what is happing with britain

[SammiYin]

Zombies.

Well, either zombies or the "great British public" showing off their astounding stupidity with a looting spree, rioting and being, well, British.

*spits tea on monitor* Good sir I am offended at your gross generalisation and would love to know what great public you're a part of! : p Trick question http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBWLH96MlPI Only Britain is great.

I, My good man, hail from none other than Her Majesty's glorious Britannia itself, however it is with great distaste that I must bear witness to such ghastly events from the rabble, we must stirrup our horses now and begin the ride for Queen and Country!

 

[poppabaggins]

Basic Story

Last Year:
Clegg Says Another Tory Government Will Cause Riot
Cameron Disagrees
Mae Reduces Police Support Saying No Need For It.

August 7th:
Police Go After Drug Dealers
Drug Dealer Waves Gun
Police Shoot Drug Dealer
Wife Calls for Enquiry
Youths Riot
Criminals Join In
Criminals Drive Up To Businesses, Load Up Cars, Torch Buildings
Bystanders Terrified And Assaulted
Criminals Use Blackberrys To Co-ordinate Attacks
Populace Use Twitter To Co-ordinate Cleanup
BookFace Is Used To Show Off
Police Arrest BookFacers
Cameron/Johnson Return From Holiday
"It's 'Bout Getting Our Taxes Back, Bruv!"
Britannia Weeps, John Bull Brings Brooms, Clears Mess Up.
Uninvolved People Call For Lethal Force

Tonight It Starts Again.

Well, I've read a few things claiming that they don't think that the police shooting had much to do with it, and that the causes were still being sought.

Otherwise, I'm one of those uninvolved people who has over a period of time come to think that they really do need to start using lethal force in these cases. The reason is simply that it's very difficult to arrest, or even identify everyone involved in things like this, never mind imprison them. Humane treatment of rioters, and the use of non-lethal methods simply results in the people feeling that there is no real risk involved in their actions. The goverment likely can't imprison them, they aren't in any serious risk of death, and anything they happen to grab or destroy is pure "profit" (in terms of goods, or pyrotechnic enjoyment).

I don't say this simply because I'm overseas from where this is happening, I've had similar thoughts watching riots all over the world in recent years, as well as situations like we dealt here in the US after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. I think people would be a lot more less eager to loot and blow up cars, if during a state of emergency the police adopted a "shoot on sight" policy. As far as media backlash goes, I think there is enough precedent that can be shown of the humane methods not working to justify it.

To my way of thinking if your going to engage in an armed insurrection against the goverment, do it. Simply faffing about wrecking stores and such really doesn't accomplish anything, or do anything about the goverment or people you might be rioting against. At least drop the pretensions and do it right if your trying to make some kind of mass statement, go after city hall and the politicians or whatever. Burning down the stores of "rich people" just means those people will collect the insurance. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if we have business owners torching their own places during this specifically to committ insurance fraud since it can be blamed on the riots.... this is not to say that I think the UK needs an armed revolution, I'm mostly writing this paragraph in response to all the people claiming that this is being done as some kind of statement against society and the status quo and as a couple of girls in a video put it "to show the rich we can do what we want". This liable isn't going to show any rich person anything but an insurance check.

Now I'm NOT arguing against the use of lethal force (after a significant warning and an imposed curfew), but:

You do realize that you're asking police to kill civilians, right? Killing people has a severe psychological impact, and if you order the police to kill people, you might just lose the support of said police. The same goes for the military. Yes, the rioters are clearly breaking the law, and I have no problem with them dying, but I don't think that there is a good way of delivering lethal force.

 

[MordinSolus]

Zombies.

Well, either zombies or the "great British public" showing off their astounding stupidity with a looting spree, rioting and being, well, British.

Personally, I think it's zombies. where else would Dead Rising 3 take place?

 

[Therumancer]

[
Now I'm NOT arguing against the use of lethal force (after a significant warning and an imposed curfew), but:

You do realize that you're asking police to kill civilians, right? Killing people has a severe psychological impact, and if you order the police to kill people, you might just lose the support of said police. The same goes for the military. Yes, the rioters are clearly breaking the law, and I have no problem with them dying, but I don't think that there is a good way of delivering lethal force.

I disagree, the danger inherant in doing something like this is that the goverment will become too apt to use lethal force in inappropriate situations. It's something that would have to be watched for that reason. After all there is a differance between shooting a looter or vandal during a state of emergency like a riot, and say blowing someone's head off for shoplifting or spray painting some graffiti when everything is operating normally. The thing you have to be careful of is to make sure that such emergency provisions are only used in times of obvious emergency and to prevent politicians from trying to turn everything into an Emergency so the police can blow some people away in pursuit of their interests.

In general a lot of first world nations have been able to responsibly use such emergency powers, people scream about atrocities after the fact, but in general as life gets back to normal people tend to forget about them if things work out, and then they come out again if really needed.

You are correct that there is no good way to use lethal force, it rather comes down to the situation. In a case like these where your dealing with people razing large sections of cities, you have to weigh the relative costs and pick the lesser of evils.

It's important to understand also that using lethal force in a situation like this is intended to inspire fear, to prevent people from doing things like this at all. Even if a lot of people die in one riot it becomes the lesser evil if you reduce the number of riots because of people deciding that they don't want to die. Under circumstances like a riot people aren't rational and a lot of warnings and such are going to castrate the whole point to begin with. The idea is to get people to feel that if they go break into a store during a riot they might have their life ended suddenly, and without warning. A guy isn't going to feel so great about running out to grab an HDTV if some cop with a shotgun might come around the corner any second and blow his head all over the place, or if he might be headed accross the street and be taken down by a police sniper on top of a building for grabbing a few DVDs.

What I'm advocating is brutal, but you have to weigh the costs, and understand that I'm saying this while looking a videos which have included burning stores and minimalls, and people throwing flash bang grenades into crowds for Lulz while recording it on their cellphobe camera, to say nothing of the dudes smugly posing with their loot on Facebook, who definatly seem likely to run right out there to do it again given the oppertunity... and the lack of any kind of fear or regret pretty much guarantees this is going to happen again because all of those dudes are going to want it to, and it's going to get worse due to people seeing that and figuring "damn, he got away with it, let's have another riot so I can get cool stuff too!".

Even in a worse case scenario if the police like massacre like 20,000 people and the media starts screaming about how it's the UK version of Kent State (which wasn't like how the media presents it to begin with) or Tiamen Square , look carefully at the devestation, and think about how 20,000 people today could save hundreds of thousands or even millions of people and countless amounts of damage in everything that it presents. Of course understand that I don't actually expect it to come to something like that. Truthfully I think once the police or army hit the streets and kill a couple of dozen people (a few in each city) a lot of the rioting is going to disperse. When your looking at some dead bodies and realize the police mean business and your not armed for a fight (this is a loot-fest, not an armed riot) I think most people are going to run away and end the problem, rather than trying to charge armed troops and cause a massacre like that. This isn't the Gaza strip or whatever, the people here aren't fighting for their homeland (from their perspective) they are out to loot DVDs, electronics, and junk food. Nobody is liable to want to die for that... and oddly those same motives are why I have no sympathy at all for them.

 

[ThatLankyBastard]

I'm wondering the same thing bro...

All I know is, shit went down the drain hardcore...

 

[SammiYin]

Zombies.

Well, either zombies or the "great British public" showing off their astounding stupidity with a looting spree, rioting and being, well, British.

Personally, I think it's zombies. where else would Dead Rising 3 take place?

Haha I can see it now, Deadrising 3: London, more looters than zombies and it's up to Boris Johnson to stop them!

 

[SilentCom]

First casualty of the riots confirmed.
26 year old male, shot dead in his car by rioters.

Ladies and Gentlemen, shit just got real.

Yep, and it wasn't the police that caused the first casuality either. What little "credibility" the rioters had is now lost seeing that they aren't in opposition to police brutality but rather they are the ones causing the brutality.

 

[MordinSolus]

Zombies.

Well, either zombies or the "great British public" showing off their astounding stupidity with a looting spree, rioting and being, well, British.

Personally, I think it's zombies. where else would Dead Rising 3 take place?

Haha I can see it now, Deadrising 3: London, more looters than zombies and it's up to Boris Johnson to stop them!

Yes, and Boris must figure out what's going on, why he can't leave the vicinity, why he can't bone the main female character, and why an American motocross champ and an American photographer who keeps yelling "Fantastic" are in London.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

I don't know the problem. But i know the solution. KIll them all.

Bet you can't figure out the refrence!

 

[SsilverR]

I get the feeling that the anger that has been brewing in this place over the years has finally come to a boil.

Same ... I mean cmon now, how long do you expect people to just sit around and complain about how broke or hungry they are before going completely apeshit?

I have a feeling that once this is over, they won't do shit in dealing with why it happened in the first place.. everyone's just going to be treated as a criminal and locked up.