UK Policing

K Stand Knut said:
During a live marauding terrorist attack maybe??

Someone has had a live weapon on them and the location of the live weapon is unknown.

Someone can detonate a bomb whilst still conscious. Are you telling me that if the clip from Wednesday was from the Manchester arena bombing, and we didn’t know how he might be donating the bomb, it would be unacceptable to knock him out by any means??

Like I said, and I maintain, there are SOME circumstances where it WOULD be acceptable. Very, very few but there are definitely some

And remember, the lad on the floor was not ‘secured’.

N.B. Please don’t turn this around to be me defending the cup from Wednesday. I am not
Click to expand...

The old neck activated suicide bomber.

There are of course totally hypothetical situations where a kick could be justified but it is so clearly not applicable to this case and even in those examples you’ve given it’s highly debatable as to whether a kick and a stomp on the head is justifiable/sensible/effective.

Coming up with the ‘any use of force is potentially justifiable’ in certain circumstances line of argument is just so pointless and trite - true or not.

Him not being secured is more damning than it is supportive. It clearly should have been done and would have served every aim the officer *should* have had, rather than a kick and a stomp in the head.

If not defending it, it's then just an utterly pointless commentary.
 
K Stand Knut said:
During a live marauding terrorist attack maybe??

Someone has had a live weapon on them and the location of the live weapon is unknown.

Someone can detonate a bomb whilst still conscious. Are you telling me that if the clip from Wednesday was from the Manchester arena bombing, and we didn’t know how he might be donating the bomb, it would be unacceptable to knock him out by any means??

Like I said, and I maintain, there are SOME circumstances where it WOULD be acceptable. Very, very few but there are definitely some

And remember, the lad on the floor was not ‘secured’.

N.B. Please don’t turn this around to be me defending the cup from Wednesday. I am not
Click to expand...

The point “whilst posing no threat to anyone“ was right there in the post you quoted here, and even in these highly extreme hypothetical scenarios you’ve created I wouldn’t expect officers to go around kicking people in the head whilst they’re lay face down like that.
 
Duafc said:
The old neck activated suicide bomber.

There are of course totally hypothetical situations where a kick could be justified but it is so clearly not applicable to this case and even in those examples you’ve given it’s highly debatable as to whether a kick and a stomp on the head is justifiable/sensible/effective.

Coming up with the ‘any use of force is potentially justifiable’ in certain circumstances line of argument is just so pointless and trite - true or not.

Him not being secured is more damning than it is supportive. It clearly should have been done and would have served every aim the officer *should* have had, rather than a kick and a stomp in the head.

If not defending it, it's then just an utterly pointless commentary.
Click to expand...
It’s probably about as pointless as saying there are categorically no circumstances when it could ever be justified when there clearly are circumstances.

Hypothetical or not.

And, I also did not state that it was applicable to this situation. In fact, if you re-read the few messages I’ve put in this thread, I think I’ve stated that it probably isn’t relevant to this situation.

The over-riding fact is that people are saying that there is never, ever any time when that force would be justifiable, when that is not true, as you’ve helpfully agreed with
 
K Stand Knut said:
It’s probably about as pointless as saying there are categorically no circumstances when it could ever be justified when there clearly are circumstances.

Hypothetical or not.
Click to expand...

One is, I suppose, a very human emotional response to seeing a prone person being put in danger of death by the violence of a police officer.

The other is someone trying to be smart and missing the whole point.
 
Rado_N said:
The point “whilst posing no threat to anyone“ was right there in the post you quoted here, and even in these highly extreme hypothetical scenarios you’ve created I wouldn’t expect officers to go around kicking people in the head whilst they’re lay face down like that.
Click to expand...
Ok. We’ll agree to disagree then. Nobody can ever say categorically that there is no threat to anyone until that person is in handcuffs and has been searched effectively.

The lad that shot the custody sergeant whilst in police custody, on the face of it, was not a threat to anyone because you couldn’t see his weapon.
 
Duafc said:
One is, I suppose, a very human emotional response to seeing a prone person being put in danger of death by the violence of a police officer.

The other is someone trying to be smart and missing the whole point.
Click to expand...
I’m just answering a simple question. Sorry if this comes across as trying to be smart.

The whole point is that this, on the face of it, is a massive misuse of force that I whole-heartedly agree with and the officer will be dealt with accordingly and probably go to prison for.

Unfortunately, this is then followed by people who have probably never, ever had to consider using any force on anyone, telling the world that there is categorically no time ever that this force could be justified, which I disagree with so used hypothetical examples to explain my rationale because luckily, it doesn’t happen very often to be discussed.

I find the idea that there is no possible circumstances where this level of force is justified equally as stupid as the people who are defending the officers actions and saying they’d give him a medal
 
Several officers pointing weapons at a guy lying on the floor who seems to be complying to their demands. Yet apparently he's still a threat... Ok, sure.
 
K Stand Knut said:
Ok. We’ll agree to disagree then. Nobody can ever say categorically that there is no threat to anyone until that person is in handcuffs and has been searched effectively.

The lad that shot the custody sergeant whilst in police custody, on the face of it, was not a threat to anyone because you couldn’t see his weapon.
Click to expand...
K Stand Knut said:
I’m just answering a simple question. Sorry if this comes across as trying to be smart.

The whole point is that this, on the face of it, is a massive misuse of force that I whole-heartedly agree with and the officer will be dealt with accordingly and probably go to prison for.

Unfortunately, this is then followed by people who have probably never, ever had to consider using any force on anyone, telling the world that there is categorically no time ever that this force could be justified, which I disagree with so used hypothetical examples to explain my rationale because luckily, it doesn’t happen very often to be discussed.

I find the idea that there is no possible circumstances where this level of force is justified equally as stupid as the people who are defending the officers actions and saying they’d give him a medal
Click to expand...

The first is a terrible comparison verging on nonsense.

The second two things are absolutely not equally as stupid. The 0.1% of occasions where a police interaction justifies extreme use of force is not something to hold up in this instance. It is in such poor taste to argue such a minor point so fruitlessly and whether it is technically true or not, it just looks like an attempt to mitigate the situation or to remain on the ‘police side’. When no sides are involved at all.

A kick to the head, followed by a stomp, clearly delivered with significant force and violence is honestly so utterly difficult to justify that it requires such extreme or complex hypotheticals should tell you all you need to know about how ‘stupid’ that reaction is from members of the public.

- spoiler - it’s not really stupid at all.
 
Rado_N said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is what I meant, this situation doesn't fit criteria.
This one probably doesn’t fit one of those situations but there is definitely some times when it may be
Click to expand...

And this is what I agreed to in your post.
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
Click to expand...

I am unsure on the idea you cannot come up with a hypothetical situation where it would be justified; for example what if he had a bomb on him, that was mind controlled and the only way to disarm it was to knock him out.....
 
Rado_N said:
IMG-0001.jpg


Interested to hear the circumstances that make it acceptable for the next thing to happen here being the officer delivering repeated kicks to the head of the person lay on the ground.
Click to expand...
I mean, there isn't outside of him having a large tarantula on his head.
 
fergies coat said:
Yes Paedophiles deserve no respect whatsoever. If you was a policeman and you seen one doing something to a little girl then human emotion us going to take over and your going to give him a good kick in, and who would really car if you did or not.
Click to expand...

I hope you’re not a police officer.
 
fergies coat said:
Yes Paedophiles deserve no respect whatsoever. If you was a policeman and you seen one doing something to a little girl then human emotion us going to take over and your going to give him a good kick in, and who would really car if you did or not.
Click to expand...

Well no it wouldn't because paedophiles are regularly caught and aren't given a good kick in by police. Stop being a thicko.
 
fergies coat said:
I'm not being a thicko. I'm just saying it's understandable if someone lost it in that situation. People aren't robots.
Click to expand...
It isn't really understandable. The whole point of being a police officer is that you don't react to things like that with violence, you apprehend the suspect and you let the justice system do it's job.
 
I expect this will go quiet shortly.

There’s an investigation in to the officers conduct to complete, then potential CPS advice to seek regarding any criminal matters, and the four men arrested have been bailed so there’s further investigation to complete in that regard too before a charging decision is made in respect of them. This will all take some time to complete.

I’m glad action has been taken quickly and hopefully community tension begins to ease somewhat. I suspect there will be further protests in the city over the weekend and hopefully they pass without issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.