I was scared last night at how efficient police in england seem to be with their CCTV. they came and told us to go home and said they'd been watching us, and I thought it was funny. then later on we where climbing on this building and they came by later on and said they seen us on cctv climbing that building, and they keep getting reports of us. FROM WHO? lol it was empty in town. there must be spies everywhere probably reading this right now.
So how are you Londoners not terrified of the Met yet?
- Thread starter BubbleGumSnareDrum
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Most town centres across the UK have CCTV everywhere, in Derby they can track anyone from every single major pub and club in the city centre. Which I think is a good thing, as when fights break out and everyone splits, they actually send police to round em all up and chuck em in the cells for the night.Banok said:
Some people can really take things to heart. Yes it was a stereotypical generalisation of the American police force (I think that much should have been obvious) - and I see the necessity for your police to use guns because as you pointed out, guns are a big part of everyday life and I'd want a gun beside me if threatened at gun point. But honestly I don't see the need for a seven paragraph rant when it should have been clear that it was a said with a tongue in cheek attitude.manaman said:
Don't worry, I did pick up on the sarcasm etc.
He wasn't a protester though, he was just on his way home from where he was selling newspapers. I think there were reports of him having a go at police when they wouldn't let him leave the area, but that doesn't count as conduct warranting that level of force, especially when he's walking away with his hands in his pockets.ColdStorage said:Sorry wasn't meant to quote you, but hey i'll edit nows.drkapow said:
Thats cos your a Doctor.
I agree partially.LockHeart said:The fact still remains that the principle of taking a person 'as you find them' applies to the case: the officer didn't know, but that doesn't excuse him from the outcome of his actions.ColdStorage said:The dude was an alcoholic, which thins blood, so internal bleeding isn't so far fetched when you have 4 bottles of Jack Daniels in your system.Gooble said:JJDWilson said:You guys are aware that he didnt die of a heart attack...an independent (i.e. non-police appointed) post mortem showed he died of internal bleeding.A13X T3h NubCak3 said:he died because he was fat not because a cop killed him.. its just like sending someone to jail for pushing someone over then in the next couple of hours he dies from a heart attack.... wait thats what happened
On the main issue, admittedly the police over-reacted, but 3 policeman acting out, out of several hundred should not be a major concern for people.
What was the protesters doing there in the first place?, causing trouble. While I feel its sad that Alcy man died of internal bleeding that whench that got smacked deserves to get smacked again multiple times for selling her story to Max Clifford for 35 K.
Again, the level of force used against that woman was not reasonable (and the officer had his ID numbers concealed) but Christ she's a dappy bint. I have no sympathy for her.
Most of the criticism of the police in the aftermath of the G20 has been pretty outrageous in my opinion. These guys are under immense pressure dealing with the 'professional protesters' and deserve a little leeway. In other parts of Europe, the police use rubber bullets and water cannon, and yet one protester complained about being struck by a policeman despite admitting she pushed him first. If you go along to these kind of things, you've got to be prepared for some rough treatment - hopefully not too rough, but in comparison to how this protest would have been handled in 99% of the world, the police did a damn good job.
You're missing the point. There's a certain degree of privacy the innocent are entitled to. The fact that you aren't doing anything wrong doesn't make it okay for your government to constantly surveil you, and I would be extremely uncomfortable living in such an atmosphere on a daily basis. It's bad enough that police pull over and stop me for walking down the street at eight o' clock at night. I don't need to see cameras on every street corner in my town.urprobablyright said:
It is unacceptable that ANY policemen reacted with that much force.Gooble said:JJDWilson said:You guys are aware that he didnt die of a heart attack...an independent (i.e. non-police appointed) post mortem showed he died of internal bleeding.A13X T3h NubCak3 said:he died because he was fat not because a cop killed him.. its just like sending someone to jail for pushing someone over then in the next couple of hours he dies from a heart attack.... wait thats what happened
On the main issue, admittedly the police over-reacted, but 3 policeman acting out, out of several hundred should not be a major concern for people.
They'll probably have one ot two guys in a control room at the police station who watch the entirety of town, so think security room cliche, and you won't be far wrong. At night I imagine its better staffed and if you caught there eye, or nothing else was going on, they might have kept watching you!Banok said:
I want to go to a town centre where they have the loud speakers on the CCTV, so they yell at drunk people to stop doing stuff (nicking traffic cone, pissing in shop door, etc) some are so drunk they think god is telling them off hehe :]
The guns as a part of everyday life was sarcasm. Guns are very far from an "everyday fact" of life in the US. The more rural you get the more likely you are to run into people with guns. The closer you get to cities the rarer it gets, funny that more violent crime happens in the cities. To say that is because honest people do not own guns is the reason would be a bit foolish, I just find it odd that you are more likely to be killed by a gun in places where they try to control them the most.piers789 said:
The rant was addressed to everyone. I read through this topic and I noticed a lot of elitism and bickering. Your message was just the easiest to get the point across with, it boiled all that down into one short sentence.
What does that bit have to do with anything at all?urprobablyright said:
And no, I'm not missing your point because you aren't making one. Are you really that trusting of government out there on your island of misfits?
This is the justification given by every tyrant in history.iain62a said:
The question is, who gets to define 'wrong'?
O.K., sorry about my reply then. My original post was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, though I could have said so in the first place.manaman said:
Awfully butthurt over one little comment. Nobody said anything about convicts, nobody said anything about who descended from where. You just sound like more of a dogmatic douche than anybody else in this thread.urprobablyright said:
Of course a government is something to be trusted or distrusted. You are so unbelievably thick. Governments write laws, oversee defense and metropolitan emergency services, and most importantly, collect taxes from us. Of course I would be concerned with whether or not I can trust a government in charge of the land in which I currently reside. Why would anyone not be concerned and attentive, regardless of whether or not they have confidence in their leaders?
This is the same kind of atttitude I see in America all the time. People just don't care what their government does or how it affects them. You aren't very different from the majority of idiots over here.
The police force is a racist institution. Watch 'The Secret Policeman', excellent piece of investigative reporting.