Everything is somebody else's fault

[Macca]

In the US, we have what is called, “Winning the Ghetto Lottery”, anyone who claims Police Brutality usually settles out of court for big money! Whether the police are guilty or not, just to prevent riots and public destruction.

The man’s name slips my mind, but this man robbed a convenience store, a cop tried to arrest him, they struggle, he tries to take the officer’s gun, the officer gets control of the gun and shoots him dead. But the news interviewed eye witnesses, who were later found they weren’t there at all, who claimed he had his hands in the air and the cop just shot him for no reason! There was a huge riot! Looting stores, burning cars, assaulting people. Much later Body cam footage revealed the truth. The officer had to move to another state! And the police settled out of court, gave his parents $35 million dollars! Talk about setting a bad precedent! Since then, everybody and their brother sues the police for brutality. And the media is complicit in stirring up this trouble for law enforcement.

Russell

All the cops round here have body cameras now and they're rolling it out around the country. They make a TV show out of the footage.

[Gaz]

Yeah, anyone who thinks Robert Maxwell was a Bad Person should take a long hard look in The Mirror

Very good lol

[alphaGT]

All the cops round here have body cameras now and they're rolling it out around the country. They make a TV show out of the footage.

Oh, we’ve got the body cams too! But for some reason the cops never release the footage until after the riots die down.

A very peculiar one, cops stopped a car on an overpass, and a man from the back seat goes over the rail, falls to his death! His sister was on the news, crying and screaming about how the cops threw her brother over the railing! They grabbed him by the seat of his pants and threw him! Two weeks later, the body cam footage showed him opening the back door, and leaping over the railing! I guess he didn’t think it was so far down? He wasn’t even in trouble, and he wasn’t in possession of anything, he had no reason to run!

But that’s how it is these days, resist the police at all cost. Have the police ever just given up and let someone go? As Eddie Murphy said, “if the cops have to chase you down, they’re bringing an ass whipping!”.

Russell

[Pigmy Pony]

Although cops wearing body cams will be mostly a good idea, I think it may also contribute to the lack of respect for the police which is prevalent these days. They can no longer give the scrotes a slap as the cams are recording everything. And the scumbags know it.

This lack of respect extends to teachers and well, pretty much everybody, Since the laws changed to say you can no longer pick up a delinquent yoof by his ears before launching him across the room, there really aren't any deterrents in place.

[walpurgis]

Yep. Gone are the days when the rozzers could give you a clumping for being lippy. These days all they can do is insult you by calling you 'Fellah' instead of addressing you as Sir!

[struth]

Its a difficult job, often made harder by their own bad apples. It was much simpler in old days, although probably the same issues occured, just were not publicised.

[Macca]

My uncle was a copper. First in the military police, then a woodentop, then a detective. His beat used to be Toxteth, Liverpool 8 where he was known to the locals as 'Noddy' due to his habit of headbutting anyone who gave him lip. No warning, just butt them.

His view was that back then they knew who all the scrotes were and it was all about keeping them off the streets by fair means or foul, even if that meant extracting a confession by force.

It didn't matter whether they were guilty of that particular crime or not, they would still be guilty of something else, possibly something the police didn't even know about. So he figured it was fair enough.

He thought the Police And Criminal Evidence act was the 'Worst thing that ever happened to policing in this country' as it put a stop to all that carry-on. I've mixed feelings about that even now but no question he was a highly experienced police officer so you couldn't really take his opinion lightly. And according to old people crime was much less widespread back then.

[alphaGT]

My uncle was a copper. First in the military police, then a woodentop, then a detective. His beat used to be Toxteth, Liverpool 8 where he was known to the locals as 'Noddy' due to his habit of headbutting anyone who gave him lip. No warning, just butt them.

His view was that back then they knew who all the scrotes were and it was all about keeping them off the streets by fair means or foul, even if that meant extracting a confession by force.

It didn't matter whether they were guilty of that particular crime or not, they would still be guilty of something else, possibly something the police didn't even know about. So he figured it was fair enough.

He thought the Police And Criminal Evidence act was the 'Worst thing that ever happened to policing in this country' as it put a stop to all that carry-on. I've mixed feelings about that even now but no question he was a highly experienced police officer so you couldn't really take his opinion lightly. And according to old people crime was much less widespread back then.

That’s how I remember it when I was young. Your best bet was to avoid the law as best you could! Because any interaction was bound to end badly.

Back then it was known that if the cops yelled “Feeeze”, and you ran, they’d shoot you! And no one would say a bad thing about it. If a cop took a dislike to you, he may plant evidence on you! I young man I knew was passed out from drinking too much, in the back of a friend’s van. When he awoke in lockup, both his eyes were swollen shut, a few chipped teeth, and broken ribs, apparently the police were unable to wake him? The judge didn’t bat an eye, fined him $50.

Those days are gone! A case I saw on the news that concerned me, a suspect, who had already shot one person in a car jacking, was running away from police with pistol in hand. The officer shot him in the back, and they tried the officer for murder! What about public safety? What’s to say he wouldn’t have shot someone else around the next corner? I just don’t get it. I forget the outcome, but the officer should have never had to deal with it. Too much politics in police work these days, I wouldn’t be a police officer today for any money.

Russell

[tapid]

My uncle was a copper. First in the military police, then a woodentop, then a detective. His beat used to be Toxteth, Liverpool 8 where he was known to the locals as 'Noddy' due to his habit of headbutting anyone who gave him lip. No warning, just butt them.

His view was that back then they knew who all the scrotes were and it was all about keeping them off the streets by fair means or foul, even if that meant extracting a confession by force.

It didn't matter whether they were guilty of that particular crime or not, they would still be guilty of something else, possibly something the police didn't even know about. So he figured it was fair enough.

He thought the Police And Criminal Evidence act was the 'Worst thing that ever happened to policing in this country' as it put a stop to all that carry-on. I've mixed feelings about that even now but no question he was a highly experienced police officer so you couldn't really take his opinion lightly. And according to old people crime was much less widespread back then.

. Love it !. As Jack Reagan once famously said in the Sweeney.. He s Carter, I m Reagan AND YOUR NICKED. No reading the human right s act nonsense with Jack

[Pigmy Pony]

My uncle was a copper. First in the military police, then a woodentop, then a detective. His beat used to be Toxteth, Liverpool 8 where he was known to the locals as 'Noddy' due to his habit of headbutting anyone who gave him lip. No warning, just butt them.

His view was that back then they knew who all the scrotes were and it was all about keeping them off the streets by fair means or foul, even if that meant extracting a confession by force.

It didn't matter whether they were guilty of that particular crime or not, they would still be guilty of something else, possibly something the police didn't even know about. So he figured it was fair enough.

He thought the Police And Criminal Evidence act was the 'Worst thing that ever happened to policing in this country' as it put a stop to all that carry-on. I've mixed feelings about that even now but no question he was a highly experienced police officer so you couldn't really take his opinion lightly. And according to old people crime was much less widespread back then.

Regarding that last sentence, a couple of points:

1. Back then, most of us had nothing worth nicking, and

2. despite some disagreement last time I suggested this, I do believe that most of our street crime is drug-related on some level. The people involved are way more afraid of the guys they're working for than anything the police and courts can do to them. Proper support for people with drug problems, funded through the sale of said drugs through licensed outlets has got to be worth a try, as nothing else is working