Bristol protests now....

[figgy]

Needs a woman police chief, they seem have more balls than their male counterparts.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

Just now, figgy said:

Needs a woman police chief, they seem have more balls than their male counterparts.

Dame Cressida **** might be available soon!

[JohnfromUK]

8 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

 

But just where are you going to find a police chief who actually has a pair?

I think the answer would probably be to select one who has come up through the ranks - rather than one who has been through a 'fast track' at University followed by Police College.  You need a hands on 'taught on the front line beat' type - not a statistician and political pleaser.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I think the answer would probably be to select one who has come up through the ranks - rather than one who has been through a 'fast track' at University followed by Police College.  You need a hands on 'taught on the front line beat' type - not a statistician and political pleaser.

I agree and I know that Walker570 would too.

But the chances of that are extremely remote!

[cardigun]

The whole point of a Democracy is to use your MP to argue your points for you, in Parliament, not out on the streets.

[ditchman]

JUDGE DREDD............................"i am de law.............."

[butchdickason]

Seems that the Police can't win no matter what law they bring in, the mob are taking control of the streets and saying that they are a minority and the rest had the right to be on the streets WRONG.   All were breaking the law.  To be a member of the uniformed police force on the streets these days is more dangerous than ever.     

[simonm]

I see Extinction Rebellion or whatever they are called are organising a mass trespass in April, so I expect they will go and destroy farmers livelihoods. I particularly like the way they know they can advertise their law breaking in advance. 

[Yellow Bear]

4 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

As I understand it, part of what they are protesting about is the new bill that 'promises' tougher laws on protesting, particularly disruptive and violent protesting.

And in one "peaceful demo" have fully confirmed the need for tougher laws on protesting

[JohnfromUK]

9 minutes ago, simonm said:

I see Extinction Rebellion or whatever they are called are organising a mass trespass in April, so I expect they will go and destroy farmers livelihoods. I particularly like the way they know they can advertise their law breaking in advance. 

Trespass in England (in fact the whole UK I think) is usually a civil matter - not criminal - so the Police won't be involved.

[Vince Green]

You have to break these things down layer by layer

Those people didn't just spontaneously all turn up in Bristol on a whim

Somebody organised it

somebody sends messages out to the protestors telling them where and when

Demonstrations are coordinated by professional agent provocateurs and they must be known to the police, MI5 etc

like the old football violence, kill it at the roots

 

 

 

 

[Mice!]

30 minutes ago, butchdickason said:

Seems that the Police can't win no matter what law they bring in, the mob are taking control of the streets and saying that they are a minority and the rest had the right to be on the streets WRONG.   All were breaking the law.  To be a member of the uniformed police force on the streets these days is more dangerous than ever.     

Absolutely , the police are damned if they do or don't,  then they have their hands tied but are still expected to do there job.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 minute ago, Vince Green said:

You have to break these things down layer by layer

Those people didn't just spontaneously all turn up in Bristol on a whim

Somebody organised it

somebody sends messages out to the protestors telling them where and when

Demonstrations are coordinated by professional agent provocateurs and they must be known to the police, MI5 etc

like the old football violence, kill it at the roots

Yes Vince but first you need a senior Police Chief with BALLS to use the existing laws and sort this rabble out.

 

Until that happens these protests will just grow and multiply.

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, Yellow Bear said:

And in one "peaceful demo" have fully confirmed the need for tougher laws on protesting

I agree and I support the proposed new law - and would prefer it went further from what I understand of it.  From what I have read, it is badly drafted and likely to result in lots of lengthy, costly appeals and challenges because it relies in words like 'annoyance'.  Ironic as the past laws have been criticised because (and I quote from a BBC article here https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56400751) "the problem is the history of public protest is littered with long and complex legal battles over whether police have used their powers properly.

One of the most important cases - about the police's power to contain a crowd for an indefinite period - took 11 years of courtroom arguments to reach the conclusion that the tactic was lawful."

[Vince Green]

1 minute ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Yes Vince but first you need a senior Police Chief with BALLS to use the existing laws and sort this rabble out.

 

Until that happens these protests will just grow and multiply.

The rabble are cannon fodder. You need to look at who is standing behind them with the radios and loud hailers 

[old man]

No good getting het up?

We are just continuing down the path set for society by the politicos in charge?

They create the so called law, then prevent it from working by back door interference? Must be by design or ignorance?

The police have their own problems as discussed, classroom taught at high levels, constrained by confusion?

Meanwhile the only people to suffer are as usual the law abiding?

The lawyers win again due to instant messaging?

 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Vince Green said:

You need to look at who is standing behind them with the radios and loud hailers 

The 'Powers that be" will know who they are - but at present they probably aren't breaking any law?  I'm not sure how the proposed new act really addresses that?

[wymberley]

10 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

The 'Powers that be" will know who they are - but at present they probably aren't breaking any law?  I'm not sure how the proposed new act really addresses that?

Of course they're breaking the law, but as already said they're simply allowed to get away with it. Both incitement to riot and aggravated trespass are criminal offences. If you can't be bothered for whatever reason to punish those who break the existing laws, what on earth makes anyone think that any new ones will be different?

[Benthejockey]

1 hour ago, wymberley said:

Of course they're breaking the law, but as already said they're simply allowed to get away with it. Both incitement to riot and aggravated trespass are criminal offences. If you can't be bothered for whatever reason to punish those who break the existing laws, what on earth makes anyone think that any new ones will be different?

The organisers are probably bordering on breaking terrorism laws same as the hunt sabs. Even packham could be justifiably be tried under trying to insight civil disobedience and hate speech. Christ if they could try old Trump for insighting the sacking of the capitol for not saying "Don't riot" there's surely bags of scope to take down these other scumbags who are actively insighting violence/criminal damage.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

The Police Officer in charge has just been shown on the BBC News at One saying they are looking at CCTV and Body Cam footage to make further arrests!

The arrests should have been made last night, he really is not worth his pay.

[wymberley]

4 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

The Police Officer in charge has just been shown on the BBC News at One saying they are looking at CCTV and Body Cam footage to make further arrests!

The arrests should have been made last night, he really is not worth his pay.

The guys and gals who are up against it are those in the thin blue line and attempting to arrest anyone in the ruckus when you have filmed evidence I wouldn't know but would hazard a guess that that might just make your predicament worse. Better to wait until you can lift them in a time and place of your choosing.

[Vince Green]

put their faces on tv with £1000 reward. That is cheaper than the police having to find them. And then add the reward to the fine as costs.

leave them wondering which of their mates turned them in 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

12 minutes ago, wymberley said:

The guys and gals who are up against it are those in the thin blue line and attempting to arrest anyone in the ruckus when you have filmed evidence I wouldn't know but would hazard a guess that that might just make your predicament worse. Better to wait until you can lift them in a time and place of your choosing.

So effectively do nothing!

[wymberley]

11 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

So effectively do nothing!

Eh?

[Dave-G]

I'm not excusing the rebellion but in a way we can't blame the wanton acts of vandalism because being nice polite protesters does diddly squat towards being listened to - a bit like speaking softly - few listen to that. The only way to get things done is to kick off big time - but that plays right into the hands of the organisers looking for political gain.

Its a win win for them and lose lose for decent people who understandably won't allow them to get a good kicking because that is against human rights.