At least you got two accounts that agreed with one another.

lol

The information was that seismic I had to re-check.

Nevertheless, I see this as progress in the Duggan case.

Lessons have been learned.

Quote Rooster Booster="Rooster Booster"No riots yet? Must be winter over there.'" No, it's not that. newsthump.com/2014/01/09/duggan- ... -in-stock/

Quote Rooster Booster="Rooster Booster"No riots yet? Must be winter over there.'" No, it's not that. newsthump.com/2014/01/09/duggan- ... -in-stock/

I wasnt indulging in 'forum wars' i simply wasnt indulging in your straw man. I was completely consistant in what i said. It was you who tried to change that.

The poster who asks if I'd trust a surgeon or a manufacturer of surgeons tools to perform surgery on me, wasn't persisting in my "straw man"

I worked out: the usage of "Smokey" refers to your evasiveness.



You clearly take an approach that tries to "win" an argument. All that approach does though is entrench your "opponent" further into their original viewpoint.

If you would try questioning (which requires the honest and direct answering of questions in response) you would do a better. Well, "better" depends on what your aim is.



Just check back on how this one started and where we helped Damo set his expectations.

actually i never actually asked you that either. Maybe fully reading what I actually put would have solved the problems you are having?

No, but you asked an equivalent question.



You misuse the term "straw man" by the way.



A "straw man" argument involves building a false view of your opponents (and that's the only description to use in this circumstance, because it isn't an approach that comes to an agreement) position and then discrediting that.

Examples of a straw man argument could be:

- Misrepresenting those arguing for a freer economy as proposing an economy entirely without rules and regulations that would allow crime as a business: i.e. holding a gun to someone's head and demanding payment, and treating that as an agreed transaction.

- Asking if someone would prefer surgery/prescription from a surgeon/doctor or a surgical instrument manufacturer/prescription drug manufacturer. As such building the "straw man" that your opponent is proposing manufacturing business perform surgery/medicine prescription.



Do those scenarios seem familiar at all to you?

i didnt misrepresent your argument at all. I simply argued against it. I never argued that you had said you wanted an entirely free market, i said that your 'freer' market was a myth. You can either be a free market, or you can be regulated. I didnt misrepresent your views at all, i simply argued against them.



In your other example i gave a specific example where the 'straw man' was actually in effect happening. I said this was a consequence of applying free market principles to that market. At no stage did I say that was your idea.



A better example of a straw man would be your response to this statement



[iI am however still, as i assume you and everyone else on this board is, far closer to bottom end of that scale than the very top.[/i



being



[iDo you really believe, that if we put the world population in a line, ordered richest to poorest, you would be towards the poor end of that line?[/i



that was your attempt to misrepresent the statement i made.

So if you weren't trying to suggest I was proposing an entirely free market that allowed crime as a business, why did you describe the scenario of crime as a business and ask if I thought it was valid?

On my scale of wealth statement, go back to the start of that and see who was misrepresenting what.



I can see I've brought you around on viewpoints (although in saying this now I realise I'll reverse that and entrench you back to your prior viewpoint) and your evasion and misrepresentation confirms that.



You're in an awkward position now, presenting yourself as:

- A "forum wars" player who evades questions and misrepresents. I see even Starbug is getting fed up with it, and you getting a little abusive in response.

- Genuinely unable to understand, or remember far enough back in a thread, both your own and other contributors posts.



Neither makes you a poster worth discussing with. I see Sal gave you a few responses, but suspect he'll get fed up with your approach too, if he hasn't already. Then who will you engage with on the boards?

Because you argued free market principles could be applied. I argued they couldnt. I also said that your 'freer' market was a myth. I gave examples of where free market principles in a regulated market failed. I didnt at any stage say you wanted an entirely free market, simply that you couldnt have a market which was both free and regulated.





no you wont, i made an unequivical statement, i made it numerous times, you didnt like it so you changed it.



The irony in here is pretty funny. I haven’t misrepresented anything you said. I haven’t evaded any question, I simply didn’t indulge in your misrepresentation of what I said. I was steadfastly consistent in what I said. I just didn’t say what you wanted me to. That is your problem and why you are trying to paint yourself as hard done by.



I in no way misrepresented what you said, nor changed what I said. The fact that Starbug is playing silly buggers and pretending to not know that St Helens and Salford are in new stadiums, that HKR have gone through a huge stadium refurbishment, and even Wakefield have spent hundreds of thousands improving their stadium isn’t relevant of anything.



I also dont need to remember anything anyone said in this thread, fortunately enough it stays there and can be read again, for instance we could trace the entire communication























that is our conversation up to the point you decided i was indulging in forum wars. Perhaps you would like to point out which question (besides your aforementioned attempted misrepresentation of what i said) i avoided or where i misrepresented your statements or views?

This is quite possibly the most enthralling pi55ing contest in the history of the written word. One pedantic nitpick, if I am honest I am not sure it is 100% relevant to the Duggan verdict but you lads crack on.

I think Smokey has broken his own record there.

It's all Damo's fault.

Is. It. Over. Yet?

You mean







Err







I think







It could be







Yes

m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25358064 I presume that the taxi is the silver vehicle in middle near the kerb hemmed in by a dark car to the rear, onother to the side and a silver one to the front that has mounted the kerb. Duggan's body can be seen covered by a red sheet. The taxi driver said that he heard firing from the front which would suggest that Duggan was shot by someone from the silver car. With the door in the way as Duggan decamped would he have had a shot and it looked like he was heading off to the left, wouldn't he be shot in the back more likely than the chest? I'm not so sure how the taxi driver would know where the shots came from anyway, but that what he said. Can anyone enlighten me to the events? Was he shot by someone from the rear car?

m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25358064 I presume that the taxi is the silver vehicle in middle near the kerb hemmed in by a dark car to the rear, onother to the side and a silver one to the front that has mounted the kerb. Duggan's body can be seen covered by a red sheet. The taxi driver said that he heard firing from the front which would suggest that Duggan was shot by someone from the silver car. With the door in the way as Duggan decamped would he have had a shot and it looked like he was heading off to the left, wouldn't he be shot in the back more likely than the chest? I'm not so sure how the taxi driver would know where the shots came from anyway, but that what he said. Can anyone enlighten me to the events? Was he shot by someone from the rear car?

Phew!

Also, what exactly happens to the evidence presented, I mean can it all be viewed.

Or is that a no no?

The taxi was a Toyota Previa. It's the big "soccer mom" type minivan. Duggan was in the back. The Previa has sliding rear doors.



I presume that Duggan started legging it to the rear of the taxi and was almost instantly met with an armed officer from the rear car.



There was a report of him texting his brother minutes before he was killed that there was a green BMW police van who were going to pull him.



I'd imagine that if the cop from the front car had shot Duggan the taxi driver would have seen it.

I hope that the taxi driver put a claim in for his lost taxi fare.



Looking at this scene, it looks like Duggan ran headlong into an officer and severely minimised his chances of survival.

I'm surprised he didn't vault the fence and try to leg it over the field.



I think the taxi driver must have meant that there were shots from the front Of Duggan, which would have been consistent.

He was getting Bonnie & Clyde-ed whatever course of action he was choosing.

I think the first thing he needed to do when he started legging it from the car was getting rid of the gun. If he gets rid of the gun and is then tackled straight after then he can loudly should police brutality and racism and hope that none of the cops see him throw the gun over the wall.



He was about 10ft away from the end of the wall when he was shot. After that there was the clear field and pathways. I think the clear run to the field is a better target to run to that looking to vault the railings, especially as think both Duggan and the cops will have been getting out of their vehicles before they had even stopped.

In terms of some of what has been discussed, this is interesting.



[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25759909The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police is to be prosecuted for safety breaches after an unarmed man was shot dead in Cheshire.[/url

Quote Stand-Offish="Stand-Offish"Also, what exactly happens to the evidence presented, I mean can it all be viewed. Or is that a no no?'" Only just looked for this, so don't know how useful... dugganinquest.independent.gov.uk/

Quote Stand-Offish="Stand-Offish"Also, what exactly happens to the evidence presented, I mean can it all be viewed. Or is that a no no?'" Only just looked for this, so don't know how useful... dugganinquest.independent.gov.uk/