Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 8:37 am  

I think most people have little if any sympathy for the victim, most can understand the direct family's disappointment at the verdict, and then I think thats where the understanding starts to peter away - who were the chanting mob outside the courtroom for instance, who are the ones who are going on the "vigil" this weekend - more importantly did any of the 2011 rioters actually know the victim or ever hear of his name before they went out to rob a shop ? Facts abound of course, according to this article http://www.businessinsider.com/uk-firearms-police-to-trial-cameras-2014-1 there are fewer than 7000 trained firearms officers in the UK and in the year Mar '11 to Apr '12 they were involved in 14,261 operations, so 2 each although thats meaningless of course as many of the 7000 will not have been ordered to open up the gun box at all that year. In this period and during those 14,261 operations a police firearm was discharged on only FIVE occasions. This information http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/19/deaths-police-custody-data#data shows how many UK citizens have been shot and killed by UK firearms police and depending on the split from Apr to Mar of those two years in question you can see that either 2 or 3 people would have been "executed" (LOL). So lets recap. 14,261 incidents when armed officers were used 5 occasions that a gun was discharged 2 or perhaps 3 deaths resulting In that period Apr '11 to Mar '12 five people died in the riots that followed and were instigated by Duggans death and between 6 and 13 people were killed during police pursuits, puts gun death into a bit of context - does anyone REALLY think that the police are running amok with guns and "executing" any criminal daft enough to carry a gun of their own ?

I think most people have little if any sympathy for the victim, most can understand the direct family's disappointment at the verdict, and then I think thats where the understanding starts to peter away - who were the chanting mob outside the courtroom for instance, who are the ones who are going on the "vigil" this weekend - more importantly did any of the 2011 rioters actually know the victim or ever hear of his name before they went out to rob a shop ? Facts abound of course, according to this article http://www.businessinsider.com/uk-firearms-police-to-trial-cameras-2014-1 there are fewer than 7000 trained firearms officers in the UK and in the year Mar '11 to Apr '12 they were involved in 14,261 operations, so 2 each although thats meaningless of course as many of the 7000 will not have been ordered to open up the gun box at all that year. In this period and during those 14,261 operations a police firearm was discharged on only FIVE occasions. This information http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/19/deaths-police-custody-data#data shows how many UK citizens have been shot and killed by UK firearms police and depending on the split from Apr to Mar of those two years in question you can see that either 2 or 3 people would have been "executed" (LOL). So lets recap. 14,261 incidents when armed officers were used 5 occasions that a gun was discharged 2 or perhaps 3 deaths resulting In that period Apr '11 to Mar '12 five people died in the riots that followed and were instigated by Duggans death and between 6 and 13 people were killed during police pursuits, puts gun death into a bit of context - does anyone REALLY think that the police are running amok with guns and "executing" any criminal daft enough to carry a gun of their own ?

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:59 am  

rover49 wrote:

So we let them commit the crime and off the copper BEFORE we do anything. I prefer the dead scumbag to the dead copper.

Id prefer no-one dead and that we were ruled by the rule of law that has served us well since the time of King John. I would rather not tear up 1000 years of legal principle and protection because someone was ‘probably’ off to do some crime.

[Durham Giant]

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 9:59 am  

Deaths in Police custody 969 since 1990. http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/de ... ce-custody You would not want to be black and be picked up by the Police. since 1998 333 people died in police custody not one police officer was convicted. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/ ... -convicted Ian Tomlinson, Charles de Menezes, Duggan Christopher Alder, Colin Roach . Just part of a long list. Join the Police, kill someone and get of with it. Dugan was lucky it was a nice quick clean kill. Much better than having 6 police officers kneeling on your chest and slowly suffocating you.

Deaths in Police custody 969 since 1990. http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/de ... ce-custody You would not want to be black and be picked up by the Police. since 1998 333 people died in police custody not one police officer was convicted. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/ ... -convicted Ian Tomlinson, Charles de Menezes, Duggan Christopher Alder, Colin Roach . Just part of a long list. Join the Police, kill someone and get of with it. Dugan was lucky it was a nice quick clean kill. Much better than having 6 police officers kneeling on your chest and slowly suffocating you.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:03 am  

Durham Giant wrote: Deaths in Police custody 969 since 1990. http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/de ... ce-custody You would not want to be black and be picked up by the Police. Any body would think the Met have suffered over the years with being stigmatised and labelleled as institutionally racist? Oh, wait on a minute...................................

Durham Giant wrote: Deaths in Police custody 969 since 1990. http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/de ... ce-custody You would not want to be black and be picked up by the Police. Any body would think the Met have suffered over the years with being stigmatised and labelleled as institutionally racist? Oh, wait on a minute...................................

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:10 am  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

Why??.... Personally, I think it would be a good start if we had organised armed squads actually offing scum like Duggan (like the Northern Ireland hit squads that were recently outed).

Nothing riles me more than when you hear about characters being referred to as known gangsters/ drug dealers/general scum, yet they are allowed to strut about with no threat of comeuppance - More no nonsense policing like the Duggan case would be appreciated by the majority of the British public.

If they were known drug dealers, gangsters what have you they would be in prison. If the police/CPS could prove they were drug dealers/gangsters etc then they would be found guilty in a court of law. If they can’t prove it in a court of law, then killing them because they were described as ‘known drug dealers’ is absolutely mental. What you are describing isn’t no-nonsense policing. Its extra-judicial murder.

You may think this makes you sound like a big man, a no-nonsense tough love kind of guy. It doesn’t. It makes you sound like you haven’t properly thought through the consequences of what you are proposing, or that you aren’t smart enough to work out something people worked out over a thousand years ago.

[Durham Giant]

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:13 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Id prefer no-one dead and that we were ruled by the rule of law that has served us well since the time of King John. I would rather not tear up 1000 years of legal principle and protection because someone was ‘probably’ off to do some crime.

It is the rule of law, police get charged with offences ( occasionally) and are acquitted by jury's often made up of people like Rover 49, Jerry Chicken, Cronus et al who all think , " dey is black*, dey is criminals*, dey are scum* " ( *delete as appropriate) , police are lovely and cuddly and they would never kill anyone illegaly or unjustly

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:13 am  

Richie wrote:

Tough choosing between Nike and Adidas isn't it. Would you have been happier being born in North Korea?
You won the lottery of life when you were born. Don't waste it.

You may have one the lottery of life, not everyone in this country has been as fortunate as you. A little humility and there but for the grace of God go I might be well placed.

A lack of the ability to empathise with others isn’t a symptom a hard-working, tough love, no-nonsense, self-made guy. It’s a symptom of psychopathy and sociopathy.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:24 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

If they were known drug dealers, gangsters what have you they would be in prison. If the police/CPS could prove they were drug dealers/gangsters etc then they would be found guilty in a court of law. If they can’t prove it in a court of law, then killing them because they were described as ‘known drug dealers’ is absolutely mental. What you are describing isn’t no-nonsense policing. Its extra-judicial murder.
...

Quite. You would always find civilised western countries apprehending and prosecuting suspects. The thought that you could kill and maim a bunch of people on suspicion there are some wrong uns amongst them, by, say, sending a drone to fire a high-explosive missile into the lot isn't the sort of thing they would go for at all.

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:25 am  

If you read the news reports around the case Duggan wasn’t some random person who found himself suspected of being a member of a violent organised criminal operation by accident. He portrayed himself as a gangster, and the Police though he was a gangster because he associated with known gangsters, and prior to the shooting they were monitoring his behaviour, they were suspicious of regular taxi rides he took between locations in London known to be associated/controlled by violent gangs (those who are a little worldly wise will know taxis are used in this way to shift drugs/guns/cash/other because they are less likely to be stopped than a stolen car or a car registered to a known criminal). Now his family might claim this was a mistake, he was just a bit of a loveable rogue who liked to pretend he was a “gangsta”, and who despite being officially unemployed and from a less than affluent background inexplicitly had money to spend taking taxis to visit his mates who just happened to be known/suspected violent organised criminals. For me it’s a bit of a stretch to believe the harmless rogue theory.

As far as the shooting incident is concerned I must admit I found the reports confusing, but then I haven’t had access to the detailed information the jury had. They seemed to have seen enough evidence to accept he had a gun in the car and that he probably threw it away at some point during the stop (someone else has already been sent down for supplying that particular gun to him). There is then the question of the shooting itself, they accept that the Police officer who shot him believed he had the gun at the time and was a genuine threat, although it appears with hindsight he had probably got rid of the gun by that point. Nobody seriously seems to think that he didn’t have a gun at all, and that the Police inexplicably fitted him up in the most contrived and awkward way possible.

What really annoys me is some of the views I’ve seen expressed in the media from “community leaders”, there is explicit race mongering, there is pandering to the criminal subculture Duggan belonged to and those who wish to appease and accommodate it, and talk of “injustice” done to Duggan’s family. He wasn’t shot because he was black, that had absolutely nothing to do with it, only a fool would believe that had he been a white gangster transporting an illegal gun it would have all been rosy. Would it help the people who go in for this type of idiocy if the Met printed out fliers to circulate amongst gangsters to confirm that they are an equal opportunity service when it comes deploying armed response against armed gangsters, and a warning they might like to consider alternative pursuits if they don’t want to get shot?

Re: The Mark Duggan verdict. : Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:28 am  

Durham Giant wrote:

It is the rule of law, police get charged with offences ( occasionally) and are acquitted by jury's often made up of people like Rover 49, Jerry Chicken, Cronus et al who all think , " dey is black*, dey is criminals*, dey are scum* " ( *delete as appropriate) , police are lovely and cuddly and they would never kill anyone illegaly or unjustly

Interesting. I'm not doubting you, you understand, but you couldn't by any chance just provide a link to the stats for composition of juries by racial prejudice in the "acquitted police killer" cases you refer to, could you?