Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton Police Brutality -

layabout said:
OK, sorry, I forgot, you don't have the ability to digest what you've read and understand the logic behind it.

* Pats Gramsci on the head.

Your posting style is bullying.I understand the logic of an ex BNP member.You dont fool me.
 
newbie said:
It's a shame that people who are neither a parent of teenagers nor live in Brixton have seen fit to infest this thread. It actually matters to some of us.

I agree and a lot of them are right wing as well.Sufila posts up here every now and then.I though the post that she started this thread was an interesting personal experience of what its like living in Brixton.
 
layabout said:
You have 2 people stood in front of you. One is a police officer, as you admit, a fucking professional, the other is a CHILD. Sorry but unless the child has WITNESSES you go with the word of the police officer.

No one is saying the child can't be right and the copper can't be wrong, but in the absence of independent witnesses, you have to go with the police officer.

Fuck me, you're being totally irrational. You are saying that in society, police officers are less trustworthy than children.
From my experience of the police, I'd say they're liars and bullies. I'd believe my teenage sister over a copper any day. In fact I'd be much more inclined to give any child I know the benefit of the doubt over a copper.
 
tarannau said:
Let's not have this ridiculous fantasy that all police are somehow worthy of respect now, despite the distasteful and discriminatory actions of many coppers not that long ago.

Where have I stated that all police are worthy of respect.
I would however comment after seeing a program about the tube station in Brixton that if I were a police officer having to put up with the shit that comes out of every other persons gob, I would run out of fixed penalty notices very quickly.
If I were a member of staff at the station it would take about five minutes before I started throwing mouthy people on the live rail.
 
TeeJay said:
Surely that explains why individual policemen can be tempted to abuse their powers?

Maybe it does. But hey, some people are absolutly mystified about the obvious results when a civilian does everything under the sun to tempt a copper in the direction of abusing his/her powers.
 
Gramsci said:
Your posting style is bullying.I understand the logic of an ex BNP member.You dont fool me.

You're trying to bully me into shutting up by bringing up my BNP past where it's not relevant in the slightest.

If you think you understand the logic of ex BNP members, then I must say, you are excelling yourself at stereotyping people. First the police, UKIP members, now BNP members. All the fucking signs of a bigot if you ask me.
 
layabout said:
You're trying to bully me into shutting up by bringing up my BNP past where it's not relevant in the slightest.

If you think you understand the logic of ex BNP members, then I must say, you are excelling yourself at stereotyping people. First the police, UKIP members, now BNP members. All the fucking signs of a bigot if you ask me.

You're think you're being bullied?

You softy tossrag.
 
tobyjug said:
Where have I stated that all police are worthy of respect.
I would however comment after seeing a program about the tube station in Brixton that if I were a police officer having to put up with the shit that comes out of every other persons gob, I would run out of fixed penalty notices very quickly.
If I were a member of staff at the station it would take about five minutes before I started throwing mouthy people on the live rail.

OOoohhh, you saw a programme about Brixton tube! I guess that makes you an expert now huh?
 
reubeness said:
The only time my 17 year old gets 'mouthy' is when he is on the other end of injustice.
He's a great person with many talents, does what he is told, is polite, respectful. Goes to college, works with children at weekends.
He got issued some kind of notice by the police for sitting on some steps outside his friend's flat at 10pm. Not rowdy just talking and rapping on the steps.
Anyway, the point is he isn't in pubs drinking alcohol, taking drugs, robbing or killing people, he is just living his life
Don't we all want to challenge unjust treatment?
The other day he was going to a recruitment agency in the west end, unsure of the street he needed he tried to ask a passer-by for directions, he chose a guy in a suit with a briefcase, quite young - the guy put his hand out and said 'no' before my son could even get the words "Excuse me do you know where ..... is"
Youths are being demonised and events such as these make it very difficult for them to stay positive, calm and quiet.

Gwyn gwel y fran ei chiw
 
Mrs Magpie said:
Gissa translation ern, please.

Its a popular Welsh proverb, it means that the mother will always see her son in a very good light, and either deny/plead ignorance to any japes he gets up to.

Literal translation - the crow always sees her chick as white.
 
Thanks. The only Russian proverb I can think of that is even vaguely relevant to this thread is 'not everyone who wears a cowl is a monk.'
 
layabout said:
You have 2 people stood in front of you. One is a police officer, as you admit, a fucking professional, the other is a CHILD. Sorry but unless the child has WITNESSES you go with the word of the police officer.

No one is saying the child can't be right and the copper can't be wrong, but in the absence of independent witnesses, you have to go with the police officer.
The logical conclusion of your argument is that people in authority should be able to get away with any injustice or abuse of that authority so long as there are no witnesses.

Gereally, such abuses of authority do tend to occur when there are no witnesses, for obvious reasons.
 
thank you Ernestolynch for that little pearl of wisdom

Except you don't know me, or my children, or what it's like to be 17 in society today. Or how being black, wearing a hood, riding a bike, asking directions can bring negative attitudes flooding in to your 'normal' existence.

How, as a parent, it is difficult to keep your children on a positive path when injustice meets their efforts to keep on the right side of the law.
Explaining to this 17 year old (who has never been in any trouble) why children (young men) who look like him MIGHT be perceived as troublemakers/targeted by the police while walking after dark.

So..... "because the society is heading this way son, and because the media wants to demonise young men like you son, you have to be polite to all the haters out there and anyone in authority even if they are wrong or physically abusing or harrassing you, because if you don't ........"

Can't believe people naturally think that parents don't look at both sides of a thing, or assume their children are angels.
 
poster342002 said:
The logical conclusion of your argument is that people in authority should be able to get away with any injustice or abuse of that authority so long as there are no witnesses.

Gereally, such abuses of authority do tend to occur when there are no witnesses, for obvious reasons.

Yes, but without any contrary evidence we have to believe the person who has authority.

Considering the role the police play, they have to be able to protect themselves from all abuse, including verbal abuse.
 
layabout said:
without any contrary evidence we have to believe the person who has authority.
WHY?! Can you not see how such a doctrine is a recipe for routine abuse of power - to which the victim will have no redress whatsoever?

To (off-topically) illustrate: in workplaces up and down the country, people are being driven out of work into nervous breakdowns caused by bullying bosses - who bully in private and with no witnesses present. In almost each and every case, the employee has no redress because the HR dept, the union and just about eveybody involved takes the side of the person in authority - nomatter what. Do you think this is right?
 
layabout said:
Yes, but without any contrary evidence we have to believe the person who has authority.
This is such a fucked up argument! Why should someone in authority automatically be trusted? There's a certain type of person that seeks power over others, and they're not the type of person I'd trust.
 
layabout said:
Yes, but without any contrary evidence we have to believe the person who has authority.

Why? You're very naive if you think like this. I've been lied about in court by the cops, several times.
 
Mrs Magpie said:
Thanks. The only Russian proverb I can think of that is even vaguely relevant to this thread is 'not everyone who wears a cowl is a monk.'
my favorite is all coppers are bastards
 
Thora said:
This is such a fucked up argument! Why should someone in authority automatically be trusted? There's a certain type of person that seeks power over others, and they're not the type of person I'd trust.

a messageboard monitor?
 
Back
Top Bottom