Police car flipped over and bus on fire in Leeds as riots break out.

Primrose53

Iam64

I don’t believe I’m the only poster finding confrontational posts are becoming more common on gransnet. There was a thread recently asking if people were scared to post. I’m not scared to post. I m less inclined to when personal insults begin to dominate.
Of course views differ. That sometimes mean we see a different point of view we may disagree with without goading.

I think I may have started that thread Iam64, mainly because I received PMs from people saying they agree with me about certain things but dare not say so on here!

I do have my own views on things and am not afraid to say so. I have never knowingly been rude or offensive to anybody on here but some people are often either very rude to me or make nasty comments.

If I comment on something (say, holiday lets, of which we own one) then I get a couple of followers on other threads trying to have a dig at me and trying to get the conversation to go that way. It doesn’t bother ME but others stop posting when it happens to them. And all because their opinions are different to mine. Bit childish really

I agree with both of you. For me, there is a huge difference in discussing a topic and having different viewpoints which are expressed in a measured and balanced way and being just downright rude, patronising, and superior. Being rude on a public forum does not show intellectual superiority, rather egotistically driven disparagement. I must confess that when I read some of the rude one liners I lose interest in the poster and regard them as lowering the tone of what could be an enlightening discussion. Back to the discussion............

We need more police for sure. We also need a government that demonstrates support, not contempt for police and other public servants. A change in cultures, demonstrated by parliamentarians

I think the police need a good strong union to make sure that that they do not go out unprotected. It’s just not on to be totally unarmed ( not necessarily guns) in this day and age. I don’t have a problem with guns,personally, armed police here have saved many lives by shooting a perpetrator. Recently in Sydney, thank God for that policewoman and her gun.

Times do change and we have to change with them.The difference between back in the day and now is that the public generally and lowlives in particular have no respect for the Police which puts them, the Police in danger.If the public see that they back off from confrontation then even more so.
We need more Police, the service has been run down, just as the military have.

The Northern Ireland police carry guns.

They are reviewing this but I'm guessing rules on guns and water cannons are a consequence of a particular history.

Wiki says its under review.

I don’t believe policing by consent equals the police need consent from members of the public. It’s the principle of good practice that’s central.
My dad returned as super cid - his funeral well attended by other retired officers. Like dad they’d joined a county force after serving in ww2. There was an interesting discussion with a group, talking about changes over their working lives. One raised the miners strike, saying it would take a generation to re-build public trust after the shocking scenes of police on horses charging miners, and Met officers waving overtime slips.
Times change but decency and the principle of what policing by consent means dont

Water cannons are only legal in Northern Ireland Maizie and Oreo.

Which is part of GB. Therefore, water cannon the Irish but not acceptable on the mainland. Disgraceful.

I agree with both Iam64 and you Primrose53
Mind you, what one person calls confrontational is seen by another just as assertive.Personal insults should be reported and not tolerated.

Iam64

I don’t believe I’m the only poster finding confrontational posts are becoming more common on gransnet. There was a thread recently asking if people were scared to post. I’m not scared to post. I m less inclined to when personal insults begin to dominate.
Of course views differ. That sometimes mean we see a different point of view we may disagree with without goading.

I think I may have started that thread Iam64, mainly because I received PMs from people saying they agree with me about certain things but dare not say so on here!

I do have my own views on things and am not afraid to say so. I have never knowingly been rude or offensive to anybody on here but some people are often either very rude to me or make nasty comments.

If I comment on something (say, holiday lets, of which we own one) then I get a couple of followers on other threads trying to have a dig at me and trying to get the conversation to go that way. It doesn’t bother ME but others stop posting when it happens to them. And all because their opinions are different to mine. Bit childish really

Iam64

Oreo
Definition of policing by consent and historic principles of British Policing is set out by the Home Office as recently as 10.12.12
It’s a long document available on line. It refers to the long standing philosophy of British Policing set out in general instructions to every new Police Officer from 1829
1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.

2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect

There are 9 points in total. My legendary tech skills don’t run to copy and paste.

Essentially, as explained by the notable police historian in New Study of Police History in 1956, it was a philosophy of policing ‘unique in history and throughout the world because it derived not from fear but almost exclusively from public co-operation with the police, induced by them designedly by behaviour which secures and maintains for them the approval , respect and affection of the public.. Home office definition
of policing by consent

I remembered the policing by consent issue because I learned it from my father - a police officer

So was my ex DH who was a DI in the Met.😃
Policing by consent doesn’t mean the police need any consent from members of the public when they ( the police) are carrying out their duties against lawbreakers.
1829 was a long time ago and it was thought that the public wouldn’t put up with strong arm tactics from a newly formed semi military force.
Where mass public disorder is happening it’s the duty of police officers to both keep innocent householders safe from them and prevent looting and violence.
It was obvs decided to withdraw in this case as Roma were involved.

nanna8

Pepper spray? tasers? I can’t believe the police are still unarmed in this day and age, poor devils. No wonder they can’t get enough of them.

My son is taser-trained and carries it every day.
About 50% of the officers on his team carry tasers.
They wouldn't be appropriate in a big crowd like at this event though.

Agreed Iam64. There’s no need for it.

I don’t believe I’m the only poster finding confrontational posts are becoming more common on gransnet. There was a thread recently asking if people were scared to post. I’m not scared to post. I m less inclined to when personal insults begin to dominate.
Of course views differ. That sometimes mean we see a different point of view we may disagree with without goading.

growstuff

petra has also given details of her experience with Roma, which was much more positive than yours.

Anybody would think you have a problem with people who aren't just the same as you.

Is this aimed at me? Difficult to know as you’ve been answering me without addressing me. Either way, as Oreo said don’t be silly and, I might add, puerile.

This is where the problems arise with not integrating and not speaking the language.

I do t have any Romanian.

An interesting juxtapostition to be sure.

This is where the problems arise with not integrating and not speaking the language.
There are many people now in the uk who are a little apprehensive about taking their children to A&E with an injury such as this.
But because they don’t look at uk tv, newspapers, radio they would never know that this could happen.
They assumed that such a thing could never happen here because ( as far as we know they have done nothing wrong.
I found my self in a situation in Budapest. It wasn’t until I tried to get cash from the bank that I found out I couldn’t.
It was on all the news outlets, but, I do t have any Romanian.
Fortunately one of the street children spotted that I had a problem and took me to an illegal money man.

I agree tho that water cannon could also be brought out when there’s severe disruption/ riots on the street.

Do you not read other posts before you write anything. The use of water cannon for policing is not permitted in England and Wales.

Here is the then Home Office minister's statement to Parliament on 15th July 2015. There appears to have been no change since then (though I'm willing to bet that some more current HO ministers would have been happy to permit their use)

On the basis of the evidence provided by both the police and the relevant independent bodies, I can inform the House that I have decided not to authorise the Wasserwerfer 9000 water cannon as a policing tactic for operational use in England and Wales.

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/home-secretarys-oral-statement-on-water-cannon

Thank you for writing that petra.

We still don't know exactly why the children were taken away. We don't know if the parents were suspected of abusing/neglecting them or whether one of the children injured the baby. Who knows?

What we do know is that the baby was taken to hospital to be treated. The parents were obviously concerned about their child and engaged with authorities. We know that historically Roma don't like engaging with authority, so the danger might be that next time a child is injured, treatment won't be sought.

Oreo
Definition of policing by consent and historic principles of British Policing is set out by the Home Office as recently as 10.12.12
It’s a long document available on line. It refers to the long standing philosophy of British Policing set out in general instructions to every new Police Officer from 1829
1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.

2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect

There are 9 points in total. My legendary tech skills don’t run to copy and paste.

Essentially, as explained by the notable police historian in New Study of Police History in 1956, it was a philosophy of policing ‘unique in history and throughout the world because it derived not from fear but almost exclusively from public co-operation with the police, induced by them designedly by behaviour which secures and maintains for them the approval , respect and affection of the public.. Home office definition
of policing by consent

I remembered the policing by consent issue because I learned it from my father - a police officer

MaizieD

Aren't water cannon illegal in the UK?

Remember Johnson spaffing £millions away on buying water cannon for London which couldn't be used?

Water cannons are only legal in Northern Ireland Maizie and Oreo.

I think the small number of police there initially had to withdraw. What happened after in the next hour or so to where other yobs turned up including ones out of the area is still unclear to me as it what exactly the police could have best done. I don't think turning up in aggressive force to target just the Roma community alone was either possible or even desirable.

I'd like to hear the stories and enquiry from the different POV before saying, "yes going in, in force" was the only or best option. I know I keep repeating this, but the lack of injuries reported is significant and you rarely see this.

You can't equate the miners strike with what happened in Leeds. Officers were bussed in from all over the country to deal with the situation and it was only when officers from the Met police arrived that things turned ugly. Previous to that many of the police agreed with the miners and the miners knew they were only doing their jobs.

Tickingbird
I too have had a very frightening experience with Gypsies ( Irish)
I was in a launderette. Just me and the 4 gypsy woman and a toddler.
The door was open and the toddler ran towards the road. I instinctively ran to stop him. I did and picked him up. Bad move!!!
All 4 women came screaming at me telling me to put him down.
By now we are back in the launderette. They closed the door and then proceeded to start pushing me still screaming that I was taking their child.
Fortunately for me the owner lived above the premises and came down to help.

Having said all that ican still understand where the anger came from in Leeds
When your culture has had generations of being persecuted, and believe me you have no idea what is still going on in Eastern Europe where they have no voice and then come here and there was this incident with a child all that anger and hate which they have never been able to express the lid came off.
Considering the incident and knowing the culture it could have been worse.

That should have made it easier then Wyllow3 as there was no need to separate groups.It was the residents, mainly it seems a few Roma families against the police.Who withdrew leaving them feeling victorious.Shouldn’t have happened.

Police not only have advanced warning - weeks - to prepare for major footie matches and know what to expect. Not equivalent at all.

I think going in heavy would have exacerbated the situation and there would have been more rather than less rioting. In Harehills there were, remarkably, no injuries reported.

It wasn't a "one group versus another" within the community. where the police have to step in to separate 2 groups.