It Could Never Happen Here...

Cressers
Cressers Posts: 1,329
edited April 2011 in The bottom bracket
Those things that Could Never Happen Here, are...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2011/a ... ist-police

Comments

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    For the Dutch royal wedding protesters were given an area along the route to voice their opinion..
    _
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    I am just glad that I won't be in the Country, far less London on the day.

    I can see this kicking off one way or another. :cry:

    The Police can't win. Either protests will lead to trouble or clamp downs will be an infringement on civil liberties. Not an easy call.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • Gazzaputt
    Gazzaputt Posts: 3,227
    For me although not in anyway supportive of the royal family this is a sad reflection of this country.

    WTF protest about a royal wedding? I pretty sure if they could the 2 of them would have done this on the quiet. Unfortunately he is the heir to the throne.

    Despite of who he is they are just two people getting married like 100,000s of others do every year of every faith and religion.

    Bandwagon jumping. Personally I hope if there is trouble the police hit them hard to sort it.
  • Zachariah
    Zachariah Posts: 782
    Taking action against people who might commit an offense is a disgraceful way for any state to behave, and makes me even more ashamed than usual to be a subject of this state park for the privileged.

    Take precautions against actions, fine - line the route with plexiglass, for instance - but acting against the people is a dangerous and counter-productive way to manage things. Say the next time a few more people are on the list...And the next time, a few more...It's not a big leap of the imagination to just blanket bans on any public gatherings where the mighty could be offended.
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    Zachariah wrote:
    Taking action against people who might commit an offense is a disgraceful way for any state to behave, and makes me even more ashamed than usual to be a subject of this state park for the privileged.

    Take precautions against actions, fine - line the route with plexiglass, for instance - but acting against the people is a dangerous and counter-productive way to manage things. Say the next time a few more people are on the list...And the next time, a few more...It's not a big leap of the imagination to just blanket bans on any public gatherings where the mighty could be offended.
    So let me get this right, the police aren't allowed to take action to prevent a crime from being committed? Read the article, it is clear that they can only take pre-emptive action when there is evidence that this is what's going to happen.
  • Cleat Eastwood
    Cleat Eastwood Posts: 7,508
    It's hitlers birthday today. He would have been so proud of the met.
    The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns
    momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself.
  • Drysuitdiver
    Drysuitdiver Posts: 474
    Cleat Eastwood wrote:
    It's hitlers birthday today. He would have been so proud of the met.

    you just lost the argument
    Veni Vidi cyclo I came I saw I cycled
    exercise.png
  • verylonglegs
    verylonglegs Posts: 4,023
    Drysuitdiver wrote:
    Cleat Eastwood wrote:
    It's hitlers birthday today. He would have been so proud of the met.

    you just lost the argument

    Agreed. no point discussing anything when such nonsense is being written :?
  • Stewie Griffin
    Stewie Griffin Posts: 4,330
    verylonglegs wrote:
    Drysuitdiver wrote:
    Cleat Eastwood wrote:
    It's hitlers birthday today. He would have been so proud of the met.

    you just lost the argument

    Agreed. no point discussing anything when such nonsense is being written :?

    I think drysuit was referring to Godwins law.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
  • Drysuitdiver
    Drysuitdiver Posts: 474
    correct I was referring to godwins law.

    and the police have always been able to arrest people planning crimes.

    I suggest people use an online dictionary and look up the word Conspiracy.

    then look up some of the legal cases where people have been convicted of conspiracy. they havent actually commited the crime planned but have ben arrested for planning it.
    Veni Vidi cyclo I came I saw I cycled
    exercise.png
  • bails87
    bails87 Posts: 12,998
    Gazzaputt wrote:
    I pretty sure if they could the 2 of them would have done this on the quiet.

    I'm sure they wanted to do it quietly, but the only church available in the entire country was Westminster Abbey, and the only way to travel through London is on a horse-drawn glass carriage. :wink:
    MTB/CX

    "As I said last time, it won't happen again."
  • BarryBonds
    BarryBonds Posts: 344
    i imagine for most women marrying the heir to the throne (and her prince) would be a bit dissapointed if the coachmen and glass carriage werent part of the deal :)

    Its a farytail wedding for most of the women i speak to Good on em prince or no prince let them get married and i wish them all the best luck in the world, every marriage needs it at some point.

    waves flag and says gawd bless ya etc etc
  • BarryBonds
    BarryBonds Posts: 344
    Cressers wrote:
    Those things that Could Never Happen Here, are...

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2011/a ... ist-police

    And in moves elsewhere an antidote to the guardian has been found

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... party.html
  • Ollieda
    Ollieda Posts: 1,010
    The whole idea of a Police force is to prevent crime happening in the first place. Unfortuantly as the way things go most police time is spent reacting to crimes that have happened, its just how things work out as its almost impossible to prevent all forms of crime from happening.

    If you would prefer to live in a nation where the police only ever reacted when a crime was actually committed as you don't want them interfering with your "civil liberties" and "privacy" then feel free to move to a different country.

    This article is basically just saying the Police are planning on doing their job - its a reporter getting paid for finding "news" on a slow news day
  • Weejie54
    Weejie54 Posts: 750
    http://wapedia.mobi/en/Inchoate_offense

    Word of the day - "inchoate".
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    Ollieda wrote:
    The whole idea of a Police force is to prevent crime happening in the first place. Unfortuantly as the way things go most police time is spent reacting to crimes that have happened, its just how things work out as its almost impossible to prevent all forms of crime from happening.

    If you would prefer to live in a nation where the police only ever reacted when a crime was actually committed as you don't want them interfering with your "civil liberties" and "privacy" then feel free to move to a different country.

    This article is basically just saying the Police are planning on doing their job - its a reporter getting paid for finding "news" on a slow news day

    I think it's a relevant bit of journalism - there is a real tension between civil liberties and preventing disorder in these kind of situations. I would have thought that those who wanted to live somewhere where civil liberties and privacy were not part of the equation would be better off moving to another country.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • Cressers
    Cressers Posts: 1,329
    So what type of divine being deigns to live among we mere commoners? What godlike personages require such special attention and protection that the the rest of us underserving oiks don't merit? How dare we hoi-paloi dare to expect to go about our normal lives unaffected by their security measures?

    If a quiet register office or minor chapel wedding is good enough for us then it's good enough for them...
  • daviesee
    daviesee Posts: 6,386
    Cressers wrote:
    If a quiet register office or minor chapel wedding is good enough for us then it's good enough for them...

    That would be a fair point.

    If someone considered "us" to be a legitimate target. I am no royalist but I can see the need for security at this one and I can see that the majority of the population see a big event as a good thing. It's good for the feelgood factor etc, etc. Well a holiday at least :wink:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • bails87
    bails87 Posts: 12,998
    BarryBonds wrote:
    Cressers wrote:
    Those things that Could Never Happen Here, are...

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2011/a ... ist-police

    And in moves elsewhere an antidote to the guardian has been found

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... party.html

    The 'antidote' to the Guardian is a hate filled gutter rag of a newspaper that's consistently the most 'punished' by thePCC for lying? "Congratulations Mr Bonds, we've found an antidote to that slightly off milk you put in your cup of tea. What we're going to do is stab you repeatedly in the face with a broken bottle, that way you'll forget all about the 10% chance of a dicky stomach."

    As for the story....an untruthful, staunchly anti-Lib Dem/ Pro-Tory paper is telling us all about the glorious work of Fearless Leader Cameron? I'd never have guessed :roll:
    MTB/CX

    "As I said last time, it won't happen again."
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    No-one is saying the Guardian is objective.

    I would say that, in my experience, the deliniation between reporting and opinion is usually better defined than other papers, and it is usually more explicit about its position and stance on issues, rather than assuming the position within its reporting.

    It's all relative though, it's still a newspaper, and if you don't politically align with it, it's a ballache to read.
    _

Categories