Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I just don't buy that the police are in favour of a lot of the rights-compromising laws they have to enforce Maybe not. They are quite happy to do whatever they can get away with to avoid personal blame however - whether the actions come from the officer themselves, their superiors or political direction. At the end of the day the police themselves should refuse to do anything they wouldn't want to be identified doing......... of course they won't want to lose their job and pension so they won't do that, which means there is an absolute NEED for overview of the police (preferably by strong Government watch-dogs, but also by citizen groups too). If I were truly angry about the erosion of civil liberty I'd be focussing my anger at the law makers, not those entrusted with enforcing the law. It's both. No tyrant can rule without somebody prepared to wear the jackboot for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Too far? So if a group of people came up to you and for no reason and choked you into semi-unconsciousness, beat you a little for good measure, hog-tied you at the wrists, knees and ankles and then carried you off and kept you imprisoned for 4 days........ Is it fair to say your only reaction would be to say "By George I think you fellas went a tad too far!" and good naturedly leave it at that? :lol:s No. Not sure what that's got to do with the women encouraging people to disrupt police to such an extent arrest is possible....as they freely admit. Not so much Chris the Merciless as Chris the Hypocrite then. Please highlight the contradiction, keeping in mind I've consistently said I don't think anyone not resisting arrest should be subject to any physical harm. Aye in fairness you've only said people should be arrested without cause and then choked you into semi-unconsciousness, beaten a little for good measure, hog-tied at the wrists, knees and ankles and then carried off and kept you imprisoned without legal recourse for 4 days. And then not complain about it of course.. A fascist with a heart, you're one of a kinda Chris. I'll repeat..."keeping in mind I've consistently said I don't think anyone not resisting arrest should be subject to any physical harm." Fop will repeat.... you've only said people should be arrested without cause and then choked you into semi-unconsciousness, beaten a little for good measure, hog-tied at the wrists, knees and ankles and then carried off and kept you imprisoned without legal recourse for 4 days. And then not complain about it of course. Edited June 23, 2009 by Fop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 you've only said people should be arrested without cause Where? Obviously the perfect world scenario is that innocent people wouldn't be arrested. But they're always going to be. Are you seriously suggesting any police arresting an individual not later charged should be struck off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 It's both. No tyrant can rule without somebody prepared to hold a camera for them. FYP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. HF's only denying saying stuff he didn't say tbh. Shame Fop resorts to that as it diminishes otherwise salient points he makes and is in no way necessary for his argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. It might have worked in the 1st quarter, but this deep into injury time he's looking desperate. you've only said people should be arrested without cause Where? Obviously the perfect world scenario is that innocent people wouldn't be arrested. But they're always going to be. Are you seriously suggesting any police arresting an individual not later charged should be struck off? So are you now saying they shouldn't have been arrested? (and then choked you into semi-unconsciousness, beaten a little for good measure, hog-tied at the wrists, knees and ankles and then carried off and kept you imprisoned without legal recourse for 4 days) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. HF's only denying saying stuff he didn't say tbh. Shame Fop resorts to that as it diminishes otherwise salient points he makes and is in no way necessary for his argument. Dear Sir, Our records show that this matter is now being dealt with by Fop Farquar Foppstein. However the department will be happy to assist you in any further queries you may have. Good day, Parky Head of the Nicos arrainment. U.N. Somewhere in a Belgian bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). they just don't care. how many people pirate dvd's and music, how many people speed, take drugs, etc etc etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). they just don't care. how many people pirate dvd's and music, how many people speed, take drugs, etc etc etc Confusing legality with wrong-doing there tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. HF's only denying saying stuff he didn't say tbh. Shame Fop resorts to that as it diminishes otherwise salient points he makes and is in no way necessary for his argument. Dear Sir, Our records show that this matter is now being dealt with by Fop Farquar Foppstein. However the department will be happy to assist you in any further queries you may have. Good day, Parky Head of the Nicos arrainment. U.N. Somewhere in a Belgian bar. Page 5. The smoking gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). they just don't care. how many people pirate dvd's and music, how many people speed, take drugs, etc etc etc Confusing legality with wrong-doing there tbh. ANY SIMILARITY BETWEEN LAW AND JUSTICE IS PURELY COINCIDENTAL - but still that's no reason just to give up and become a complete Holtocracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). they just don't care. how many people pirate dvd's and music, how many people speed, take drugs, etc etc etc Confusing legality with wrong-doing there tbh. Stealing is both illegal and wrong, endagering life is both illegal and wrong and the last one is just fun and wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. It might have worked in the 1st quarter, but this deep into injury time he's looking desperate. you've only said people should be arrested without cause Where? Obviously the perfect world scenario is that innocent people wouldn't be arrested. But they're always going to be. Are you seriously suggesting any police arresting an individual not later charged should be struck off? So are you now saying they shouldn't have been arrested? (and then choked you into semi-unconsciousness, beaten a little for good measure, hog-tied at the wrists, knees and ankles and then carried off and kept you imprisoned without legal recourse for 4 days) I don't know. I'm not armed with all the facts. All I did was contextualise the picture you painted (of whiter than white global warming protesters attacked from behind while singing come-bye-yah during a peaceful process) with the facts I could find...that these women aim to get themselves arrested so they can complain about it and that the protest they were 'supporting' ended in criminal activity. Edited June 23, 2009 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). they just don't care. how many people pirate dvd's and music, how many people speed, take drugs, etc etc etc Confusing legality with wrong-doing there tbh. Stealing is both illegal and wrong, endagering life is both illegal and wrong and the last one is just fun and wrong. You'd probably find the majority don't do those things anyway, not that I'm convinced all are always 'wrong'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11080 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 You'd probably find the majority don't do those things anyway, not that I'm convinced all are always 'wrong'. arse off you bum lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nicos trying to get off on a technicality. It might have worked in the 1st quarter, but this deep into injury time he's looking desperate. you've only said people should be arrested without cause Where? Obviously the perfect world scenario is that innocent people wouldn't be arrested. But they're always going to be. Are you seriously suggesting any police arresting an individual not later charged should be struck off? So are you now saying they shouldn't have been arrested? (and then choked you into semi-unconsciousness, beaten a little for good measure, hog-tied at the wrists, knees and ankles and then carried off and kept you imprisoned without legal recourse for 4 days) I don't know. I'm not armed with all the facts. All I did was contextualise the picture you painted (of whiter than white global warming protesters attacked from behind while singing come-bye-yah during a peaceful process) with the facts I could find...that these women aim to get themselves arrested so they can complain about it and that the protest they were 'supporting' ended in criminal activity. You don't know if someone shouldn't be arrested for doing nothing wrong? Well that is progress for you at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I can't believe that in this governmental system, there isn't a policing oversight comittee. I wouldn't be surprised if it was this very committee who agreed to the preposterous photo-law thing. I twitch at the thought of a civilian oversight though. I don't think your average Joe knows enough to make legal decisions. I also think your average Joe will find it too difficult to see both sides of the arguments, he won't be able to comprehend the minutia nor the grand ideals. But to truly be an oversight by the people, you'd need the people there. Unfortunately the people generally aren't big thinkers. I agree that something needs to change. I don't think another committee is neccesarily the answer. Most people do know right from wrong - unfortunately this doesn't include most politicians (as expense clearly show) or Chief Police Officers (as ACPO/Omni-Corp repeatedly demonstrates). they just don't care. how many people pirate dvd's and music, how many people speed, take drugs, etc etc etc Confusing legality with wrong-doing there tbh. Stealing is both illegal and wrong, endagering life is both illegal and wrong and the last one is just fun and wrong. You'd probably find the majority don't do those things anyway, not that I'm convinced all are always 'wrong'. You'll probably find that the majority of police officers do the majority of those things too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 23, 2009 Author Share Posted June 23, 2009 There might be a case here for referring Nicos to the tucking committee on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 There might be a case here for referring Nicos to the tucking committee on this one. eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 There might be a case here for referring Nicos to the tucking committee on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 There might be a case here for referring Nicos to the tucking committee on this one. Tuck away with quotes please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 (edited) There might be a case here for referring Nicos to the tucking committee on this one. Tuck away with quotes please. A gentle and reasoned discussion (NSFW ) at your house? Edited June 24, 2009 by Fop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now