Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

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.

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.

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.



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.

But presumably you agree that the police shouldn't use unnecessary violence? That they shouldn't use violence out of all proportion to the situation they find themselves in? So Sgt Smellie should have been convicted?

Sorry, just trying to cut through all this quibbling. There is a serious point underneath all this somewhere.

Yeah well like I say, that particular copper got it badly wrong - yes they are supposed to be able to deal with a physical assault without giving someone a damn good pasting. I'm just not a fan of these sweeping generalisations. That copper was a wanker, a tosser, a twat of the highest order, but that wasn't BECAUSE he was a copper, he'd have been a tool whatever his profession. To me, he doesn't necessarily represent ALL policemen.

I've had far more dealings with the police in my time than I would've liked. Some of them have been cumstains of the highest order, like the twatting little tosspot who threatened me with his truncheon (oooh-er) because I didn't look properly before I crossed the road on my way to the station one morning. Most of them, however, have been completely professional and some of them have been downright stars. You can't generalise about people just on the grounds that they're in the police force, and the same should be said of protestors.

Most protestors DO want to protest and make their point peacefully, but some of them are there just to kick off, and I've met the latter, unfortunately. I don't condone it, but if you're there just to have a fight with a copper or to see how far you can push/test them before they lash out, part of me thinks you can't really complain if you get a slap (not at all pc of me I know). The fact that not all coppers DO rise to the bait is to their credit, surely?

Not at all, you've made a really good point! I agree that this individual's actions reflect terribly on the Police as a whole, but I think in reality not every member of the force would have behaved in such an appalling manner.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not excusing his actions at all - I'm afraid I'm a very old fashioned girl who believes men should never, in any circumstance, hit women, police badges/provocation aside! Honestly though, I don't think this one idiot's behaviour is indicative of the average policeman's response to that particular situation. A hand up, palm facing the protestor and a firm tone asking her to step back is ALL that was required here, and the fact he failed in that simple task is reprehensible - THAT'S what makes it shocking.