Armed police go on strike

Sadly this thread wouldn't even exist if the person shot was non black ,and before making the usual comments , think about what I have just said , it is in no way racist
 
bungydinsdale said:
Going on strike is an industrial action, but industrial action is not always going on strike. Withdrawing part of their labour, not doing certain tasks and working to rule are industrial actions, but not strikes.
Click to expand...
Police are also banned from working to rule.
 
Wez68 said:
Sadly this thread wouldn't even exist if the person shot was non black ,and before making the usual comments , think about what I have just said , it is in no way racist
Click to expand...
Begs the question would Chris Kaba had been shot if he was white? Chris Kaba was an unarmed black man who was shot by the police. Whatever way I look at it, I will never be able to comment on the experience of a being a black person being stopped and harassed by the police. I'm 35 years old and never been stopped by the police, never pulled over, have you?
 
GibbosEmpire said:
Begs the question would Chris Kaba had been shot if he was white? Chris Kaba was an unarmed black man who was shot by the police. Whatever way I look at it, I will never be able to comment on the experience of a being a black person being stopped and harassed by the police. I'm 35 years old and never been stopped by the police, never pulled over, have you?
Click to expand...
I honestly don’t believe the police harass black people (or any ethnic minorities).

Regards to some people being repeatedly “stopped” / “harassed” by police, there will be a reason. The usual ones being..

Their car has intelligence linking it to criminality.

Their manner of driving.

The area they are hanging around in is a high crime area.

Their behaviour (which may be suspicious but not criminal in anyway).
And of course there will be some people who have been spoken to by the police more than others when they have not committed any crime, obvious example - you live in a high crime area but also irrelevant stuff like you work shifts and are returning home in the early hours of the morning.

Through the day the police are often busier, whereas a night shifts are often quieter (although the big jobs often happen at night) so the police will likely have more time to police proactively.

So if you are out and about at night more often than someone else you may find that you are pulled over more often than them.

An example would be a group of Asian lads coming home after last service at a mosque, especially if they live in a high crime area. The lads aren’t doing anything wrong but they are more likely to be pulled over simply due to the circumstances - several of them in a car (Asian people generally from larger families / living more than one family unit in the same house) travelling late at night, in a high crime area (some ethnic minorities prefer to stay living in the areas their family originally migrated to decades ago, which are more often the historically poorer areas) possibly in a vehicle not insured to them (insured to their parents etc).

If they were pulled over it’s due to the circumstances, not their ethnicity. The officers would simply be doing their job, not trying to harass people.
 
GibbosEmpire said:
Begs the question would Chris Kaba had been shot if he was white? Chris Kaba was an unarmed black man who was shot by the police. Whatever way I look at it, I will never be able to comment on the experience of a being a black person being stopped and harassed by the police. I'm 35 years old and never been stopped by the police, never pulled over, have you?
Click to expand...
I think this view, whilst valid in itself, is also perpetuating the problem of discrimination, both perceptional and actual.

It's a fact that young black men are far more likely to be stopped and searched by the police in London, which is an uncomfortable statistic.

But young black men are also far more likely to be involved in gang violence in London and this is often associated with criminality.

It would be crazy to disregard the second statistic when considering the first, but that seems to be the normal and its ducking the real issue.

That's not to say that there isn't a problem with discrimination in the Met, rather that this isn't the only driver behind the issue, or even the main one.

It's a socio-economic issue, first and a policing issue second.
 
It looks like the person shot was indeed a wrong 'un but if that is the threshold for being shot dead then we are in a police state. Shooting an unarmed person dead has to result in charges. The shooter will probably be cleared but there has to be process.

In the meantime, I am sure the government will ensure a minimum service level and decry these woke lefty law enforcers and their Labour paymasters.
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
I think this view, whilst valid in itself, is also perpetuating the problem of discrimination, both perceptional and actual.

It's a fact that young black men are far more likely to be stopped and searched by the police in London, which is an uncomfortable statistic.

But young black men are also far more likely to be involved in gang violence in London and this is often associated with criminality.

It would be crazy to disregard the second statistic when considering the first, but that seems to be the normal and its ducking the real issue.

That's not to say that there isn't a problem with discrimination in the Met, rather that this isn't the only driver behind the issue, or even the main one.

It's a socio-economic issue, first and a policing issue second.
Click to expand...
I think the overall relationship with minorities, women, people of colour etc in general needs to change. I just think as a white heterosexual male in his 30s will have a totally difference experience with the police than others, thats a privilege.
 
GibbosEmpire said:
Begs the question would Chris Kaba had been shot if he was white? Chris Kaba was an unarmed black man who was shot by the police. Whatever way I look at it, I will never be able to comment on the experience of a being a black person being stopped and harassed by the police. I'm 35 years old and never been stopped by the police, never pulled over, have you?
Click to expand...
Not pulled over ,but arrested for no reason apart from the fact that several officers were hurt earlier that day in my village ,arrested walking back from Hardwick hall along with 3 of my mates on the pretence of drunk and disorderly ( rubbish ,they just wanted to nick people ) .
As for black or white as posted above the officer had a split second to make a choice ,the car was linked with Arms ,I don’t believe skin colour had anything at all to do with it
 
GibbosEmpire said:
I think the overall relationship with minorities, women, people of colour etc in general needs to change. I just think as a white heterosexual male in his 30s will have a totally difference experience with the police than others, thats a privilege.
Click to expand...
I agree, it does need to change, but my point is that this is only part if the problem, or more likely a symptom, rather than a cause.
 
Jedi boro said:
I think that’s beyond doubt now as the met have even admitted it themselves.

This shocking case proves it - bianca Williams


www.theguardian.com

Athlete stopped by Met police says it feels like 'being black is a crime'

Bianca Williams says she feels obliged to speak out, as Keir Starmer questions police actions
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
Proves what exactly? What have the MPS 'admitted'.

Two contrasting views of the same incident, with the MPS being sued, which they are contesting I believe.

Racism and discrimination should be challenged, always, but it's an easy allegation to make and a difficult one to disprove.
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
Proves what exactly? What have the MPS 'admitted'.

Two contrasting views of the same incident, with the MPS being sued, which they are contesting I believe.

Racism and discrimination should be challenged, always, but it's an easy allegation to make and a difficult one to disprove.
Click to expand...
They have admitted that they had issues in the past that they are working to address.
 
Fattyfoggon said:
apparently the armed Met Police officers have handed in their "blue cards" which allows them to carry weapons, so they can still work as police officers but not carry arms
Click to expand...
This was always going to happen as they have thrown to them the wolves their job is to use lethal force of required now to have that use of lethal force in a work scenario interpreted as murder mean they are now all at risk of summary justice.

Why would anyone fire another round as that too is surely murder then.

Ludicrous decision.
 
Jedi boro said:
They have admitted that they had issues in the past that they are working to address.
Click to expand...
They did, but I read it that they had admitted some liability in the case you specified, which as far as I know they haven't.

I don't think the comments from politicians help either, which invariably take the path of least resistance by inferring that race played a part.

It may of done of course, but it equally may not. The whole race agenda is weaponised now and its counter productive.
 
ThePrisoner said:
It looks like the person shot was indeed a wrong 'un but if that is the threshold for being shot dead then we are in a police state.
Click to expand...
But that’s not the threshold, and nobody (certainly nobody in policing) has ever said it should be.

ThePrisoner said:
Shooting an unarmed person dead has to result in charges.
Click to expand...

No it shouldn’t!

Hypothetical but somewhat likely scenario:

If you are being stopped by the armed police (because you and/or your vehicle are linked to firearm offences).

And you are given specific instructions to follow for your on safety I.e put your hands on your head / the steering wheel / out the window / keep your hands where I can see them etc. And you don’t something differently I.e reach into your jacket / under the seat of the car etc.

Then you run the risk of being shot, legally!

Whether you were unarmed or not isn’t the deciding factor in whether the use of force was reasonable and justifiable or not.
 
Heam44 said:
But that’s not the threshold, and nobody (certainly nobody in policing) has ever said it should be.



No it shouldn’t!

Hypothetical but somewhat likely scenario:

If you are being stopped by the armed police (because you and/or your vehicle are linked to firearm offences).

And you are given specific instructions to follow for your on safety I.e put your hands on your head / the steering wheel / out the window / keep your hands where I can see them etc. And you don’t something differently I.e reach into your jacket / under the seat of the car etc.

Then you run the risk of being shot, legally!

Whether you were unarmed or not isn’t the deciding factor in whether the use of force was reasonable and justifiable or not.
Click to expand...
And what if the person didn't understand English or was hard of hearing or was under the influence or having a medical episode? Just shrug shoulders and move on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top