GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
and of course urban is a microcosm of the entire country or world which each group being equally and fairly represented isn't it...
oh wait no it's not the UN it's a bulletin board...
stephenson admits losing public trust
- Thread starter Pickman's model
- Start date
and of course urban is a microcosm of the entire country or world which each group being equally and fairly represented isn't it...
oh wait no it's not the UN it's a bulletin board...
now thats being silly, i was referring to the culture of these boards and the impact that culture has and will have on its members
the OP of the comment was talking about DB attitude here, i suspect he doesnt walk around in the community using the same language that he expresses himself with here
or do you walk around being sarcastic in every conversation you have in real life?
no? didnt think so
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
bless you're new here aren't you...
but you're right I'm far more sarky and sharp in real life...
however my sarcasm isn't reflective of some mindset which has been previously used to implement due process in law when given powers by the state nor does it inform the thinking process behind the actions I would take as it's generalised. when speaking about your former job and being still an advocate for your former job and displaying it it rather does.
So I'd pop you're logical fallacy back in it's sock draw if i were you ....
Voley
🐭
It's not a question of language, it's a question of attitude. He thinks people that disagree with him are cunts. It's not a good starting-point for a genuine exchange of views.
Stephenson's remarks, although not as extreme, also show a similar lack of empathy and understanding. This is something that the police will have to change, not the public, if they genuinely want people to engage with them.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
you do a better job could you?
go on then
awr bless it.
whatever makes you think that in order to have an opinion you must be able to supplant that system with a working version of your own in order to validate it.
I'd put that logical fallacy in the other sock draw if i were you.
Tho I'm beginning to think you might have to take the puppets out first...
regardless. with the propensity of posters in general, especially on this part of the boards, to reply to anyone who posts outside of the politic of the left wing core, with abusive language. is it any surprise that DB or others will post in the same manner a similar attitude?
if all police are to blame for the actions of a few, then all the members of this forum are to blame for an attitude to call people cunts
yes i am new, does that mean i have to STFU?
i dont necessarily, i do think if you dont like a system than you should take (legitimate) action to change it
i dont mean running riot through the streets of london and then complain when you run into a wall of police, but how about attending the police consultations that are clearly not attended?
your avoiding the use of the word cunt, but the attitude is similar
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
I reffer you to my original post why engage with a system which seeks to oppress you in order that it will have further motivation to oppress you.
It makes no attempt to meet the people at their level but insists the people meet it at it's level.
The public must meet the standards of the police not the police to meet the standards of the public.
This isn't engagement at all but simply a system to allow them to say there's ample opportunity for you to have your say but you don't.
the choice presented is death by hanging or firing squad, the argument you're putting forward is which is more humane rather than is it acceptable to put someone to death.
I'm not avoiding using it I'm pointing out the duplicitous nature of the poster you're defending and their beliefs and that you have the appearance of being a sock puppet for that poster...
try again caller...
your defeatist beliefs will allow the problem to persist
if your not willing to elicit change due to principle, the you will have to live with the status quo
so, whinge on, as you were
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
your defeatist beliefs will allow the problem to persist
if your not willing to elicit change due to principle, the you will have to live with the status quo
so, whinge on, as you were
A system which is redundant will cease to have function.
You're assumption is that there can be another replacement system, which is error. You don't remove a tyrant with another tyrant.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
are you really suggesting that we do not need a police force?
we might need a police force however at present we don't have one we have an unelected militia designed by those in power to disempower the rest of us and to protect the mechanics of those in power and their system.
Try looking up the history of the police and why they were set up...
no we have a police force who enforce the law and maintain public order
but they are humans and like any humans some of them are bad, the police are also subject to the law
are you suggesting we go back to electing parish constables?
might have worked a few hundred years ago but we didn't have a population of 62 million then
the police do not make the laws, our democratically elected representatives do that
if laws are made that you dont agree with, tough, as clearly they work for the majority (bearing in mind the need to protect the rights of the minority as long as they do not prevent the rights of the majority. before the doors of nazi allegations open)
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
idiot
Repeated again, for the terminally stupid.
The problem is not who's "side" they are on, but the definition of "the public". There is no single such entity (any more than there is any single "community"). Whilst we fail to understand that fact we will always end up with claims that "the police are not on our side".
Politics works on the majority basis (in theory) - i.e. the policies our society pursues are those supported by the majority of citizens.
Policing has tended to do the same ... but that has run into very obvious and justifiable concerns expressed by minority groups - to the effect that the police, on "the side of" the majority, victimise them.
This has been something that the police have struggled with for years and have still not got right ... but it is also something that has not been acknowledged as an issue by politicians and others (like you) who still talk in terms of the policing needing to be on their side, or on the side of some group they claim to represent ("hard working families", etc.).
The police simply cannot ever be on the side of everyone - it is not possible. In the context of protest, your demonstrator is the bankers thug. In the context of the use of streets, your freedom to party is your elderly neighbours anti-social behaviour, etc., etc.).
The police should therefore not be on anyone's "side". They should be entirely neutral and seek to enforce the law without fear of favour. They should provide a safe and stable society in which people are free to carry out any lawful activity in a way which does not unreasonably impinge on the freedoms of others not interested in that activity.
To enable them to do that everyone (especially members of minority groups) should engage in the policing debate to ensure that the police have a sound and accurate understanding of their point of view and the issues affecting them. If they do not, they cannot legitimately whinge that their views have not been considered.
They will be investigated (check), arrested (check), interviewed (check), have the case referred to the CPS (check), be charged and tried if there is sufficient evidence to justify that (check), a jury will decide their guilt (check) and, if they are convicted, they will be sentenced (check).
If, at any stage the answer is negative, they will be acquitted (check) and will be entitled to be treated as being entirely innocent (check ... except that you and others like you will not abide by that principle and will continue to allege that they are guilty, despite the decision of the criminal justice system ...).
So, er, yes. They do.
It is. If you listen to Azrael, Peter Hitchens and the middle-aged, middle-class, overwhelmingly white, CoE, physically able and heterosexual people who attend consultation meetings and write to their councillors, MPs and the Mail ...
I don't say that anyone who disagrees with me is a cunt. Here I am saying that anyone who whinges about the police not being on their side whilst not participating in consultative processes is a cunt. That is not the same.
You will never find a post on here where I have described someone as a cunt simply for disagreeing with me. For fuckwitted lines of argument, yes. For basing arguments on impossibilities (such as the police not being able to forsee the future), yes. For jumping to conclusions based on prejudices rather than evidence, yes. And for then denying, in the face of all the evidence, definitely. For stalking me from thread to thread, simply to troll, yes (yes, Pickman's Model, that means you ...).
But not simply for disagreeing with me with rational and reasoned argument. I have absolutely not problem with anyone holding any view as long as they can ratioanlly provide a reasoned argument in support of it, and if they are willing to accept that there may be other points of view too.
Before you claim otherwise, go and find an example ...
Hardly the case really, if society gets the police service it deserves ... as you amply portray.
If society were full of dickheads and morons like you, the average cop with a SATS stage 2 pass would be fucking overqualified ...
Actually I wouldn't bet on that ...
* Pops into Ladbrokes before reading further and has a cheeky £5 on the response being the usual mealy-mouthed "It's not my job to do better" type shite ... *
Back of the net!
Not only a cunt. A fucking predictable cunt!
(Bugger! Apparently it was 20:1 on ...
)But they don't, you see. They are perfectly respectful to me at all times because they thoroughly respect the fact that others may have views that they disagree with and that doesn't make them bad people ...
... or was that at the other U75 ...
(As well as being cunts, many of the likes of GarfieldLeChat are also hypocrites ... as you are no doubt beginning to work out ...
Isn't Care in the fucking Community great now they all have access to the interweb? ... )
Just to save you some pain and wasted posts ... they don't understand this either ... in Fuckwit World the police simply wander down the old House of Parliament and, lo and behold, they get exactly the law that they want and get rid of any that don't suit ...
thanks for supporting the point i have been making
cunt/idiot/twat/puppet....... basically all the same thing
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
Listen, prick. I am not interested in talking to you at all. I was ignoring you for a while but you then seemed to start being reasonable again and so, like a cunt, I started responding again.
What a fucking mistake.
Just fuck off and leave me alone, OK? I simply am not interested in you or your pomposity.
Similar threads
- Poll
