|
U-Know! Forum » Guess what verdict the cop got |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Merrick 2148 posts |
Apr 06, 2010, 19:15
|
||
|
Locodogz wrote: would you care to elaborate on your statement? I hate anyone who would use violence against peaceful protesters. I hate anyone who is willing to use violence and coercion to enforce rules - any rules, even if they do more harm than good, even if they're the opposite of what the rules were until recently - as long as they're handed down from above. It's morally bankrupt. It's also an essential part of the role of the police officer.
|
|||
pooley 501 posts |
Apr 06, 2010, 20:46
|
||
|
Merrick wrote: Locodogz wrote: would you care to elaborate on your statement? I hate anyone who would use violence against peaceful protesters. I hate anyone who is willing to use violence and coercion to enforce rules - any rules, even if they do more harm than good, even if they're the opposite of what the rules were until recently - as long as they're handed down from above. It's morally bankrupt. It's also an essential part of the role of the police officer. Do you equally hate a protester that uses a peaceful protest as an opportunity to bash a few coppers heads? Would you defend the copper being targeted by a knob head protester (there are a few) with as much gusto as you would protect a protester being clobbered by a copper? If not, ask yourself why not? Had that awful video of the G20 shown a protester hitting a copper that was peacefully supervising and he had died, would you be as angry? If not, why not? I would on both counts BTW
|
|||
|
dave clarkson 2988 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 01:31
|
||
|
".... I you take issue with something I, or anyone else, says then deal with it on its own terms, take it apart with intelligence, logic and fact" Merrick - we could do that if you actually initiate a debate with something which is intelligent and logical. Or are we in for another thread of dumb ass-ness similar to the one about the peeps jumping up and down outside Boots about the complementary medicines? 8)
|
|||
Locodogz 254 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 09:52
|
||
|
Hmmm.... "I hate anyone who would use violence against peaceful protesters." " It's also an essential part of the role of the police officer." Is that in the job spec? Or just in your imagination? Credibility...null points.....
|
|||
Daminxa 1415 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 10:41
|
||
Getting right up in someone's face and shouting at them and swearing at them is aggressive, violent behaviour in my opinion. The lady in question was guilty of that. It didn't mean she deserved a clobbering, in fact it demonstrates that the cop in question had very poor conflict resolution skills, but to paint ALL coppers as violent thugs and ALL protestors as peaceful isn't entirely accurate, is it? There's blame on both sides.
|
|||
|
Locodogz 254 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 11:07
|
||
Seems like most of us can understand that.....
|
|||
sanshee 1080 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 11:52
|
||
|
Absoloutely. We'd be in a better place today if the response to 9/11 had been, as Willie Nelson once said of that, 'pop your head over your neighbour's fence and ask em what the matter is first'. Well he said it better than that, but I think from the offset turning up to these events with a 'side' mentality more or less dictates where it's going, and makes the whole thing an absoloute waste of time. What's really sad is that some may be happy to keep it that way. :-/ x
|
|||
|
Merrick 2148 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 13:03
|
||
|
Locodogz wrote: "I hate anyone who would use violence against peaceful protesters." " It's also an essential part of the role of the police officer." Is that in the job spec? Or just in your imagination? Your edit misses out a very important point. The role of the police officer is to enforce the law. (The additional role that's accepted is to enforce obedience to their will, but let's stick to the principle). Laws are invented by politicians and handed down to police. They are instructed to use whatever coercion it takes to enforce the laws. It is not the officer's role to defy this. If the laws do more harm than good, if they invent or exacerbate trouble, they enforce them nonetheless. Most especially, if the laws change - even to the exact opposite of what they had been - the same police use the same power and coercion to enforce the new law. The example that sparked this thread was deployment to use violence against peaceful protesters. there are many others we could cite, but I'm sure we all get the idea. The role they take on says 'give me rules to enforce, I don't care what they are as long as they are rules and I get to enforce them'. I cannot see how that is anything other than morally bankrupt; I cannot see how anyone can deny that is the essential role of the police officer. If you can, please explain it to me.
|
|||
|
Merrick 2148 posts |
Apr 07, 2010, 13:04
|
||
|
pooley wrote: Do you equally hate a protester that uses a peaceful protest as an opportunity to bash a few coppers heads? I do despise the idea that attacking cops is some sort of useful or worthy activity in and of itself, yes. The cops are not the enemy, they are its guard dogs. But to answer the particular wording of the question, it depends on the specific situation, what the coppers are there to do on that day. Frankly, I have more respect for violence from fascist street thugs than violence from cops. The fascists believe in something, the cops are just fighting for what other people believe in. Their violence is to maintain the rules written down by others, irrespective of their wisdom. I cannot respect someone who would use whatever violence it took to enforce obedience to a rule then, when the rule is changed to its polar opposite, that same person uses the same coercion to enforce the new rule. It's either a complete blind faith in those making the rules, or a belief that obedience to authority is the most important thing. pooley wrote: Would you defend the copper being targeted by a knob head protester (there are a few) with as much gusto as you would protect a protester being clobbered by a copper? Again, I would decry it, but not to the same degree. The cops has been entrusted with a higher position, given arms and armour. So the same behaviour from them is a worse crime.
|
|||
|
sanshee 1080 posts |
Edited Apr 07, 2010, 13:27
Apr 07, 2010, 13:26
|
||
|
pooley wrote: Would you defend the copper being targeted by a knob head protester (there are a few) with as much gusto as you would protect a protester being clobbered by a copper? Merrick" wrote: Again, I would decry it, but not to the same degree. The cops has been entrusted with a higher position, given arms and armour. So the same behaviour from them is a worse crime. Yes, the copper may be 'tooled up'(as did that berk who smashed the RBS window - then f*cked off into the comfort of anonymity - what conviction! Eat yer heart out Pankhurst!) but what if he was just standing there, and someone decided to 'floor' him? Not acceptable, surely? x
|
| Pages: 6 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
