Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
I'm sorry if I missed it, but your first post seemed very much to me to be talking in general terms, rather than the events in Bristol specifically, after a couple of posts talking about how lawful protest is ineffective.
My first post said 20 officers were injured last night, two seriously, and it was unacceptable.
We can discuss the issue in much broader terms but likely better in a new thread?
You've been condemning violence and injuries caused to the officers, and earlier you said it's "narrow minded" to try and achieve anything by seriously injuring others - are you now suggesting that violence committed against the protestors by the officers is acceptable?
I'm saying this is what happens in a riot. I'm not sure of your point? Mine is I'd sooner there was no rioting so no one is injured and everyone goes home safely.
I'm not sure there's a better thread for it. We're talking about a violent protest in response to a draconian piece of legislation which further erodes the right to peaceful protest, so to my mind, this whole discussion is incredibly pertinent to what happened in Bristol.
But more to the point, I think I remember rightly that you are an officer, right? Inevitably and understandably, your concern is going to be with colleagues and friends put in danger through violence (legitimate or illegitimate) which makes it difficult to discuss the more philosophical questions under lying it.
Why can't a copper also be concerned about civilians getting hurt? Isn't that kind of why they do the job?
Your comment seemed to be excusing the officers inflicting injuries and violence on the protestors as though this just a natural consequence.
I guess what I’m trying to say is, it’s surprising to see you suggest that protestors getting hurt is to be expected, but police officers getting hurt is unacceptable, when overall your posts seemed to be anti-violence in totality.
Well that too, but I was piggybacking off the point about police officers being injured last night which has been the focus of The Religion's posts to date.
At any rate, it wasn't meant as a criticism; just a recognition that if you see the more immediate effects of violence (both ways) it's understandably harder to take a long term view of its effectiveness as a method of process.
I don't follow the end bit of your post. It's as if police officers aren't human beings with personal thoughts and feelings on these topics themselves.
I didn't suggest that you're simply painting it how you want it to be? Not sure why.
There's not really been a focus. I just pointed out the level of injuries were serious and it wasn't right. If others think differently that is fine I guess although I'd question their morals perhaps.
As I said I'd sooner everyone goes home safe and well. And by that I mean everyone.
Well you certainly didn't condemn them inflicting violence against protestors, like you did the officers being injured as a result of the protestors.
Do you condemn the officers beating those protestors violently?
What? I've been pretty clear throughout yet for some reason you look desperate to try and catch me out with something or have a confrontation. Not sure why.
You've been clear about violence against police officers and violent protests yes, but I haven't seen you condemn the violence brought upon the protestors.
If i've missed it, can you show me?
I'm not trying to catch you out at all, I'm just asking a pretty straightforward question.
Surely more than a clipped Twitter video is needed before we condemn police using their batons. Bodycam them all up
As I say, it was not meant as criticism. Simply a reflection of the fact that you are human and inevitably are going to have your opinions shaped and influenced by the things you see, like all of us.
I suspect my own position would be rather different if I had to face violent protest directly. Whilst my relative distance allows me to talk in the abstract, your closeness to events inevitably is going to make that more difficult. I'm not trying to suggest that makes me right or you wrong (as I think it might have been taken), but rather just to highlight the differences of background that is going to inevitably shape our thinking on the issue.
On the other hand you've not been pretty clear yourself on if you feel it's acceptable?
That is fair and I don't disagree. I hadn't taken it that way to be honest as you're very balanced in what you say and open to listening and understanding contrasting views. Much more so than others.
That again doesn't condemn the violence brought upon the protesters, you're suggesting that violence is a natural occurrence in a riot (I agree with you), however you only seem to be condemning one side who are inflicting the violence.
Am I right or wrong in that? For some reason you seem to think i'm out to target you, all i'm asking for is clarification on your stance.
Do you condemn the violence brought upon by the protestors, or not.
My stance is that until there's justice, there's unlikely to be peace - and very few societal changes happen without civil unrest & violence.
Definitely the first time that's been said on this forum of me.
Well you have been here anyway!
Sorry but you're just waffling now to avoid what I asked. I've explained my view and I want everyone to go home safely. I can only assume you're deliberately looking past that.
Do you feel the level of violence last night was acceptable?
Farage is a scumbag.
I'm really not waffling at all. You said you want everyone to go home safely - we all understood that, there's no need to repeat it again.
You've said at least 3x how despicable it is that these police officers have been hurt, what I was trying to get at was do you also feel the same way that the police officers have inflicted hurt on the protestors or not.
You seem to refuse to want to answer that, only saying that all forms of violence is bad.
I believe that societal change only tends to happen when members of society disrupt & cause chaos for a prolonged period of time, so yes violence is an ends to a means. However, i'm also under no illusions that the general British public gasp & clutch their pearls at the first sight of any violence that they deem unacceptable (because like I said earlier in the thread, economic, racial & sexual violence is normalised).
If you are expecting me to say that the police officers shouldn't have gotten hurt, and those bad protestors are too violent - you're not going to get that from me. Would I prefer that society can change without violence? Yes of course, i'm not a psychopath - but history has proven that to be unlikely, and there's nothing to suggest that, that will change any time soon.
Sadly you are waffling. You're doing so to try and muddy the water of the actual point being made.
20 officers have been injured, one with a broken arm, another was stamped on and now has a collapsed lung. Two other officers had a vehicle they were sat in set on fire. They are facts as to what happened and you seem unwilling, or unable, to say that is wrong. What's even more baffling is you then avoid this by demanding I "condemn' 15 seconds of Twitter footage showing some officers using their batons on a crowd. That's despite me having said quite clearly I would rather there was no serious violence and that everyone went home safely.
Come on. You're clearly brighter than that.
I am bright you're right, but there's no need for condescension especially since I don't think I've spoken to you without respect.
And like I said, society doesn't change unless there's civil unrest & chaos for a prolonged period of time, violence can be part of that - is that right? No of course not.
But so much of our basic freedoms have come about as a result of much more violent expressions than last night.
From what I have read, the police stayed behind their line through a few hours of protest and ignored graffiti on their vehicles and windows being smashed. They engaged when one of their vehicles was set on fire and the order was given to break up the demonstration as it was becoming too volatile. This was when a lot of the protestors had left over the duration.
That might be one side of the story, but the pictures from the first couple of hours suggest there is some truth to that.
That might be one side of the story, but the pictures from the first couple of hours suggest there is some truth to that.
I read that somebody had a poo in front of the officers but that might just be a protest at the lack of public toilet facilities. I can get behind that kind of demonstration.
honestly from my time in Bristol that is 100% believable
I was there a year ago actually at a Half Man Half Biscuit gig. It has some cracking pubs and I'd love to go back and explore more. I also had a fantastic kebab after the gig.
The vehicle was just two days away from retirement!
it really is a great city apart from all the kids from Stroud who pretend to be poor and fight the power on their parents dime
I went for a night out in Stroud once and I thought I had seen everything, but that evening in the pub is burned into my memory. It's definitely got some unique characters has Stroud.
Well that's most kids these days. I like the gritty edge to the place too. It's about time their footy teams sorted themselves out and got back to the big time.
Calm down you're not AOC
