Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Sun Jan 12, 2014 10:48 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

compared to who? My income and wealth is far closer to those at the bottom end of the scale than the top. I would guess pretty much everyone here is in the same position.

The rest of th world.
You are significantly wealthier and have siginificantly more opportunities and a signficantly higher living standard than the vast majority of the world.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:13 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

You started off this thread saying that you'd barely seen any of the details of the case but you were still leaning heavily into the Duggan camp. That's not a "staunch police supporter" and it's absolute BS to claim it now, when you've gone further and further into supporting Duggan.

I don't support Duggan.
I got angry at what looked to me like another police cock-up.
That could have been anyone in that taxi and I would have felt the same.
I am not alone in thinking this way.
There are many diametrically opposed to my view, you being one of them.
I will reiterate that I support the police not least because if I didn't I would have been brave enough today say so.
You can think what you like.

To go back to football, one of your chief interests, by way of comparison ....I can support a team and still question their tactics can't I?

No matter, I suspect that nothing that I say will make you happy.
Stick me in the police hater box then and let's move on.

Incidentally, I don't start many threads but along with my initial feelings (right or wrong) I thought it would be a good one with plenty of opportunity for different views to be expressed.
I got something right then if nothing else.
lol

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Sun Jan 12, 2014 11:35 pm  

Stand-Offish wrote:

I don't support Duggan.
I got angry at what looked to me like another police cock-up.
That could have been anyone in that taxi and I would have felt the same.
I am not alone in thinking this way.
There are many diametrically opposed to my view, you being one of them.
I will reiterate that I support the police not least because if I didn't I would have been brave enough today say so.
You can think what you like.

To go back to football, one of your chief interests, by way of comparison ....I can support a team and still question their tactics can't I?

No matter, I suspect that nothing that I say will make you happy.
Stick me in the police hater box then and let's move on.

You can support a football team and question their tactics. However, a Liverpool fan today wouldn't have put on a red and white shirt, sat with the home fans and sang along with the Stoke City songs during the game.

It would make me happy if you gave a genuine reply to the question of what the cops should have done differently to apprehend Duggan, rather than the utterly meaningless reply of approaching "with caution".

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 12:01 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

You can support a football team and question their tactics. However, a Liverpool fan today wouldn't have put on a red and white shirt, sat with the home fans and sang along with the Stoke City songs during the game.

It would make me happy if you gave a genuine reply to the question of what the cops should have done differently to apprehend Duggan, rather than the utterly meaningless reply of approaching "with caution".

I wasn't being flippant.
Caution would be my approach to dangerous situations like this one.
Clearly I can't specify a procedure that will satisfy you not least because you can play 'what if?' with it until the cows come home.

My ethos would be to arrest rather than kill where possible.
A sort of siege mentality if you like.
I know it wouldn't work for all cases.
But in this case the guy is in a taxi pretty much surrounded. He could take the taxi driver hostage.
He could try to leg it. He's not shooting at anybody yet so let's wait and see.
If he comes out shooting ... he's dead.
He could give himself up, I'd give him every chance.

Incidentally.......
You think he was in the act of legging it.
Have you proof of that?
Or was he shot in the act of getting out as requested?
I'm asking because I don't honestly know.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:56 am  

Stand-Offish wrote: Caution would be my approach to dangerous situations like this one. Clearly I can't specify a procedure that will satisfy you not least because you can play 'what if?' with it until the cows come home. If you are saying that the police screwed up with the way they implemented the stop of the taxi then you need to be able to offer alternative suggestions of what they should have done. You can't say why the police screwed up and you can't offer any alternatives. My ethos would be to arrest rather than kill where possible. I'd suggest that was the intention of the police as well. A sort of siege mentality if you like. I know it wouldn't work for all cases. But in this case the guy is in a taxi pretty much surrounded. He could take the taxi driver hostage. He could try to leg it. He's not shooting at anybody yet so let's wait and see. He's driving around London in a London taxi. Taking a wait and see approach would be difficult if the taxi takes a turn down a road that only taxis are allowed down. The police take a wait and see approach and Duggan just happens to be dropped off near a school or heavily populated shopping centre. Is this an example of good police work, or is this a police screw up? He could give himself up, I'd give him every chance. What does "I'd give him every chance [to give himself up]" actually mean? Incidentally....... You think he was in the act of legging it. Have you proof of that? Or was he shot in the act of getting out as requested? According to the evidence given by the cab driver and corroborated by one policeman present at the scene, Duggan got out of the taxi and ran in an attempt to escape.[40] The driver stated, "I saw that Mark Duggan got out and ran. At the same time, I heard firing from the front. I saw shots strike Mark Duggan. He fell to the ground. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Mark_Duggan

Stand-Offish wrote: Caution would be my approach to dangerous situations like this one. Clearly I can't specify a procedure that will satisfy you not least because you can play 'what if?' with it until the cows come home. If you are saying that the police screwed up with the way they implemented the stop of the taxi then you need to be able to offer alternative suggestions of what they should have done. You can't say why the police screwed up and you can't offer any alternatives. My ethos would be to arrest rather than kill where possible. I'd suggest that was the intention of the police as well. A sort of siege mentality if you like. I know it wouldn't work for all cases. But in this case the guy is in a taxi pretty much surrounded. He could take the taxi driver hostage. He could try to leg it. He's not shooting at anybody yet so let's wait and see. He's driving around London in a London taxi. Taking a wait and see approach would be difficult if the taxi takes a turn down a road that only taxis are allowed down. The police take a wait and see approach and Duggan just happens to be dropped off near a school or heavily populated shopping centre. Is this an example of good police work, or is this a police screw up? He could give himself up, I'd give him every chance. What does "I'd give him every chance [to give himself up]" actually mean? Incidentally....... You think he was in the act of legging it. Have you proof of that? Or was he shot in the act of getting out as requested? According to the evidence given by the cab driver and corroborated by one policeman present at the scene, Duggan got out of the taxi and ran in an attempt to escape.[40] The driver stated, "I saw that Mark Duggan got out and ran. At the same time, I heard firing from the front. I saw shots strike Mark Duggan. He fell to the ground. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Mark_Duggan

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:51 am  

Stand-Offish wrote:

...He's not shooting at anybody yet so let's wait and see.

Seriously? You propose that the police don't shoot until the armed criminal shoots? You want to think about that? if say you're the nearest armed officer- you are saying you'd wait and see if he took a shot at you first, and only then would you shoot (if still alive)?

Stand-Offish wrote:

...He could give himself up, I'd give him every chance.

"Armed police, hands up" or equivalent is the only chance a gunman should get.

Stand-Offish wrote:

...You think he was in the act of legging it.
....

There was some evidence that he tried to leg it, but I don't think it is that significant, since the police obviously couldn't allow him to escape if they believed he had a gun.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:13 am  

Page 17:

Stand-Offish wrote:

I am a staunch supporter of the police.

Opening post:

Stand-Offish wrote:

So I am coming from a position of ignorance, which isn't good I admit.

But Hillsborough and de Menezes spring to mind.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:49 am  

Stand-Offish wrote: Well the verdict is in and here is one report. I found myself getting angry when it was announced and found myself siding with those shouting down the mouthpiece officer as he was attempting to give his comments. Have I any right to logically feel this way? After all I wasn't there at the scene of the shooting and I don't have all the evidence and I didn't have to come to a considered verdict. So I am coming from a position of ignorance, which isn't good I admit. But Hillsborough and de Menezes spring to mind. I would like someone to convince me that my feelings are unfounded. And why were the police so confrontational anyway? Was there not another way? Is it right to put an officer into this kind of life or death split second decision situation? Meh! It's nothing new. Check out Diarmuid O'Neill's story. Apparently that was lawful too!

Stand-Offish wrote: Well the verdict is in and here is one report. I found myself getting angry when it was announced and found myself siding with those shouting down the mouthpiece officer as he was attempting to give his comments. Have I any right to logically feel this way? After all I wasn't there at the scene of the shooting and I don't have all the evidence and I didn't have to come to a considered verdict. So I am coming from a position of ignorance, which isn't good I admit. But Hillsborough and de Menezes spring to mind. I would like someone to convince me that my feelings are unfounded. And why were the police so confrontational anyway? Was there not another way? Is it right to put an officer into this kind of life or death split second decision situation? Meh! It's nothing new. Check out Diarmuid O'Neill's story. Apparently that was lawful too!

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:22 am  

ryano wrote:

Meh! It's nothing new. Check out Diarmuid O'Neill's story. Apparently that was lawful too!

What about O'Neill's story is deserving of any sympathy?

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:49 am  

[quote="Stand-Offish"]
He could take the taxi driver hostage.
/quote]

Hands up or I'll shoot you with my sock?