| WWW.RLFANS.COM https://rlfans.com/forums/ |
|
| Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? https://rlfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=515511 |
Page 13 of 19 |
| Author: | Ajw71 [ Tue Dec 27, 2011 9:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Big Graeme wrote: in fact they actively avoided confrontation. Isn't there numerous videos on youtube of the rioters charing the police and the police having to back off. |
|
| Author: | TrinityIHC [ Wed Dec 28, 2011 5:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Big Graeme wrote:If that is what you want to call them, fine. Or maybe putting people on the ground would (and did) do the job without resorting to shooting people. Maybe a rubber bullet to the forehead might be a more forceful reminder to behave and provide a cheaper solution than having to employ ever increasing number of policemen on the streets to deal with this kind of filth? Especially in the current economic climate. |
|
| Author: | Ferocious Aardvark [ Wed Dec 28, 2011 10:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Ajw71 wrote:Wow talk about splitting hairs. But for the shooting the riots would not have happened? Do you agree. No. |
|
| Author: | World of Redboy [ Wed Dec 28, 2011 11:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
How do you work that out? |
|
| Author: | Ferocious Aardvark [ Thu Dec 29, 2011 2:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
How do I work out if I agree with a proposition? It's not hard. I consider it, and the answer is sort of just there. Try it: do you like spinach? |
|
| Author: | Ajw71 [ Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:No. In Tottehnam, a protest march after the shooting turned violent. Therefore but for the shooting their would have been no protest march and no violence. |
|
| Author: | Ferocious Aardvark [ Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Ajw71 wrote:In Tottehnam, a protest march after the shooting turned violent. Therefore but for the shooting their would have been no protest march and no violence. Rubbish. There was a protest of about 100-200 people who marched on the police station. These were not violent rioters but peaceful protesters with direct links to the family of Duggan, who had been shot. They did not start or encourage, much less become involved in, any violence. An official spokesperson for the family was quoted as saying; Quote:"The family want everyone to know that the disorder going on has nothing to do with finding out what has happened to Mark. They also want people to know they are deeply distressed by the disorder affecting communities across the country."" Your attempt at making a link is in fact a grave libel against those people. The rioting that began in Tottenham was not at the police station, nor is there any evidence that it involved any of those protesters. What you are doing, apart from libelling peaceful protesters, is making a link which really is pure semantics. The situation was simply taken advantage of by those who chose to start looting, and then rapidly inflamed by those who saw criminals "getting away with it" and going on copycat sprees. If the looted shops had never been built, would they have been looted and burned? No. So did the proprietors of the shops cause the looting and arson by being there? That's about the same level of link as you are trying to make. |
|
| Author: | Wire Yed [ Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Again from what i remember from the news, it was a peaceful protest march up to the police station, when they got there they wanted questions answering, the IPCC had already become involved so they were not allowed to say anything. It then became a little heated and there were rumours that a woman was assaulted by the police during this heated debate, this was banded about the local neighbourhood, that was the trigger. It then turned in to a slightly violent protest, then another bunch of local undesireables realised the police were just standing there doing nothing and the looting started |
|
| Author: | Ajw71 [ Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:The situation was simply taken advantage of by those who chose to start looting, and then rapidly inflamed by those who saw criminals "getting away with it" and going on copycat sprees. Yes the situation that a large number of people were on the streets who wouldn't normally be there as a result of a protest about a police shooting. |
|
| Author: | Ferocious Aardvark [ Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Seems like 'we' might start shooting people? |
Ajw71 wrote:....as a result of ... Your English comprehension is letting you down. The looters on the streets was not "a result of" the protest at the police station. It was something that those who looted did as a completely separate personal choice. Unless you can provide evidence that any single individual looted a shop because that was his chosen method of protesting against the Duggan shooting. Can you? Also, even if some cretin advanced that as a cause-and-effect, surely you are not so stupid as to accept it as the truth? How does stealing from a shop and burning it down "protest", in any any the English language recognises, against a shooting by police of an individual? It doesn't. The cretin would obviously be lying. But the fact is that NO reported convicted rioter has yet claimed he/she did it for Duggan, so where does that leave your theory? I really don't know why you would persist in trying to make this purely bogus causative link. |
|
| Page 13 of 19 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|