Jump to content
N-Europe

England Riots


LegoMan1031

Recommended Posts

Insurance will sort out the damage(hopefully, they always have some stupid loophole) and the rioters will be dealt with. As long as no one is hurt there's no permanent damage.

 

Except I'm sure there will be more than a few people without contents insurance after giving it up to help with finances. Insurance rates in general will go up, property prices will go down. And people won't want to invest in some of the areas leaving people homeless and jobless.

 

Other than that, yeah, no damage at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 565
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No, it's pretty clearly a reaction to racist police stop & search practice. All the original riot areas: Tottenham, Enfield etc etc are predominantly black. It's poor youth-police relations. Why would you not loot and riot if the whole of society is stacked against you?

 

Then why are they rioting and looting civilian houses and stores, instead of going straight to the police? This isn't a statement, it's chaos and opportunism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Already answered, though probably a bit subtle for you. Understandable.

 

Here's a more detailed suggestion:

cars equipped with PA systems sent to affected areas, broadcasting a message from the bereaved asking everyone to stop fighting.

A message of peace; radical I know.

 

Judging by the footage I saw, those cars would end up on fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Already answered, though probably a bit subtle for you. Understandable.

 

Here's a more detailed suggestion:

cars equipped with PA systems sent to affected areas, broadcasting a message from the bereaved asking everyone to stop fighting.

A message of peace; radical I know.

 

OK, no need to be patronising to someone you barely know. We're all adults here, let's keep it as such.

 

In all fairness, a link between a video posted in the middle of a topic with no quote to what it's referring to is pretty easily missed, especially when it's just a speech and not an actual plan. I just figured you just posted it to be inspirational or whatever.

 

Whilst it's great and all, do you really think that will work? Do you really think that half of the people even care about the root cause of it all? If they did, they'd be marching on parliament, not tearing down the shops and homes of the communities they care about so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's times like this, i really do question Britain. I mean why??, you are wreaking the city, causing hundreds of thousands of pounds of damage and for what.

 

People are angry, it's been building up with the poor state of the economy leading to so many problems, and here is an opportunity for them to vent and be destructive - perhaps inspired by the revolutionary behaviour and riots in other countries. (Not that I condone this.)

 

I agree! But it certainly claims the high ground.

 

I appreciate where you got the idea from, and in a perfect world that would quell the rioters and put a stop to this unnecessary violence, but... :( I don't think these people care about morals...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree! But it certainly claims the high ground.

 

So you admit your 'solution' is unlikely to resolve the issue? Not that current methods are too effective either...

 

It's threads like these that make me want more/unlimited 'thanks'. So many good points being made as well as hilarious posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think the Police should just start fucking shit up. I don't understand the whole "what about the innocents" thing. Surely they abandoned ship a long time ago? If they stayed, they won't exactly be walking amongst the rioters will they? If they've got any sense, they'll be hidden.

 

Thickest armour they can find, biggest stick they can find, most vicious dogs they can find, go nuts. Fuckers made their choice when they started setting fire to peoples homes/businesses.

 

Consider two relatively recent examples, the G20 Summit in Toronto, and the Vancouver Riots. In Toronto, the police weren't using discretion at all. The riots were relatively short and contained in one area, while the police were everywhere else beating bystanders and peaceful protesters. There was even one incident where a disabled man's prosthetic leg was stolen by police, while other police officers dragged him through the streets. Many people were arrested and denied their legal rights simply for wearing black. They also weren't given any chance to get out, as the police beat them when they tried to get out of the area. Regarding the Vancouver riot, my Cousin (as I mentioned earlier in the thread, she lives in Vancouver and was only a couple blocks away at the time) and the people she was with nearly got trampled when the police lines broke and a bunch of rioters came in their direction. Had the police managed to get back into formation after the rioters had reached them, they would likely have been trapped in the crowd.

 

Its not simply a case of asking the innocents to move out of the way, or saying that they shouldn't have been there in the first place. The point is that they ARE there and the police need to take precautions to make sure only the criminals are targeted.

 

I agree that the police should be as harsh as they need to be (short of using live fire, unless the crowds get their hands on some guns), but they need to use discretion regardless of what they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Already answered, though probably a bit subtle for you. Understandable.

 

Here's a more detailed suggestion:

cars equipped with PA systems sent to affected areas, broadcasting a message from the bereaved asking everyone to stop fighting.

A message of peace; radical I know.

 

People have died? :(

 

When loads are doing it people think they will get away with it, I can't wait to hear their excuses. Should be funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are also missing the point of my suggested action. I see these riots as a symptom of a greater problem. To "treat" the greater problem (which would result in no riots) you need a different "medicine", and it may take more than one dose to take effect.

 

People have died? :(

 

When loads are doing it people think they will get away with it, I can't wait to hear their excuses. Should be funny.

 

The entire thing is about someone who died!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue that most of these people are fuckwit delinquents who like to smash shit up at any opportunity. Otherwise known as black men.

 

People of any race can be chavs. It has more to do with socioeconomic conditions than race. Ever heard of white-trash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consider two relatively recent examples, the G20 Summit in Toronto, and the Vancouver Riots. In Toronto, the police weren't using discretion at all. The riots were relatively short and contained in one area, while the police were everywhere else beating bystanders and peaceful protesters. There was even one incident where a disabled man's prosthetic leg was stolen by police, while other police officers dragged him through the streets. Many people were arrested and denied their legal rights simply for wearing black. They also weren't given any chance to get out, as the police beat them when they tried to get out of the area. Regarding the Vancouver riot, my Cousin (as I mentioned earlier in the thread, she lives in Vancouver and was only a couple blocks away at the time) and the people she was with nearly got trampled when the police lines broke and a bunch of rioters came in their direction. Had the police managed to get back into formation after the rioters had reached them, they would likely have been trapped in the crowd.

 

Its not simply a case of asking the innocents to move out of the way, or saying that they shouldn't have been there in the first place. The point is that they ARE there and the police need to take precautions to make sure only the criminals are targeted.

 

I agree that the police should be as harsh as they need to be (short of using live fire, unless the crowds get their hands on some guns), but they need to use discretion regardless of what they do.

 

Oh yeah, discretion is obviously needed. I wasn't really talking about windmilling aimlessly into a crowd, I just meant that they need to resort to force now. Harsh force.

 

Plus the megaphone idea wasn't entirely serious. A more serious idea would be to make announcements through TV/Radio warning people of harder Police action against rioters with a day or two to allow people to make their way out. That combined with common sense on the officers part when it comes to identifying rioters/bystanders would hopefully keep innocent casualties to a minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...