Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat
Annoyed about politics
thermidorthelobster:
I'm currently a little annoyed by a couple of things.
Firstly, the whole Met Police business. A court has found the Met Police guilty of breaking health & safety laws. So what's the punishment? A £175,000 fine. And remind me, whose money funds the Met Police? It's ours - us taxpayers. So the people paying the fine are taxpayers. And what penalty is there for the officers who shot an innocent man 8 times in the head at point-blank range, or their supervisors, or their managers? Nothing at all. Nobody's apparently responsible for this. In my view the fact that nobody IS responsible should mean heads should roll, as clearly the procedures are totally flawed. Clearly there was a big mistake made here. Or, if not, shouldn't the police or the government turn round and admit that if we're going to fight terrorism we might have to shoot a few members of the public from time to time?
And in the blue corner... A government minister is fined for using his mobile phone whilst driving. He says he was taking "an important call about deportation". And that's supposed to mean what exactly? It's OK to take the call if it's important? How did he know the call was important when he answered it? It really gets my goat that he's somehow trying to justify this.
Evilgoat:
--- Quote from: "thermidorthelobster" ---I'm currently a little annoyed by a couple of things.
Firstly, the whole Met Police business. A court has found the Met Police guilty of breaking health & safety laws. So what's the punishment? A £175,000 fine. And remind me, whose money funds the Met Police? It's ours - us taxpayers. So the people paying the fine are taxpayers. And what penalty is there for the officers who shot an innocent man 8 times in the head at point-blank range, or their supervisors, or their managers?
--- End quote ---
Sorry but can I stop you here.
If you hear 'Stop! Armed Police' and run, sorry, you asked for it, you were warned. No sympathy here, its a terrible shame and a waste BUT he was challenged. The case does not sdipute this and has little or nothing to do with it. Would YOU leg it if you were challenged?
The case is about Health and Saftey, there was a very, versy serious risk that someone uninvolved may have been seriously injured, thats what this is about. Sorry, but mr Menzies did the wrong thing and paid the ultimate price.
You have a point about the fines though but what can you do?
--- Quote from: "thermidorthelobster" ---
Or, if not, shouldn't the police or the government turn round and admit that if we're going to fight terrorism we might have to shoot a few members of the public from time to time?
--- End quote ---
Again, see up, which part of 'Stop, Armed Police' was unclear? The city is in a heightend state of alert, we've just been bombed, and this guy was clearly challenged and told to stop moving, so he ran.
Or would you have prefered they were right but didnt fire and someone blew up another underground train?
--- Quote from: "thermidorthelobster" ---
And in the blue corner... A government minister is fined for using his mobile phone whilst driving. He says he was taking "an important call about deportation". And that's supposed to mean what exactly? It's OK to take the call if it's important? How did he know the call was important when he answered it? It really gets my goat that he's somehow trying to justify this.
--- End quote ---
Sorry but he should have the book thrown at him as an example, but as with the other Police Super last week, naught will happen I fear.
Welcome to the UK. At some point that government seem to have forgotten that they are public servants, hence 'civil servant'. Its only going to get worse too.
hobbit:
--- Quote from: "thermidorthelobster" ---
And in the blue corner... A government minister is fined for using his mobile phone whilst driving. He says he was taking "an important call about deportation". And that's supposed to mean what exactly? It's OK to take the call if it's important? How did he know the call was important when he answered it? It really gets my goat that he's somehow trying to justify this.
--- End quote ---
With all the money they get to spend on expenses perhaps a hands free kit would have been a useful thing to have
As for the other subject I'm afraid my views wont stay on long if I post them, so I will not comment
graham:
What do you expect from self righteous government ministers i bet he had a fag in his company car too. :?
rollazuki:
As far as Im concerned if a copper says stop, asks you to pull over etc etc, and you refuse, then you should lose all your civil rights, immediately.
If an armed copper demanded I stop, Id be on the ground sharpish, not running away. Reason? Id expect to be shot at, and Ive done nowt wrong.
Its ridiculous that they should be fined etc. If the guy had been a bomber and they had hesitated, the dumb ass newspapers would now be blaming their casual attitude for a train full of people dying. They cant win.
And as for the dim woman on the news who said they were armed and looked threatening.....THATS WHAT AN ARMED RESPONSE TEAM SHOULD LOOK LIKE YOU DIMWIT !!!
Pretty soon they'll be risk assesingf war zones, and accounting for each shot fired.
They should trust their rigorous training and leave em to it.
Rant over, no expletives used, calming down.........
Ps, tell ya what, If armed police are telling some bloke near me to stop, and he doesnt, whatever the reason, Ill be happy when thay take him down. Job done, no bystanders hurt. Result.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version