|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
By the way, anyone remember Don McPhee's iconic image of the row of police officers at Orgreave with the miner wearing a toy policeman's hat standing just in front of them? I didn't even see the significance of this image until I read about it years later. The whole point is that non of the police have their uniform numbers on. Apparently the senior officer in charge had effectively given his officers carte blanch to use any degree of violence they wanted and so ordered them to take their numbers off so it would be even more difficult to bring any of the officers to account later on. So if the police turn up at CM less identifying badges, you will know what their game plan is... http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,1384820,00.html Police were seen without uniform numbers this summer during G8. Richard Webb |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 15:55:14 +0100 someone who may be Tony Raven
wrote this:- you do not use a Taser on a suspected suicide bomber unless you want to risk detonating their explosives. If the police really did suspect that their victim was a suicide bomber then they were not doing a very good job letting him on a bus. So far all their bull**** has failed to provide a convincing explanation about this. Time will tell whether they give the "independent" investigators a convincing explanation. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
Tony Raven wrote:
you do not use a Taser on a suspected suicide bomber unless you want to risk detonating their explosives. I wonder if that is really true? |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
it is a spontaneous coming together of people
lmao, but I now see why you have to maintain the fiction. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 23:14:42 +0100, wafflycat wrote:
"Sniper8052" wrote in message .. . I fail to see why other road users, including pedestrians, should have to suffer their bullish behavior because 'they' choose to behave like louts once a month. Can we take it you'd have the same view as regards the same and worse behaviour of thousands of motorists doing same on a daily basis? Cheers, helen s You may take it that I will take the same attitude to anybody who breaks the rules of acceptable behavior no matter what. If the group loosly termed CM, which chooses not to acknowledge it acts as a group, feel they have something to protest, fine let them protest, but also let them follow the rules and laws set down for the normal function of the roads and society. In my book two wrongs don't make a right and CM has on the occasions I have seen them been little more than an unruly and loud mob intent on being a pain in the backside to all and sundry. Whilst this may not be the intent of all those present enough of the riders present this behavior to tarnish all with the same brush. Sniper8052 |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
|
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
|
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 23:45:06 +0100, Jon Senior wrote:
Sniper8052 wrote: The fact is that the group, self styled Critical Mass, wishes to evade it's collective responsibility to behave properly and often behaves very badly by all accounts. It does not have a "collective responsibility". Any more than a crush of pedestrians traveling the same footpath have a collective responsibility. I fail to see why other road users, including pedestrians, should have to suffer their bullish behavior because 'they'd choose to behave like louts once a month. Some do, some don't. There are some bad ones but the way to deal with them is to rally the rest of the group by supporting the action, not by attempting to alienate all participants. As others have asked, how do you (As a vocal supporter of the police action) propose to distinguish between CMers and other cyclists who just happened to be going the same way? Or would such "participants" be guilty by association in your book. If CM want to ride around London, fine, obey the rules... all of them. If CM voluntary workers think they are above or beyond the law and hope to evade the responsibility they are taking on themselves in 'not' organizing the ride, but publicly promoting it, they may find they are in fact 'responsible' in the 'eyes of the law'. The best way to deal with the idiots (From my experience of a few, admittedly smaller, CMs) here is to enter the group as a member and speak to them privately. No threats needed. Just a gentle, "You're not really proving anything by swearing at that driver now are you?". This would be far more likely to gain you the support of the rest of the group. This requirement is a notice to all that public anarchy once a month will no longer be tolerated. A notice which is long overdue in my opinion. Any individual who breaks the law can and should be treated accordingly. This goes for the drivers who take it upon themselves to break the mass as well as those inside it who think they are vigilantes. But the moment you label all members of the group the same regardless of their actions you are entering dangerous territory. If your neighbour robs a house, you are not considered guilty by proximity. Why should the same not apply to CM? Fundamentally, you cannot stop CM from happening. Without much effort I can think of many ways of avoiding any attempts at control. Bring in the riot police and the cyclists will bring in the press... and you may not have noticed, but the police are not really doing well in the PR stakes at the minute. Jon Also a one-time supporter of CM Any body acting as a group has a collective responsibility. The ride acts as a group thus it has a collective responsibility. London Marathon runners are a group of individuals they still have a collective responsibility to obey the rules of the organising bodies and society. I do not know what plans are being made to enforce the new regime, if I am called upon to exercise any power which I can personally and reasonably justify as legal and proportionate I will do so. I don't have much of a 'book' pretty much the whole of my philosophy on policing is 'be fair in all things - be polite always' I've never had much of a problem with that. I certainly won't be pushed into arresting of ticketing people where I cannot personally justify my actions. I don't know what the rules are going to be. I was told today that all policing was going to be withdrawn so what happens next I don't know, it's anyone's guess. I agree that not all members of CM share the same ideas and that perhaps the majority go along for a nice ride. It will their responsibility set the example. If the vigilantes make trouble and break societies rules they should as you acknowledge be punished, as should any drivers who drive in a dangerous manner. However that also brings the responsibility of the ride leaders, those at the head of the ride - not 'organisers'- to obey the road traffic laws. If the Friday skate can manage to tell the police where they are going and organise things in a half decent manner I don't see much excuse for CM not having done the same. Sniper8052 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
"Sniper8052" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 23:14:42 +0100, wafflycat wrote: "Sniper8052" wrote in message .. . I fail to see why other road users, including pedestrians, should have to suffer their bullish behavior because 'they' choose to behave like louts once a month. Can we take it you'd have the same view as regards the same and worse behaviour of thousands of motorists doing same on a daily basis? Cheers, helen s You may take it that I will take the same attitude to anybody who breaks the rules of acceptable behavior no matter what. If the group loosly termed CM, which chooses not to acknowledge it acts as a group, feel they have something to protest, fine let them protest, but also let them follow the rules and laws set down for the normal function of the roads and society. In my book two wrongs don't make a right and CM has on the occasions I have seen them been little more than an unruly and loud mob intent on being a pain in the backside to all and sundry. Whilst this may not be the intent of all those present enough of the riders present this behavior to tarnish all with the same brush. Excellent, I wonder how you'll go about getting all the motorists in London to provide advance notice of where they are going. After all, it may not be the intent of all those present in the rush-hour to be a PITA to all and sundry but shurely there are enough of them holding up everyone and breaking the law (jumping red lights... road rage... illegal parking... injure a few in accidents etc) to tarnish all with the same brush? I have no problem with those who break the law (whatever mode of transport) being brought to book. What I do have a problem with is the singling out of cyclists who apparently cause a problem once a month, when gridlock is achieved and laws broken on a daily basis by those travelling in motor vehicles. It smacks of picking on a minority group which is an easy target. Cheers, helen s |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Police in London attack critical mass
Sniper8052 wrote:
Whilst this may not be the intent of all those present enough of the riders present this behavior to tarnish all with the same brush. Wrong attitude. Under no circumstances is it acceptable to label an entire group based on the behaviour of some members of that group. In other circumstances that is considered racist, or sexist. It is that level of ignorance combined with unreasonable (And frequently abused) power that has cultivated my dislike of the police. Do yourself a favour and demonstrate that as an officer of the law you are capable of seeing things with a little more clarity than your fellow civilian. Power = responsibility... remember? Jon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Notes from CM militants | Velo | Social Issues | 0 | July 11th 05 05:45 PM |
NYPD Seeks Injunction to Stop Critical Mass | Jym Dyer | Social Issues | 6 | October 29th 04 07:04 PM |
Critical Mass: Peaceful Cyclists to Reclaim City Streets | TIME'S UP! (via Jym Dyer) | Social Issues | 0 | September 24th 04 05:10 AM |
CRITICAL MASS Melbourne - 8th Birthday Ride - Fri 28/11 | Juz | Australia | 9 | December 1st 03 11:26 AM |