No, just as a matter of fact, it has nothing to do with the bloke you were referencing being an idiot.
UK Policing
- Thread starter Sara125
- Start date
-
Hello, Guest! We have four new competitions (with taglines and awards as prizes) starting.
A new Odds or Evens competition is starting now. Click here to read the rules and message Damien to submit your eight players by 14th September 2024
A new Carabao Cup prediction competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit predictions for round 3 which begins 17th September.
A new Champions League prediction competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit predictions for the first round which begins 17th September.
A new Europa League prediction competition is starting now. Click here to enter to submit predictions for the first round which begins 25th September.
For Odds or Evens you have until the 14th September to submit your players. Submissions will be open for the next 6 days, 11 hours, 7 minutes, 59 seconds, and will close on Sep 14, 2024 at 12:30. -
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) get the depressing job of reviewing United's 3-0 loss at Old Trafford to Liverpool. They discuss what went wrong, Casemiro's day to forget, and the pressure now on Erik Ten Hag. They also take some time to give McTominay a proper farewell, and give their overall thoughts on the Summer Transfer Window.
No, just as a matter of fact, it has nothing to do with the bloke you were referencing being an idiot.
This is where I'm confused. I don't think it would clarify the situation. Maybe if the dude was armed and still had said gun/knife in his hand then I could accept the kick in the head, maybe, but he was subdued on the ground
Even if it was the same person, I'd still struggle to accept the kick to the head as understandable let alone justified.
you shouldn't be so quick to judge, let's see the full video first for context
for all you know the lad is a hero for taking out three racist cops on a violent rampage
That’s exactly what I’ve been saying ….wait for the full video and lead up to the incident.
Doubt anyone being seen as a hero.
Last edited:
Oh it 100% wouldn’t be in any way understandable or justified.
I think this officer should be in a world of trouble no matter what. We’ve seen the video. It’s attempted murder as far as I’m concerned, and nothing that happened prior could justify this level of use of force.
Lots of people seem certain this lad attacked the police officers, but there are conflicting information out there about who actually broke the female officers nose. It would go a long way in clarifying that part.
This is catnip to Farage, EDL and Reform isn’t it ? 
Could have the ingredients to really kick off, especially if that lad on the floor had nothing to do with the attacks on the policemen/woman.
Big/quick test for the new Home Sec.
Could have the ingredients to really kick off, especially if that lad on the floor had nothing to do with the attacks on the policemen/woman.
Big/quick test for the new Home Sec.
I think it’s fair to say that they weren’t anything to do with the assaults on the officers. I’d be happy to go on record to say that they would not have been out to give an interview in the time frame that they had if they had assaulted any cop to that extentThis is catnip to Farage, EDL and Reform isn’t it ?
Could have the ingredients to really kick off, especially if that lad on the floor had nothing to do with the attacks on the policemen/woman.
Big/quick test for the new Home Sec.
I think he really thinks that, noticing him going back and forth around the "context" argument.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 16,883
- Supports
️
Gets worse and worse.
I’ve changed how I’d describe this situation.
I used the word understandable last night but as new information is available I absolutely do not understand how even in a racist organisation someone thinks they can do what the officer did.
I’d made the foolish assumption the victim was the assaulter of the officers but that appears not to be true.
What a horrific state of affairs this is.
I’ve changed how I’d describe this situation.
I used the word understandable last night but as new information is available I absolutely do not understand how even in a racist organisation someone thinks they can do what the officer did.
I’d made the foolish assumption the victim was the assaulter of the officers but that appears not to be true.
What a horrific state of affairs this is.
Feck me they’ve hired this cnut Yakoob as the solicitor? Must have a terrible brain injury. He really is the worst of the worst
Whatever the situation a cop kicking someone in the head when they were already no danger to you can't be justified in any way. His efforts should have been on what else was happening around him.
Question; is there a situation where it is acceptable?
Who is Yakoob?
Good lord, I'm with you on this
Obviously not.
I'm playing devil's advocate, so let me clear I agree but say if the person had just murdered eight people, I imagine there would be a context where the act is mitigated?
He'd be at the opening at an envelope that guy. He's a pure grifter and narcissist.
No.
There is no context where a person who has already been detained and is lay face down on the ground, and it is then in anyway ok to repeatedly kick them in the head.
Regardless of what crime they may have hypothetically committed, they’ve been detained, arrest them and put them through the process of the justice system.
What you’re talking about is cheap schadenfreude, it’s obviously totally different to the morality of the question.
The subject was neutralised, it’s down to the courts to decide what the punishment is, it clearly never should be delivered by the boots of an officer in an emotional situation. At the end of the day, until the courts decide, your example is only “allegedly” murdered 8 people.
TikTok Lawyer / wannabe influencer, he’s a right bellend and should be nowhere near a case this serious, I get why they gone to him though.
Agreed.
Of course, that's, erm, the point of a hypothetical question.
It was understanding if there is ever a context in which that level of violence would or could be justified.
Was not, I repeat, a commentary on the officer in question.
Ewwwww
He's an Andrew Tate tribute act with a law degree.
Police officer admits stealing money from man who died after collapsing
https://news.sky.com/story/police-o...y-from-man-who-died-after-collapsing-13185295
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crglwd8nx62o
Honestly. How disgusting is that.
A serving police officer in the Met stealing from a dead man.
Glad the bastard was caught.
Categorically there is some situations, yes.
This one probably doesn’t fit one of those situations but there is definitely some times when it may be
Oh I agree
Usual scummy behaviour from the Met
What I don't understand is why Armed Response Officers were called out to deal with this situation. Armed response officers are there for one reason - to drop someone threatening others with a weapon - not to deal with a maul / scrap type situation. If they were "on patrol" and the incident happened nearby then they should not get involved but call for other officers to backup.
Armed Response Officers are carrying assault rifles, handguns and tasers and will use the most appropriate weapon to take the person down. Tasers for people armed with knives - handguns for extreme close quarters with potential nearby innocents and assault rifle for when the threat has firearms or potential IED's. I worked at the Airport in the late 80's when the ARO's first appeared at Manchester airport following the attacks at Rome and Vienna airports in 1985 and it was a big culture change - they were patrolling and not to be messed with!
Anyone of their "tools" is potentially lethal in the wrong hands and so they don't get involved in crowd control / officer being attacked unless there is an explicit threat to life. They should not be getting involved in situations where their weapons might be grabbed by someone else.
I'm in no way excusing the police of their actions in this video but some significant info has clearly not been released yet. It just doesn't currently make sense how they ended up getting involved in this situation.
Armed Response Officers are carrying assault rifles, handguns and tasers and will use the most appropriate weapon to take the person down. Tasers for people armed with knives - handguns for extreme close quarters with potential nearby innocents and assault rifle for when the threat has firearms or potential IED's. I worked at the Airport in the late 80's when the ARO's first appeared at Manchester airport following the attacks at Rome and Vienna airports in 1985 and it was a big culture change - they were patrolling and not to be messed with!
Anyone of their "tools" is potentially lethal in the wrong hands and so they don't get involved in crowd control / officer being attacked unless there is an explicit threat to life. They should not be getting involved in situations where their weapons might be grabbed by someone else.
I'm in no way excusing the police of their actions in this video but some significant info has clearly not been released yet. It just doesn't currently make sense how they ended up getting involved in this situation.
It’s at the airport. The number of ‘other’ officers will be bare minimum. This isn’t the city centre of Manchester or one of its suburbs where there will/should be a large number of officers ready to back up. The airport probably has 3:4 other officers to deal with things, if that.
Besides, it was a public order situation with numerous people involved. The fact that firearms officers were involved should not be the question, they attend similar incidents all over GMP on a daily basis. The behaviour when they got there was possibly the problem, not the fact they had guns strapped to them
GMP unless it's something else you are referring to.
The officer who pickpocketed the collapsed man. But yeah the GMP too. Abhorrent behaviour and I’m glad he got suspended swiftly
Categorically no there are not any situations where it’s acceptable to kick someone in the head repeatedly whilst they are already being held down lay on the floor.
So now you agree there are situations where it is acceptable? This morning you agreed there are never situations where it is acceptable.
Well, I beg to differ.
I also don’t believe that he was being ‘held down’ either but that's a different conversation.
In what circumstances is it acceptable in your mind to kick someone repeatedly in the head whilst they are lay on the ground posing no threat to anyone?
Totally agree. There is no reason that can justify what happened while they were restrained on the ground.
Just rewatched it and OK he wasn’t held down at that point, I misremembered that, but he’s lay face down with his mother (?) next to him, and absolutely no threat to anyone.
Weren't his hands behind his back and was complying with instructions too.