some of the comments i have read in this thread have amazed me! I suggest to the people who think the police force is some brainwashed army to actually go to their local station and ask to go out on patrol with an officer and look at things from the other side of the coin. I've done this myself and I can tell you they're doing a better job than most of youcould probably do. Also to those who use the old arguement 'they should be out dealing with real crime', let me know what you'd be doing during your shift??

Originally posted by 19DCW71
This is why I think protesting is a useless waste of time. There's a sign which says "Defend Free Speech" yet nobody even defends themselves when force is applied.

To protest peacably is fine but the minute they try to infringe upon and take your rights by FORCE, is the time the entire crowd needs to react as one and make it a phsyical protest.

Your peaceful protests are absolutely USELESS and have resulted in absolutely NOTHING, other than the fact theat your standing there looking foolish and actually doing more harm for the cause. They know evertime they come in they take a little more of our rights and nothing is done.

Next time you people decide to protest, you may as well go already handcuffed, with your pants around your ankle, because your being raped of your rights, so why put up a facade if your not gonna fight.

I can understand this point of view, but I disagree completely. Allow me to explain....

I believe that history should always be our guide. By getting physical with the police, media is then able to capture those images on film, spin the story, and make you look like a crazy. Instead I say be peaceful. Just like Americans did in the 60's. When they protested and things got out of hand, they SAT DOWN! These people were abused in every possible way, and they SAT DOWN! So when it could no longer be ignored and the media covered these incidents...they had no footage to make the protesters look like crazies. Instead the world saw images of protesters SITTING DOWN and authorities were shown to be the abusers that they truly are.

By exposing the corrupt system for what it is...then you can get the change you desire. No good comes from violent protest. Instead you look like some angry psycho and no one will listen to the message of an "angry psycho". If you are peaceful, sitting down, and the whole world sees you getting your head smashed in by the real psychos.... then your the victim and people will listen to your story.

Of course you have a right to defend yourself. You shouldnt allow anyone to bully you, hit you, push you etc. In this case however, you have to look at the bigger picture. Being violent in retaliation does nothing but give the police an excuse to come out in force and play with all their new "non lethal" toys...and get away with it... and in cases like these it will not matter who is violent and who is not. You will all get painted with the same brush and they will come after the whole group.

Originally posted by MrWendal

By exposing the corrupt system for what it is...then you can get the change you desire.

If MODERN society is "the Change" you're talking about, this was a waste of time. Today there's more corruption, violence and immorality than when they protested. So I can assume it safe to say this ISN'T the change they were desiring.

No good comes from violent protest. Instead you look like some angry psycho and no one will listen to the message of an "angry psycho".

I tend to disagree. Everyone has succumbed to the will of every physco who has run this country and is still so naively brainwashed that they still believe "The SPIN" the media puts on everything. When everyone realizes tyhe media is biased then we can talk about the media. until then,i'ts just another American propoganda brainwashing tool used to further THEIR cause.

If you are peaceful, sitting down, and the whole world sees you getting your head smashed in by the real psychos.... then your the victim and people will listen to your story.

LOL . No disrespect, but this scenario only shows that you may be dead for no apparent reason. To allow someone to smash your head in shows your natural survival instinct has been removed by their tactics or you are just plain scared to death and shouldn't be there in the first place. If memory serves correct, didn't many students die during these protests? It was a little before my time.

If you read my other post, you will see, I honestly think the only way to logically protest PEACFULLY is in mass numbers. Everyone needs to organize (for the right cause) and then protest. A good example was the million man march. I don't know what the exact number was but now you have a significant protest.This will assure that the governing agencies will not intervene by force. What could you possibly do to 1 million plus people.

My suggestion is that when they try to unjustly quench the protest with force, it's only right to use it back. I'm not stating rush out and cause physical confrontations. But people need to band together as one. It's not about race and religion, but rich and poor. We Poor are the ones who built this world and are being controlled by such a minimal few.It's pathetic.

I tend to agree that peace it better, but is U.F.U. (utterly effing Useless) when it comes to accomplishing something of this significance in a realistic time frame. Peaceful protests will last for centuries and get nothing accomplished.The powers that be aren't stupid. they appease the few with menial B/S and we're back to square one. Do you want to be a slave the rest of your life, along with your children theirs and so on? I want my siblings to be free.

Can somebody answer the point, mentioned by several people now, about requiring permission to set up stalls in public?

Originally posted by onetruesaxon
Please let me tell you.

There once was an old man living on his own, minding his own business when 2 thugs broke in to his home, fed up with the police doing nothing every time he had a burglary he took matters into his own hands and shot one if them dead. Did the police give him praise for getting rid of the low life scum that polluted the streets, no of course not instead he was duly arrested and sentenced for murder. Where he spent years of his life behind bars.

Are you talking about Tony Martin? If you are then if you read about the case in full it is clear that he broke both the letter and spirit of the law with offences including the possession of an illegal firearm.


[edit on 16-10-2008 by Mike_A]

Originally posted by franspeakfree

Originally posted by onetruesaxon
I can tell you they're doing a better job than most of youcould probably do. Also to those who use the old arguement 'they should be out dealing with real crime', let me know what you'd be doing during your shift??

Please let me tell you.

There once was an old man living on his own, minding his own business when 2 thugs broke in to his home, fed up with the police doing nothing every time he had a burglary he took matters into his own hands and shot one if them dead. Did the police give him praise for getting rid of the low life scum that polluted the streets, no of course not instead he was duly arrested and sentenced for murder. Where he spent years of his life behind bars.

You are talking about that guy in Norfolk/Norwich, aren't you? Something Martin?

Well, yes, you can use that story to make a point but it would be better to explain exactly what happened. Martin (please excuse me if that wasn't his name, I have trouble with my memory. It is a second name rather than first though), who had had his property burglarised several times over that previous 6 months, found a young man (late teens) robbing his shed. Martin confronted the burglar, who took flight. While the youth had his back to Martin, running away with no property, Martin fired one or more shots from his shotgun into the youths back, killing him.

We all know about British fire arm laws, Americans always tell us we wouldn't have such high crime rates if we were allowed to carry guns and that may well be the case but as it is, gun laws here are extremely strict! Even in America, a country that to most Europeans seems to be very trigger happy, there are strict rules against shooting an unarmed person who is running away from your property, no matter what crime they have commited!

I do understand the farmers point of view. The thought that someone who has done nothing in his/her life to earn a crust could come and take your hard earned property is sickening but there is always a line that should not be crossed and I firmly believe the death of another human should not so much as be approached!


EDIT: Apologies, I have just re-read your post and you seem to be posting from a very American perspective, so you are probably not talking about the farmer in Norfolk, I would be interested in reading about the event you are talking about though, if you can possibly find me a link or maybe explain further.

Regarding your videos, they are all (obviously) American and US police can not be compared in any way to their British colleagues and a comparison should never be attempted.

On top of that, you are showing footage of police reacting on the spur of the moment, due to their own training and personality. This thread is about the reaction of the "higher ups" to a protest.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by triplesod]

Originally posted by Mike_A
Can somebody answer the point, mentioned by several people now, about requiring permission to set up stalls in public?

Originally posted by onetruesaxon
Please let me tell you.

There once was an old man living on his own, minding his own business when 2 thugs broke in to his home, fed up with the police doing nothing every time he had a burglary he took matters into his own hands and shot one if them dead. Did the police give him praise for getting rid of the low life scum that polluted the streets, no of course not instead he was duly arrested and sentenced for murder. Where he spent years of his life behind bars.

Are you talking about Tony Martin? If you are then if you read about the case in full it is clear that he broke both the letter and spirit of the law with offences including the possession of an illegal firearm.


[edit on 16-10-2008 by Mike_A]

I thought that mate (see my above post) but it seems that she is American so is very unlikely to know of that case. I would presume she is talking about an American case.

I'm just wondering though if you are sure about the "illegal firearm" business. Tony Martin was a Norfolk farmer, they all have shotguns and rifles, legally 99% if the time.
You are completely right though about him committing a grievous crime and he deserved his punishment.

i give up on this topic because people will manipulate things to fit their own agenda without actually doing any research.

Triplesod,

Yeah I realised after it might not be Tony Martin but nevertheless he is a case that is brought up in these circumstances.

As far as the weapon goes, he was using a pump action shot gun which is illegal in the UK and he knew this because he hid it after the event. The bigger issue, and the specifics are eluding me right now, is that (IIRC) he didn’t just confront the burglars. From what I remember he heard them downstairs, crept down with his gun and waited to get a clear shot; in other words his intent wasn’t to drive them off or apprehend them but to actually cause serious harm or kill them. I think this was proven through ballistics, i.e. the holes in the wall from his initial shots demonstrated that he must have been crouching on his stair, somewhat hidden from the burglars. Again I’m hazy on the specifics so maybe you can correct me on some of that but I think that’s what happened.

But Lizard, have you found anything saying that the protesters had permission to set up these stalls?

It doesn’t matter whether they were causing an obstruction or not, they simply need to have permission to set them up and that is that; that is the law. Since the police only seemed to be bothered with the stalls and anyone stopping them from removing them it would make most sense that they just didn’t have that permission to set them up.

The children think that what they are born with is normal, but the older people realize that things have changed so much, and our rights have gone downhill since 9-11. But it is too late for them, or by then they have relized that politics are senseless, unless who your election is going to take away your basic rights or not...

Big government has ruined a lot of our self-government and our privacy with things like the "patriot act". What a lame name for a bill that lets the government observe our phone calls and transactions. They can look at this blog. I'm sure they are, heck, it says in the site description that this site is used to "uncover government secrets"! I don't know how bad this kind of thing is in the UK, but I think it will get much much worse for us in the US if another "terrorist attack" happens. If a attack did happen we might have to pass a "Pass this unless your not a american hero bill" that takes away the Bill of Rights.

Ridiculous.

People keep coming into this thread and saying how bad things are and talking about the Big Brother state but no one is answering the points brought up by Essam, IA and myself.

We know that UK law requires you to have permission to set up these stalls in public, can anyone say whether or not they had permission? Since that is all the police were focusing on, it would seem likely that they didn’t.