wiggyrichard Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Where does he say that? :? I asked him what he was suggesting. It was a question hence the question mark. Well im not one of the Eggheads, but im going to have a stab at it... Im guessing he was implying that... all we need know is somebody to 'go down' with an underlying health issue and we'll have another G8 inquest dragging on for months and costing millions. Im struggling to say the arguement you are trying to provoke Snowy? The cops are using a little bit of force, Neil just doesnt want someone to fall over with an underlying heart complaint and cause an inquest costing millions of tax payers money because the gypos simply wouldnt leave when asked to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 The gypos have left though, haven't they? I was under the impression that most/all of the trouble is being caused by the police clashing with idiot protestors who are seemingly all vying for the upper-class twit of the year award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 I knew that post would be too much to resist for VT's own "devil's advocate" Is it too difficult to answer a question that your post provoked? The resident know that they will be removed by force if they don't leave, therefore if they stay and the police are forced to get physical with them then they have only themselves to blame if they get hurt. Of course there are limits, if a policeman for example was seen repeatedly beating someone over and over then I'd consider that excessive and worthy of investigation. If, in the heat of battle someone gets pushed to the ground, then keels over with a heart attack thats just bad luck and would have been avoided if they weren't breaking the law in the first place or leaving of their own accord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Im struggling to say the arguement you are trying to provoke Snowy? I'm not 'trying to provoke an arguement', wiggyrichard. I asked a question because of something he posted. That may well 'provoke' a discussion or debate but that's kind of how threads work. Nice try at trying to suggest something about an 'arguement'. If you want one, I suggest the next room. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 So VT is intolerant to Queen , Travellers and Chinese ..anyone else to go on the list ? AHem..... ME! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 19, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted October 19, 2011 So VT is intolerant to Queen , Travellers and Chinese ..anyone else to go on the list ? AHem..... ME!ME hasn't posted on here for ages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 The resident know that they will be removed by force if they don't leave, therefore if they stay and the police are forced to get physical with them then they have only themselves to blame if they get hurt. Of course there are limits, if a policeman for example was seen repeatedly beating someone over and over then I'd consider that excessive and worthy of investigation. If, in the heat of battle someone gets pushed to the ground then keels over with a heart attack thats just bad luck and would have been avoided if they weren't breaking the law in the first place or leaving of their own accord. If your 'heat of the battle' scenario happened, then those involved (on all sides) ought to be held to account for their actions rather than some sort of presumption that it's all bad luck and their own fault, necessarily, for breaking the law. If, indeed, it is just bad luck then okay; if it requires dodgy Freddie to say that they have an underlying health condition* then it may not be. The way of presumption as suggested above is a very, very dangerous path - one which people are quite willing to hare down until it becomes them, someone they know or someone with whom they may have sympathy (or with whom they may empathize) incurring the bad luck. *It may be the case that someone else agreed with dodgy Freddie, I'm not sure. Edited for a bit of clarity (I hope). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b6bloke Posted October 19, 2011 Author Share Posted October 19, 2011 well its been really boring as the toffy nose rebels have not put up any resistance, in fact I saw more of a protest for the change of Opal Fruites to Starburst! As for the gay mentions earlier, I thought this had been covered in many a VT post where it was pretty much pointed out that that the gay thing only counts if you look them in the eye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 So VT is intolerant to Queen , Travellers and Chinese ..anyone else to go on the list ? AHem..... ME! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 in fact I saw more of a protest for the change of Opal Fruites to Starburst! I took a man's life that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 The resident know that they will be removed by force if they don't leave, therefore if they stay and the police are forced to get physical with them then they have only themselves to blame if they get hurt. Of course there are limits, if a policeman for example was seen repeatedly beating someone over and over then I'd consider that excessive and worthy of investigation. If, in the heat of battle someone gets pushed to the ground then keels over with a heart attack thats just bad luck and would have been avoided if they weren't breaking the law in the first place or leaving of their own accord. If your 'heat of the battle' scenario happened, then those involved (on all sides) ought to be held to account for their actions rather than some sort of presumption that it's all bad luck and their own fault, necessarily, for breaking the law. If, indeed, it is just bad luck then okay; if it requires dodgy Freddie to say that they have an underlying health condition* then it may not be. That way lies a very, very dangerous path - one which people are quite willing to hare down until it becomes them, someone they know or someone with whom they may have sympathy (or with whom they may empathize) incurring the bad luck. *It may be the case that someone else agreed with dodgy Freddie, I'm not sure. And here we are back to the namby pamby petal dick policing policy! Police cant use force when required 'just in case'. What, are they supposed to give everyone a medical before moving them on? Shit happens and those idiots should'nt be there in the first place. If you dont want trouble and a bit of pushing and shoving, stay the **** away and mind your own business! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 in fact I saw more of a protest for the change of Opal Fruites to Starburst! I took a man's life that day. What about when they got rid of pacers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b6bloke Posted October 19, 2011 Author Share Posted October 19, 2011 its like the people moaning about the tasers being used. I laughed my ass off as the BBC are showing a clip of a protester smashing a peice of 4x4 into the police behind the sheild and you just see a taser pop out and bam! he/she got what they asked for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 well its been really boring as the toffy nose rebels have not put up any resistance, in fact I saw more of a protest for the change of Opal Fruites to Starburst! As for the gay mentions earlier, I thought this had been covered in many a VT post where it was pretty much pointed out that that the gay thing only counts if you look them in the eye Or push back...im pretty sure that as long as the balls dont touch it's ok too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 The resident know that they will be removed by force if they don't leave, therefore if they stay and the police are forced to get physical with them then they have only themselves to blame if they get hurt. Of course there are limits, if a policeman for example was seen repeatedly beating someone over and over then I'd consider that excessive and worthy of investigation. If, in the heat of battle someone gets pushed to the ground then keels over with a heart attack thats just bad luck and would have been avoided if they weren't breaking the law in the first place or leaving of their own accord. If your 'heat of the battle' scenario happened, then those involved (on all sides) ought to be held to account for their actions rather than some sort of presumption that it's all bad luck and their own fault, necessarily, for breaking the law. If, indeed, it is just bad luck then okay; if it requires dodgy Freddie to say that they have an underlying health condition* then it may not be. That way lies a very, very dangerous path - one which people are quite willing to hare down until it becomes them, someone they know or someone with whom they may have sympathy (or with whom they may empathize) incurring the bad luck. *It may be the case that someone else agreed with dodgy Freddie, I'm not sure. And here we are back to the namby pamby petal dick policing policy! Police cant use force when required 'just in case'. What, are they supposed to give everyone a medical before moving them on? Shit happens and those idiots should'nt be there in the first place. If you dont want trouble and a bit of pushing and shoving, stay the **** away and mind your own business! THIS. The bloke at the G8 was a seprate issue because he wasn't involved. But.... If you DO have an underlying health condition and put yourself in a situation where a Police Officer feels you are becoming a risk to yourself or others and *clearings in the woods you with a baton/tazes you/gives you a bit of a kicking (*delete as appropriate) YOU are responsible for the shit state you end up in for putting yourself in that position. It is not for a riot officer to perform a medical before putting you on your arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b6bloke Posted October 19, 2011 Author Share Posted October 19, 2011 in fact I saw more of a protest for the change of Opal Fruites to Starburst! I took a man's life that day. What about when they got rid of pacers? I actually think that wasnt as bad as the loss of Spangles and the Cabana bar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Marathon to Snickers was the one that invoked my rage within. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 And here we are back to the namby pamby petal dick policing policy! No, we aren't. Police cant use force when required 'just in case'. In a variation on a phrase that should ring a bell, where do I say that? What, are they supposed to give everyone a medical before moving them on? No. They should be held to account for the actions which they take (as should we all) and those who order them to do something should be held responsible for the directions they give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 The resident know that they will be removed by force if they don't leave, therefore if they stay and the police are forced to get physical with them then they have only themselves to blame if they get hurt. Of course there are limits, if a policeman for example was seen repeatedly beating someone over and over then I'd consider that excessive and worthy of investigation. If, in the heat of battle someone gets pushed to the ground then keels over with a heart attack thats just bad luck and would have been avoided if they weren't breaking the law in the first place or leaving of their own accord. If your 'heat of the battle' scenario happened, then those involved (on all sides) ought to be held to account for their actions rather than some sort of presumption that it's all bad luck and their own fault, necessarily, for breaking the law. If, indeed, it is just bad luck then okay; if it requires dodgy Freddie to say that they have an underlying health condition* then it may not be. That way lies a very, very dangerous path - one which people are quite willing to hare down until it becomes them, someone they know or someone with whom they may have sympathy (or with whom they may empathize) incurring the bad luck. *It may be the case that someone else agreed with dodgy Freddie, I'm not sure. And here we are back to the namby pamby petal dick policing policy! Police cant use force when required 'just in case'. What, are they supposed to give everyone a medical before moving them on? Shit happens and those idiots should'nt be there in the first place. If you dont want trouble and a bit of pushing and shoving, stay the **** away and mind your own business! THIS. The bloke at the G8 was a seprate issue because he wasn't involved. But.... If you DO have an underlying health condition and put yourself in a situation where a Police Officer feels you are becoming a risk to yourself or others and *clearings in the woods you with a baton/tazes you/gives you a bit of a kicking (*delete as appropriate) YOU are responsible for the shit state you end up in for putting yourself in that position. It is not for a riot officer to perform a medical before putting you on your arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted October 19, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted October 19, 2011 Kill them all. Then kill all the police for unlawfully killing all the travellers. Everyone wins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts