Rioting in London?

[Crazedwraith]

Edit: This is not going to help any.

On the on hand maybe a lot of the rioter are people who probably want to go to or watch the games on telly. So maybe them being on would calm things down and people would watch the games rather than looting... On the other hand if the police move officer to the games, or don't police the games and things go worng there. They will catch utter hell.

Oh well heavy rain forecast tonight perhaps that will douse people's appetite for destruction.

[madd0ct0r]

Oh well heavy rain forecast tonight perhaps that will douse people's appetite for destruction.

that's probably the best thing that could happen.

good article turned up on the gaurdian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... protect-us

If they are making a political statement, it is that politics does not matter.

Now what small glimmers of optimism there are come from pockets of communal action, like the collective clean-ups that started in London . Democratic institutions themselves are seen as weak or broken.

The irony of all this is that outside Britain, Europe and the US, the great story of 2011 has been the Arab spring, as the people of Syria, Yemen and beyond have taken to the streets. It seems that just as those nations demand the tools of democracy, we are finding them rusting and blunt in our hands.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Only now is David Cameron saying they're going to be using water cannons and plastic bullets if required, yet the chief constable is reluctant to deploy them, his reasoning being that it's only appropriate with large fixed rounds to "buy distance", and only use plastic bullets if they face live firearms

[Ryan Thunder]

Nonsense. There are plenty of reasons why you shouldn´t riot. The government threatening to use excessive force is not one of them.

I'd think the government threatening to use excessive force would be a very good reason not to riot, but what does that have to do with what I was talking about?

Oh, I see. I guess 'excessive' is a subjective term.

But more seriously, if the police can't contain things, how is it moral not to deploy the military? Furthermore, why would you hold it against the government for doing so instead of the rioters who brought about this mess in the first place (you can talk about them being 'symptoms of deeper underlying issues' or whatever all you want, but they're still the ones lighting shops on fire and thus are the more immediate concern, we can address underlying causes and assign blame for them later.)

[mr friendly guy]

For some reason youtube recommended my Russian news (English edition), and its interesting to see their take on the riots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDNDrTWr ... ure=relmfu
This is a leftist look.
Basically can be summed up as a) blame the banks
b) police brutality, not just with the shooting death but prior to that, particularly against ethnic minorities (Brits can give a better idea)
c) "IMF type riot" (ie welfare cuts, unemployment etc causing what we see in third world countries in response to the IMF).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x7W-K0eMw0

Now from a conservative outlook.
a) Calls to recall British troops to deal with the riots. I have to wonder about something called logistics, ie how long it takes those troops to get from the other end of the world back to the UK.
b) its these people's fault they don't get jobs - ie the jobs are taken up by harder working Eastern europeans, while the locals aren't interested.
c) PC is debilitating the police

[Zaune]

Only now is David Cameron saying they're going to be using water cannons and plastic bullets if required, yet the chief constable is reluctant to deploy them, his reasoning being that it's only appropriate with large fixed rounds to "buy distance", and only use plastic bullets if they face live firearms

That's the most sensible comment I've heard from a senior cop since the start of this mess. Baton rounds are about the most dangerous weapon that you can describe as less-lethal with a straight face, and the last few days will be as nothing compared to the shitstorm that'll descend as soon as the police or the army actually kill a rioter.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Only now is David Cameron saying they're going to be using water cannons and plastic bullets if required, yet the chief constable is reluctant to deploy them, his reasoning being that it's only appropriate with large fixed crowds to "buy distance", and only use plastic bullets if they face live firearms

That's the most sensible comment I've heard from a senior cop since the start of this mess. Baton rounds are about the most dangerous weapon that you can describe as less-lethal with a straight face, and the last few days will be as nothing compared to the shitstorm that'll descend as soon as the police or the army actually kill a rioter.

Damn, I meant to say large fixed crowds, not round, I largely agree about baton rounds, though I still say that water cannons should be made available immediately- within 24 hours is a day too late given how quickly this is unfolding. As I recall, the last time someone died over here in a riot or demonstration was when some guy died after being pushed to the ground by an officer.

If it gets to the point where more people die, they'll have to bring in stronger measures- they're already deploying armoured cars as things stand.

[Zaune]

Correction: Ian Tomlinson was walloped over the head with a riot baton from behind, then pushed to the ground.

And on this one and only issue, I'm going to suggest you cut Mr Cameron a little slack; we don't actually own any water cannon vehicles except for the half-dozen or so in Northern Ireland, which are likely to be needed where they are. They've probably had to be purchased or leased from overseas, so we're lucky to have them even this fast.

[Broomstick]

That's the most sensible comment I've heard from a senior cop since the start of this mess. Baton rounds are about the most dangerous weapon that you can describe as less-lethal with a straight face, and the last few days will be as nothing compared to the shitstorm that'll descend as soon as the police or the army actually kill a rioter.

The shitstorm you could get in response to a firestorm if some of those arson fires really get out of control would make people ignore a few dead rioters. There have been reports of firefighters being attacked - that is a very troubling sign.

London does not need another Great Fire. It's not just a matter of keeping trainers and iPods from being stolen, there really is a larger public safety issue lurking in the background.

There is a point at which you need to declare martial law and send in the army. It's easy for me, sitting an ocean and a half a continent away, to say the UK isn't at that point but really, it's the people over there who have to make that call.

[ComradeClaus]

Edit: This is not going to help any.

On the on hand maybe a lot of the rioter are people who probably want to go to or watch the games on telly. So maybe them being on would calm things down and people would watch the games rather than looting... On the other hand if the police move officer to the games, or don't police the games and things go worng there. They will catch utter hell.

Oh well heavy rain forecast tonight perhaps that will douse people's appetite for destruction.

It could get worse. I don't think the IOC will look fondly on thids come 2012, they better have the runner up ready just in case.

Seriously, how the Hell did London get 2012 but Munich not get 2018? I doubt the UK can even afford to host it. Though I'm sure Merkel will loan them a couple billion extra euros if necessary.

You can count on riots next year too.

And Vuvuzelas!

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Correction: Ian Tomlinson was walloped over the head with a riot baton from behind, then pushed to the ground.

Yeah, that was him, I couldn't remember his name- news reports say his legs were hit, not his head.

Death of Ian Tomlinson

And on this one and only issue, I'm going to suggest you cut Mr Cameron a little slack; we don't actually own any water cannon vehicles except for the half-dozen or so in Northern Ireland, which are likely to be needed where they are. They've probably had to be purchased or leased from overseas, so we're lucky to have them even this fast.

You're right, wiki says this with regard to water cannons:

In the case of the UK there are only 6 water cannons, all held by the Police Service of Northern Ireland, their use on the British mainland would require the authorisation of Parliament.

With reports of fire engines coming under attack, they may need to use them in the interim for riot control.

I've been saying all along that if the police cannot maintain order, then martial law is the only solution

[Ryan Thunder]

<snip>

That was maybe not the best response I could have given; allow me to try again.

I don't advocate deploying the military over nothing, but if the police can't contain the situation on their own then the government has to escalate. I realize that its not as simple as 'lol let's riot', but we need to have order before the underlying issues can be examined and addressed, in my opinion. That is why I do not necessarily consider the introduction of military troops as excessive. I would be happy to hear why you disagree, salm.

[Hillary]

Correction: Ian Tomlinson was walloped over the head with a riot baton from behind, then pushed to the ground.

No he was hit on the back of the legs.

I still say that water cannons should be made available immediately- within 24 hours is a day too late given how quickly this is unfolding.

What is the point of deploying water cannons when they are of no use in the current situation? They are only of any worth in dealing with fixed crowds - that's why they are not being used.

I don't advocate deploying the military over nothing, but if the police can't contain the situation on their own then the government has to escalate. I realize that its not as simple as 'lol let's riot', but we need to have order before the underlying issues can be examined and addressed, in my opinion. That is why I do not necessarily consider the introduction of military troops as excessive. I would be happy to hear why you disagree, salm.

I disagree on the basis that the military are simply not trained to deal with civilian situations such as this and there is nothing to suggest that the police will not be able to get this thing under control themselves. I would go further and say that the army would actually make things worse at this stage.

[Crown]

<insert disclaimer on how shocked I am about all this pointless violence here>

There's a part of me that has a smirk when I see all those Etonian educated fucks touring the damage site and scratching their arse and heads in befuddlement at what they're seeing. You can almost see behind their thin outer shells that passes for a shred of humanity they're thinking; "Why are they rioting? X-Factor is back on air, that usually sates them!"

[Ryan Thunder]

I disagree on the basis that the military are simply not trained to deal with civilian situations such as this and there is nothing to suggest that the police will not be able to get this thing under control themselves. I would go further and say that the army would actually make things worse at this stage.

I can agree with that. As I said, I advocate deploying the military if and only if things cannot be brought under control by the police. In that scenario, I don't see it as excessive. Since the police are getting a better handle on things, the military is not necessary.

[Skgoa]

I didn't want to go into this thread, because this is one of those topics that make people on this board collectively loose halve their IQ. But this article is pretty spot on, imho:

By Martin Fletcher, NBC News correspondent

LONDON -- As political and social protests grip the Middle East, are growing in Europe and a riot exploded in north London this weekend, here's a sad truth, expressed by a Londoner when asked by a television reporter: Is rioting the correct way to express your discontent?

"Yes," said the young man. "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you?"

The TV reporter from Britain's ITV had no response. So the young man pressed his advantage. "Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press. Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you."

Eavesdropping from among the onlookers, I looked around. A dozen TV crews and newspaper reporters interviewing the young men everywhere.

The truth is that discontent has been simmering among Britain's urban poor for years, and few have paid attention. Social activists say one out of two children in Tottenham live in poverty. It's one of the poorest areas of Britain. Britain's worst riots in decades took place here in 1985. A policeman was hacked to death. After these riots, the same young man pointed out, "They built us a swimming pool."
Poverty, joblessness cycle
Police and local leaders in Tottenham made real progress in improving community relations in the intervening years and that's true about all of Britain. The best way to prevent crime, the theory goes, is to improve the lot of the people, then they won't need to commit crimes. But caught in a poverty and joblessness cycle, young people in many British urban areas have little hope of a better life.

So when a local 29-year-old father, described by police as a gangster, was shot dead by an officer, the response came quickly.

Mark Duggan was killed Thursday. On Saturday night about 50 relatives and friends protested outside the Tottenham police station.

Local young men, almost all with their heads covered by hoods -- known here as "hoodies" -- took advantage to indulge themselves in a favorite sport: cursing the police. This quickly escalated into a night of hurling rocks, bottles (Jack Daniels, one young man told me -- "we broke into the liquor store, drank the Jack Daniels and threw the bottles at the cops"), burning two patrol cars, torching buildings, smashing shop windows and carting off hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of phones, cameras and clothes.

The looting and rioting had nothing at all to do with the killing of Mark Duggan. That was the spark. The bonfire had been prepared by years of neglect, fueled by the anger of young men with no stake in the system, angry at everybody and quick to exploit fury at the killing of a local man, even if he did allegedly fire at the police officer first.

So now the question people in Tottenham are asking is: Will the government pay attention to the social issues underlying the anger?

And a wider question is: Would anyone care at all if there had not been violence?

http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20 ... ondon-riot

There's a part of me that has a smirk when I see all those Etonian educated fucks touring the damage site and scratching their arse and heads in befuddlement at what they're seeing. You can almost see behind their thin outer shells that passes for a shred of humanity they're thinking; "Why are they rioting? X-Factor is back on air, that usually sates them!"

For me, the best single example for me was the indian store owner they showed on german tv: "why would people do this?"... Lady, underpriviliged people riot BECAUSE others don't know and don't care about them enough.


Thats also the only thing I am going to add to this ongoing law&order wankfest:
The "only solution" is to escalate? The deploy the fucking military? How calous - I hope thats the correct spelling - do you have to be to even think such, much less publicly admit it. The right fucking thing to do would be to give these people ANYTHING more productive to do. As long as Cameron is only giving speeches about how everyone will be punished, instead of going to these peole and listening to them, these kinds of troubles will happen again and again.

[Eternal_Freedom]

<insert disclaimer on how shocked I am about all this pointless violence here>

There's a part of me that has a smirk when I see all those Etonian educated fucks touring the damage site and scratching their arse and heads in befuddlement at what they're seeing. You can almost see behind their thin outer shells that passes for a shred of humanity they're thinking; "Why are they rioting? X-Factor is back on air, that usually sates them!"

Yeah, I noticed that as well.

On the upshot, people are joking about it now, including this little gem I heard this morning:

"I was stuck in the Tottenham riots, and I knew I had to hide somewhere where the rioting bastards would never find me, where they'd never go. So I ran straight for the JobCentre."

[Cecelia5578]

Thats also the only thing I am going to add to this ongoing law&order wankfest:
The "only solution" is to escalate?

Are you joking? I think you must have HPCA confused with SDN.

It seems from this American's perspective, that even calls for escalated police force have been met with stern disapproval from a lot of posters. I think there's been too much restraint, personally, but then I'm just a disinterested foreigner.

[Crown]

Yeah, I noticed that as well.

On the upshot, people are joking about it now, including this little gem I heard this morning:

"I was stuck in the Tottenham riots, and I knew I had to hide somewhere where the rioting bastards would never find me, where they'd never go. So I ran straight for the JobCentre."

"Tottenham have signed a new Italian forward, Robatelli. Spurs boss 'Arry has been quoted as saying; he is a 'twific' signing, a real smash and grab!"

My text inbox over floweth with these things!

[Captain Seafort]

I disagree on the basis that the military are simply not trained to deal with civilian situations such as this and there is nothing to suggest that the police will not be able to get this thing under control themselves. I would go further and say that the army would actually make things worse at this stage.

The army did riot control in NI for thirty years. They've got vast institutional experience of this sort of thing. In any event, while I'd be very surprised if things went downhill enough that military force was required to solve the problem, they might end up needing them simply for extra numbers if the problems keep spreading.

[Skgoa]

Thats also the only thing I am going to add to this ongoing law&order wankfest:
The "only solution" is to escalate?

Are you joking? I think you must have HPCA confused with SDN.

It seems from this American's perspective, that even calls for escalated police force have been met with stern disapproval from a lot of posters. I think there's been too much restraint, personally, but then I'm just a disinterested foreigner.

I haven't read all posts in this thread because I couldn't stand the internet tough guy bullshit, but you are the 4th on this page alone.

[Terralthra]

As this article says:

The politics of a burning building, a smashed-in shop or a young man shot by police may be obscured even to those who lit the rags or fired the gun, but the politics are there.

[Vendetta]

Only now is David Cameron saying they're going to be using water cannons and plastic bullets if required, yet the chief constable is reluctant to deploy them, his reasoning being that it's only appropriate with large fixed crowds to "buy distance", and only use plastic bullets if they face live firearms

That's the most sensible comment I've heard from a senior cop since the start of this mess. Baton rounds are about the most dangerous weapon that you can describe as less-lethal with a straight face, and the last few days will be as nothing compared to the shitstorm that'll descend as soon as the police or the army actually kill a rioter.

Damn, I meant to say large fixed crowds, not round, I largely agree about baton rounds, though I still say that water cannons should be made available immediately- within 24 hours is a day too late given how quickly this is unfolding. As I recall, the last time someone died over here in a riot or demonstration was when some guy died after being pushed to the ground by an officer.

If it gets to the point where more people die, they'll have to bring in stronger measures- they're already deploying armoured cars as things stand.

Water cannons won't do shit. They're large heavy vehicles that are slow and unweildy and not suitable to deploy in most of the areas hit by rioting because they simply can't get there in time to make a difference. If you have a densely packed crowd of people who you want to keep back from something (back far enough they can't throw petrol bombs at it), then water cannons and baton rounds are appropiate. But that's not what these riots are, these riots are quite mobile and they're mostly just looting shops.

[Lord Pounder]

I've been following the riots with great interest. I love the double standards of the British Police. When I lived in Belfast I have seen dozens of occasions when water cannon and plastic batton rounds were deployed for a few dozen people before the shit hit the fan, but apparently when worse riots happen on the main land there is agonising deliberation and wringing of hand before any decision can be made

[Captain Seafort]

I've been following the riots with great interest. I love the double standards of the British Police. When I lived in Belfast I have seen dozens of occasions when water cannon and plastic batton rounds were deployed for a few dozen people before the shit hit the fan, but apparently when worse riots happen on the main land there is agonising deliberation and wringing of hand before any decision can be made

I suspect it's a product of the institutional experience of the force in question. For the Met a riot is serious stuff. For the RUC it was less newsworthy than rain, so they probably developed an attitude of "oh, a riot, hose them down so we can get home on time".