of something like that myself. What about a 'fighting area' at demos, so's thugs on all sides can go and have a good ruck, get it out of their systems? Then everyone else could concentrate on the protest, and be more peaceful.I was going to say Labby might enjoy it, but I fear he's more of an 'internet warrior' really. Oh well.

toxic - well, we've covered that one, since its an INERT gas, do you understand that, inert means non-toxic

The dictionary I'm using defines "toxic" as "[i]Capable of causing injury or death, especially by chemical means; poisonous[/i]" and it is in that context that I use that word. You'll find that the English language allows you to do that sort of thing, you know, like "toxic" debt etc.

Furthermore, I understand that the gases in those fire extinguishers have a detrimental effect on the ozone layer, so I fail to understand how they can be inert and yet react with O3. Still, you're the lab technician - you tell me.

But well done you, for getting hung up on a word 🙄

No Ernie you see Labby isn't actually interested in the 'debate'; he needs to 'win' the argument to satisfy his ego. No point in engaging with him really. Just let him have his little rant, let him show off a bit.

z-11 Where is the police's "absolute duty to maintain public order"? The public and students also have an absolute right to use reasonable and proportionate force to defend themselves from officers who act outwith the execution of their duty and to escape false imprisonment by those officers. Police officers are citizens in uniform no more and no less. They should not be assaulted but it is perfectly legal to hit them with weapons if necessary to defend yourself from an attack that you believe is coming from them so long as the force you use is proportionate to the attack you believe is coming. Same rules for us all in effect.
"Really, because we haven't seen anyone prosecuted for this "illegal" act have we Elfin? " no but we all saw a man walking along with his hands in his pockets struck with a baton from behind then pushed over . we all saw that the officer had his face masked and Id numbers removed we all saw that none of the other officers acted to stop or id or detain the assailant. Many saw that a row of officers tried to prevent an ambulance getting through to Tomlinson. And we all read how the "investigation" went awry because of a belief that a jury would be confused by the original police post mortem from a questionable pathologist and a six month time limit was "missed".

Policing Public Order events is hugely complex, far from having an absolute duty to maintain some Orwellian concept of public order the police have a number of competing duties they deserve our sympathy and support but not unquestioning allegiance or blind faith. When individual officers lose it they should be identified and dealt with by the law when senior officers make bad tactical decisions they too should expect scrutiny and to be brought to book. Citizens in this country have died as a result of both levels of police service wrong doing. In a free society we should not just accept that. Just as we should support and assist the prosecution of those who attack officers in the execution of their duty we should also be willing to hold the police service to account.

Ah, sounds sort of like you're trying to now back out of your corner Elfin.

Nothing to do with 'winning the point' more to do with pointing out that if you cannot be bothered to be accurate in your allegations, and instead choose to resort to hyperbole with wild, false allegations against the police that they broke the law , then it sort if undermines the rest of your comments on the thread, when you go on to explain how "its all the police's fault, innit, coz throwing bricks at dem is fair becoz dey broke the law!"

Actually Labby; here's a little task for you:

Find me the list of permitted weapons that UK police carry/can use. And the definition of 'proportionate and reasonable force'.

Off you go.

@crankboy

[img] [/img]

Is it really legal to whack a copper if you feel endangered?
I'm not particularly enamoured with the rozzers or the unwashed so I'll just enjoy watching them hit lumps out of each other.

Where is the police's "absolute duty to maintain public order"

Its part of the ancient office of constable, an oath, sworn in public, answerable to the Queen (not to politicians) as an independent officer of the law - The Office of Constable is unique because it is the duty of police officers to protect life and property, preserve order, and prevent the commission of offences and where an offence has been committed, to take measures to bring the offender to justice.

The public and students also have an absolute right to use reasonable and proportionate force to defend themselves from officers who act outwith the execution of their duty and to escape false imprisonment by those officers

They also have a legal duty to prevent and arrest a breach of the peace (yes, really, all citizens do!) so if you want to get technical, thenunless they fulfil that duty themselves they are also engaged in criminal behaviour! regardless kettling has been ruled legal in the highest court in the land, and the police therefore have a duty to follow a legal order given by their command

Are you really that daft......or is it just all an act ?

you really have to ask?

Is it really legal to whack a copper if you feel endangered?

It is actually. As long as the force you use is proportionate to the danger you feel is imminent, as Crankboy so brilliantly explains above. However, 'self-defence' would only be appropriate in a situation where the copper is acting unlawfully, or you believe their actions to be unlawful. You have the right to resist unlawful arrest. IE, if a copper comes and says 'I'm arresting you for Xcrime' which you know (and can prove) you haven't committed, then I spose you have the right to resist arrest. Proving the copper lacked 'reasonable grounds' for arresting you would be another, pretty complicated matter I'd imagine.

You have to right to defend yourself from attack by anyone, including coppers. However, in reality, I suspect whacking a copper would take some explaining, and a bloody good lawyer to get you off.

Zulu-Eleven - Member

Ah, sounds sort of like you're trying to now back out of your corner Elfin.

Nothing to do with 'winning the point' more to do with pointing out that if you cannot be bothered to be accurate in your allegations, and instead choose to resort to hyperbole with wild, false allegations against the police that they broke the law , then it sort if undermines the rest of your comments on the thread, when you go on to explain how "its all the police's fault, innit, coz throwing bricks at dem is fair becoz dey broke the law!"

Ratty, you must be the only person who thinks that the police never break the law on demonstrations. In fact, I would go so far as saying that even [i]you[/i] don't believe that. But yet you want everyone else to believe it.

You know, I really don't mean to be rude ......... but you really are unbelievably daft 😕