If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
People are now sueing the metropolitan police for wrongful detainment and for breaching the european thingy for human rights. (I forget the official term)
Only two people so far, a businessman who was in there and not even protesting, and a single mother of a baby who was only 11 months old at the time. Because she was detained she was unable to collect her child from the nursery.
The case probably won't finish for another year, but if they succeed, it will open the gates for many others to take similar action.
You admit yourself that the police willingly and purposefully took away their RIGHT to peaceful demonstration. Most of the people who were held in OC did not break any laws for the entirity of the 7 hours they were held. They were not told why they were detained and there is NO law that says they couild have been detained like that.
I respect the police for the fact that they do a difficult and neccersary job. I support the police fully, but only when they are chasing/catching/detaining criminals. When they break several laws in order to detain innocent people I have no respect at all for them. They acted a lot worse than the majoirty of the protestors, they provoked violence, even if it was largely unknown to them (for I will accept that they may be too stupid to realise that when people are treated like that they get annoyed), they endangered lives and they took away basic human rights.
Whoever does that will never gain any respect from me, simply because the do not deserve it. I strongly hope that the right people win the case and in my honest opinion, and in the honest opinion of the laws of this country, the detainees should win.
Yeah I see your point <IMG SRC="smile.gif" border="0" ALT="icon">.
So the answer is..........noboff Stealgate and his ilk? <IMG SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0" ALT="icon">
Stealgate, you still didn't respond to my earlier question:
I agree that the people caught up in the mess by accident should win the legal action, but noone else.
I think freedom of speech can be taken so far. When people repeatedly abuse freedom of speech, by using it as an excuse to cause violence, to promote hatred or anything similar, then I'm afraid those people have ruined it for everybody else. They cannot accept that they have the right to protest peacefully, instead they are hell bent on causing trouble.
Yes, they are the minority. But thanks to that minority the majority are unable to voice their opinions effectively. Do you not agree?
I think the police should carry on with what they are doing, and should only stop when they have the assurances of the protestors that there will be no more violence from "protestors" like the Wombles.
In comparison, a few months ago there was an anti-capitalist, studenty march at my uni. The police had the assurances of the union that there would be no violence. In response the police sent about 10 officers to march with the protestors. True to the union's word there was no violence. Despite there being about 1500 protestors.
Now, I'm sure these are the same people who goto London every year, or go on similar marches around the country.
Why can't they leave the criminal element at home?
By the way the latest reports on todays Mayday action are here.
The wombles led a peaceful protest today, and they would insist that it is the police who starts the violence. I would, in most cases (the wombles are slightly dodgier) agree that the police provock a lot of violence. That is from my own personal experience of having been at a protest in which, imHo, the police provoked most of the violence.
I do NOT agree that because of a small minority bent on violence, the rest should not be able to protest freely.
There is a small minority of the population of London bent on commiting crime, but it would be ridiculus to treat everyone like a criminal.
And in response to your last question, they DO leave the crime element at home. According to police estimates (which ar likely to be bias, lets face it) there were at most 700 intent on causing violence today, only a tenth of the entire body of the protestors. As I have said time and time again, most of the protestors are innocent people who are merely using their right to demonstrate peacefully. That right should only be taken away when they cease to do so, not when someone else does.
Right, and they needed bottles, bricks and molotov cocktails to do this did they?
The police only "baton charge" if they are being attacked, idiot.
And how exactly does a "womble" expect to get past a heavily armoured riot officer in a padded suit without using violence?
The average police officer is a lot tougher than a civilian, the fact that they spend years training and are a lot fitter than you and I means you can't simply push them out the way. Especially if they have shields.
And in the footage I've seen of the Wombles, they try their push and shove tactic, realise it won't work so they chuck stuff instead. Hmmmmm, non-violent eh?
1984 Miners strike, Orgreave.
that was 18 years ago, hardly relevant now is it?
Perhaps not.
But I wouldn't be surprised if something similar happenned now.
18 years ago the police didn't have a regulating body, effectively they didn't answer to anyone. Very little in the way of investigations took place, and the police federation was one of the most powerful unions in the country, and was easily able to sway government policy.
However since then the police are controlled by the PCA and other organisations.
If an event like the 84 miner's strike happeed again, a lot of officers would find themselves out of work.