Black Lives Matter

[Mario]

This is the area that has been designated a no go Police area in Seattle, seems a nice place for a stroll.

[philpvfc]

30 minutes ago, TheSage said:

Posting fake posters doesn't help the debate. 

"Both sides are the same" doesn't wash.

The BLM campaign occurred in response to the cold blooded murder of a black man. Their aim is equality and civil rights. Fine and very noble causes. I'm with them 100%.

The thugs who were fighting the police yesterday, making Nazi salutes, and threatening the press and public, were white supremacists whose aim was to cause mayhem. 

Morally, the two are light years apart. 

Did I not read yesterday that 100 arrests were made, one person was arrested for carrying a knife and dozens of bottles and smoke bombs were thrown at the police? There were hardly any BLM supporters anywhere near Churchill's statue so what on earth were these idiots doing? Well? What were they doing? 

Apart from urinating on one of the memorials they were supposed to be protecting and showing their far right allegiance to neo-Nazis. I'm sure Churchill would have been impressed.

The thuggery on display in London yesterday had nothing to do with any great moral cause. It was aimed at causing public disorder, to have a battle with the police, and a punch up with BLM protesters who  had cancelled their march to avoid the very problems that these white supremacists were causing!! You could not make it up.

It is a black power fist in the picture and not a fascist salute. There is a difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If the BLM had cancelled their protests how come there was reports of BLM protests in the capital and how come there was BLM supporters fighting in Parliament square and Waterloo. You might think they are totally innocent but you’d be wrong.

[Davebrad]

1 hour ago, TheSage said:

Posting fake posters doesn't help the debate. 

"Both sides are the same" doesn't wash.

The BLM campaign occurred in response to the cold blooded murder of a black man. Their aim is equality and civil rights. Fine and very noble causes. I'm with them 100%.

The thugs who were fighting the police yesterday, making Nazi salutes, and threatening the press and public, were white supremacists whose aim was to cause mayhem. 

Morally, the two are light years apart. 

Did I not read yesterday that 100 arrests were made, one person was arrested for carrying a knife and dozens of bottles and smoke bombs were thrown at the police? There were hardly any BLM supporters anywhere near Churchill's statue so what on earth were these idiots doing? Well? What were they doing? 

Apart from urinating on one of the memorials they were supposed to be protecting and showing their far right allegiance to neo-Nazis. I'm sure Churchill would have been impressed.

The thuggery on display in London yesterday had nothing to do with any great moral cause. It was aimed at causing public disorder, to have a battle with the police, and a punch up with BLM protesters who  had cancelled their march to avoid the very problems that these white supremacists were causing!! You could not make it up.

It is a black power fist in the picture and not a fascist salute. There is a difference

 

1 hour ago, TheSage said:

you may be able to tell the difference if there is one, but joe public watching the biased broadcasting corporation, would not but being told what it was the bbc would have got their agenda over...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[geosname]

5 hours ago, Davebrad said:

if your stopped for a friendly chat, and they ask for identity/name say "have i committed a crime, am I committing a crime, or am I going to committ a crime" that should see them off...

If it were only that easy.

[geosname]

4 hours ago, philpvfc said:

Ironic that 12 months ago we were complaining about record levels of knife crime predominantly caused by black gangs and then they have the audacity to complain about being more likely to be stopped and searched because they are black. If it reduces knife crime then the police have my backing. 

Has it reduced?

[geosname]

4 hours ago, Mario said:

Ive never understood why anyone would complain about being stopped when they have done nothing wrong, knife crime in London is horrendous, why wouldn't you try and help .........Unless of course....... 

Oh dear.

[philpvfc]

9 minutes ago, geosname said:

Has it reduced?

Lot lower this year.

[geosname]

6 minutes ago, philpvfc said:

Lot lower this year.

Good news

[Mario]

Lot lower this year.

Stop and search working for the community excellent lives being saved

[geosname]

I have no problem with stop and search if conducted legally..... because it's the law.

Even under stop and search you are not legally obliged to give your details.

I wouldn't but others may choose to do so.

The consequences of providing your details include a record of the event and the power used to stop and search. Every time you are stopped subsequently and provide details your previous stops will be available on search...... whether the search is logged for misuse of drugs act, road traffic offence, terrorism etc etc.even a pnc check?

Imagine being a young black male driving an expensive car, a pnc check is carried out as you pass a police vehicle.... the results show you have been stopped several times under missuse of drugs... what's the chance you are about to be stopped ?..... the suspicion based solely on the number of previous stops.... even though nothing was found and no charges made.

The police have the right to ask you your name, address, date of birth..... anyone has that right..... some may argue that if you have nothing to hide you would answer..... so reverse the situation, ask the officer the same questions and apply the same logic.... if they have nothing to hide?

If it's so important to have someone's details why doesn't the law make it compulsory? In some circumstances it does, and I would comply, but there are rules when it's compulsory.

I would advise anyone to follow the law or suffer the consequences and the law should be applied equally to everyone.

[toyahw]

1 hour ago, geosname said:

 

Even under stop and search you are not legally obliged to give your details.

 

Here you have to be able prove your identity at any time. I have to carry either my passport or permanent residence card at all times. Otherwise you are illegalyl on the street.  Same goes for tourists. But the police tend to turn a blind eye to tourists.

One rule for one, one for another. That seems like a running theme these days...

[geosname]

1 hour ago, toyahw said:

Here you have to be able prove your identity at any time. I have to carry either my passport or permanent residence card at all times. Otherwise you are illegalyl on the street.  Same goes for tourists. But the police tend to turn a blind eye to tourists.

One rule for one, one for another. That seems like a running theme these days...

It's exactly the same here mate.

If I wish to visit a family member, even in the same province, and wish to stay overnight I should inform immigration before I do and must definitely tell them when I get back.

If I want to visit anywhere outside the kingdom I have to ask permission and get it before I leave or I am not allowed back in, no matter what my visa states.

[darren1810]

19 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

Exactly!  I know of a group of lads who travelled from Newcastle (the proper one) down to London to "defend the statues" which were already encased in steel, from a BLM demonstration which had been called off.  The fact that 99.9% of these statue defenders were blokes who were chanting football songs suggests that they were there for a punch up.  Sorry if I am jumping to conclusions.

Thus demonstrating the stupidity of some Toon regulars, prepared to go to London when exactly the same thing was happening in their own city. Bizarre behaviour.

[Regal Beagle]

On 13/06/2020 at 17:13, Joe B said:

Are you labelling Black Lives Matter as an extreme ideology due to the actions of a minority of idiots?

If so, I hope you are as consistent as ever and brand all those who don't like BLM as people who throw Nazi salutes, who urinate on memorials to police, and attack on-duty policeman.

Only being fair there mate. Glad we could clear that up. 

I'd hoped that my post was clear enough - the explicit goals of BLM, other than their headline which everyone agrees with, is to abolish the Police and to dismantle capitalism.

They are both radical, if not extreme, political views.

 

I'm not sure what the 'as ever' dig is all about - but funnily enough I would be against the Premier league putting nazi symbols on their shirts too. I get you are angry but that is so grossly unfair.

Opposing the political goals of BLM is not the same as endorsing racism. It's actually still the opposite of endorsing racism.

[Iron Curtain]

19 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

I'd hoped that my post was clear enough - the explicit goals of BLM, other than their headline which everyone agrees with, is to abolish the Police and to dismantle capitalism.

They are both radical, if not extreme, political views.

 

I'm not sure what the 'as ever' dig is all about - but funnily enough I would be against the Premier league putting nazi symbols on their shirts too. I get you are angry but that is so grossly unfair.

Opposing the political goals of BLM is not the same as endorsing racism. It's actually still the opposite of endorsing racism.

Where has "Abolish the police" come from? I may have missed it?

The BLM website doesnt say "Abolish the police" ... It says Defund the police. 

They dont say they want it completely defunded, the phase indicates they want to reduce the funding that goes to the police and have it redirected into community programmes that tackle crime in a different way. For example, the say that the Police in the US have too many duties.

The following is from Wkik, but I have had a look at the sources listed also.

One primary argument for defunding the police focuses on the fact that police officers provide too many services. According to this argument, the United States has had an over-reliance on the police for an unrealistically wide range of roles in the United States.[7][54] For example, many police officers are expected to manage complex personal situations and crises related to homelessness, mental health, and substance abuse. This model may be asking too much of police officers, and some of these services may be better managed by social workers or other community-based professionals.[55][56] Furthermore, police officers may be particularly badly suited for some of these roles. For example, 1 in 4 people who are killed by the police have severe mental illness. If someone is experiencing a mental health crisis, and if there is no emergent threat to themselves or others, trained professionals in mental health may be better suited to manage such situations than police officers. Furthermore, if more funds were diverted to help treat and support those with mental health issues, there could be better outcomes.^[57][58][59]