Yes riots and not one person went home with a new TV, shocking.

I dont think there are any electrical outlets left in Bristol city Centre

Maybe they were genuinely there to protest rather than loot? Ethical rioting?

Sadly doesn’t help the cause of the original protest, by causing the kind of chaos the act supposedly aims to stop.

All failing governments need an enemy, external (Argentina, China) or internal (Bristol, Liverpool, Clapham). The press whip up a moral panic and the police get a rise for doing a cracking job.

I have a feeling as th weather improves pent up energy will be released in this way more and more

The press whip up a moral panic and the police get a rise for doing a cracking job.

So they’re supposed to ignore the images of people setting vans alight, attacking a police station, pelting it with rocks and smashing glass and causing injury to police officers?

Yep..its all a government conspiracy!!! You believe that if you want.

Just a classic case of a peaceful protest being hijacked by a small minority of highly politically motivated anti-democratic groups. Just like the issues around the environment, Black Lives Matter, and more recently womens safety. Not exactly new is it, these tactics are as old as democracy itself.

Just a classic case of a peaceful protest being hijacked by a small minority of highly politically motivated anti-democratic groups

Enough about the police, what about the protestors?

Just a classic case of a peaceful protest being hijacked by a small minority of highly politically motivated anti-democratic groups.

Which groups are these?

Why are they against democracy?

Who mentioned conspiracy? Demos being hijacked sounds like a conspiracy.

There is a long history of the use of agent provocateurs by security services. Eg

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/may/10/g20-policing-agent-provacateurs

https://theintercept.com/2020/06/02/history-united-states-government-infiltration-protests/

Why are they against democracy?

Maybe anti the kind of limited democracy we have at the moment. It doesn’t seem to be working very well at the moment. I’d say I am broadly anti it too. I haven’t set fire to a police van but voting against it for the last 30 years hasn’t done much I have to admit

On the BBC this morning there was film if a guy putting lit cardboard under a police van full of officers. Unlikely to have done much damage as the van was slowly reversing as he did it but that was attempted murder surely?

Agree with most of the recent posters above. Especially this:

Enough about the police, what about the protestors?

This

the kind of limited democracy we have at the moment. It doesn’t seem to be working very well at the moment. I’d say I am broadly anti it too.

I’m assuming those critical of the Police last night are content to let crowds smash up vehicles and attack buildings?

It’s easy to criticise the actions of the Police in these situations, and they are often wrong, but I don’t see many of the critics offering solutions. We expect an under resourced group of officers to deal with much larger groups of protestors, then criticise them for being too heavy handed or not being firm enough.

I don’t sense this was a case of police officers inciting violence. On this occasion the police response seemed pretty muted and calm actually. The number of people actively engaged in violence seemed quite small. I guess it could have escalated further if the response had been too heavy handed.

I am very much against the current government and what it is trying to do, but I don’t believe this violence will achieve much.

“Enough about the police, what about the protestors?”

Ha ha! That made me laugh.

I’ve very little sympathy for the police; if they allow themselves to be used as a political tool for a government, then the whole notion of ‘policing by consent’ collapses, as the police are duty bound to remain apolitical. The Clapham vigil debacle was just one example of how the police choose to be heavy handed when faced with little/no resistance. They weren’t so heavy handed when crowds of (mainly male) football fans gathered in Glasgow. Refusing to attend incidents where a woman was sexually assaulted on the night of the Clapham vigil, and where a woman reported a man performing a sex act in public, yet having sufficient resources to provide protection to rich people, embassies etc, just shows how the police aren’t doing their job of adequately protecting society.

Why Bristol though? Never really had it down as a hot bed of subversion…

Yes riots and not one person went home with a new TV, shocking.

Rioting under covid restrictions, where all retail has moved online, involves ordering a big telly and some new trainers online, on credit, then not paying for them. If they try to pursue you for payment then simply send them a photo of a petrol bomb

Sticking it to the man, yeah?

I’m assuming those critical of the Police last night are content to let crowds smash up vehicles and attack buildings?

Why are people so horrified when inanimate objects get smashed up but couldn’t care less when your rights are being steam rollered by a right wing government?

One is easier to take pictures of I’ll give you that.

Why are people so horrified when inanimate objects get smashed up but couldn’t care less when your rights are being steam rollered by a right wing government with the full support of the leader of the Labour Party ?

Fixed that for you.

“Why Bristol though? Never really had it down as a hot bed of subversion…”

You need to read up on the history of Bristol.

if they allow themselves to be used as a political tool for a government, then the whole notion of ‘policing by consent’ collapses, as the police are duty bound to remain apolitical.

Bit tricky to be apolitical when they are under direct control from the Home Office who agress their funding, objectives and can pick and choose their Chief Constables etc.

Why Bristol though? Never really had it down as a hot bed of subvision…

Been like it for years, hotbed of left wing/alternative lifestyle/anarchist and all things related. Makes it a great place culturally (raves, festivals, green thinking) but brings problems of homelessness, drugs, riots…

Why Bristol though? Never really had it down as a hot bed of subvision…

I mentioned it on another thread but this is our ninth riot in only 300 years. We’re on a roll

Actually I think its politically quite anti the current government. Very strong labour vote, significant remain vote, high Green vote, strong sense of liberal socialism. Not much of a voice in the traditional democratic process so people are finding their own way to speak out. The statue toppling that happened here was great and was probably a trigger for the new law that this was a protest against

Why are people so horrified when inanimate objects get smashed up but couldn’t care less when your rights are being steam rollered by a right wing government with the full support of the leader of the Labour Party ?

Fixed that for you.

Starmer is a Tory plant obviously. I thought that went without saying.

Bit tricky to be apolitical when they are under direct control from the Home Office who agress their funding, objectives and can pick and choose their Chief Constables etc.

Sussed the quote function, yay!

And herein lies the problem. Having one party, for whom an actual minority of the population actually voted, having near-absolute power over those institutions of society that govern all our lives, is wrong. Because it’s a gateway to totalitarianism. We need political reform now more than ever before.

Which groups are these?

The ones rioting and damaging people property?

Usually the extreme left.

just shows how the police aren’t doing their job of adequately protecting society.

The other ‘kill the Bill’ chant I heard was – ‘who are you protecting?’

Starmer is a Tory plant obviously. I thought that went without saying

I thought Corbyn was the Tory plant, he did more damage to Labour in 5 years than the Tories have managed in over 100.

Stokes Croft is the most anarchist place I can think of in the UK. Ketamine and squat parties are a political statement ya know 🙂

I don’t sense this was a case of police officers inciting violence

Possibly not in this case I don’t know, but there is a long unpleasant history of the use of agitators and deliberately heavy-handed police tactics to incite crowds and discredit protests. And it’s very useful timing for the government isn’t it, who have shown themselves to be quite partial to a bit of Putin-style authoritarianism/manipulation.

#tinfoil

The other ‘kill the Bill’ chant I heard was – ‘who are you protecting?’

Not who, but what, surely?

It mainly seems to be statues

The BBC and other mainstream media outlets were very quick to jump on this story this morning, but virtually no mention of the bill the demonstrators were shouting about, and crucially last week almost a news blackout on this subject.

The BBC and other mainstream media outlets were very quick to jump on this story this morning, but virtually no mention of the bill the demonstrators were shouting about,

Of course. Yet the narrative has swung so far right that the BBC are now routinely/reflexively accused of being a ‘far-left’ operation even as they are flagrant bootlickers dot gov. What idiocratic times we inhabit.

I can’t see any way at all that these powers could ever be misused or extended beyond their original intent…

What powers do police have now?
If the police want to place restrictions on a protest, they generally have to show it may result in “serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community”.
They can also impose specific measures on the routes of marches.
When it comes to major events, such details are typically thrashed out with the organisers weeks in advance.
Violent protest ‘shameful day’ for Bristol
PM defends policing bill amid criticism from MPs
What went wrong at the Sarah Everard vigil?
How will the bill change those powers?
Police chiefs will be able to put more conditions on static protests.
They will be able to:
Impose a start and finish time
Set noise limits
Apply these rules to a demonstration by just one person
Taken to an extreme, let’s say there’s an individual holding a protest placard, while blasting out their views on a speaker.
If they refuse to follow police directions over how they should conduct their protest, they could be fined up to £2,500.
It will also become a crime to fail to follow restrictions the protesters “ought” to have known about, even if they have not received a direct order from an officer.
At present, police need to prove protesters knew they had been told to move on, before they can be said to have broken the law.
The proposed law includes an offence of “intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance”.
This is designed to stop people occupying public spaces, hanging off bridges, gluing themselves to windows, or employing other protest tactics to make themselves both seen and heard.
One final measure clarifies that damage to memorials could lead to up to 10 years in prison. This follows the toppling of a statue of slave trader Edward Colston in Bristol.

One final measure clarifies that damage to memorials could lead to up to 10 years in prison.

I will make a bet with any one, that no-one in this country is ever going to be put inside for ten years for busting out the paint on a statue. I think it’s handy for govts to let you think that, but it’ll never happen.

Why Bristol though?

You know, where the cops literally tazered their own race relations coordinator in the face…That Bristol

If peaceful protest gets restricted in an authoritarian manner, the gut instinct the present Tory regime as far as I can see, then what becomes the alternative?

Or in other words, if your peaceful protest is illegal, then you might take the view that you’re as well hung for a sheep as a lamb.

I will make a bet with any one, that no-one in this country is ever going to be put inside for ten years for busting out the paint on a statue.

30 days jail for the chap who put a Mohicane on Churchill IIRC.

I will make a bet with any one, that no-one in this country is ever going to be put inside for ten years for busting out the paint on a statue.

Indeed. It’s all part of the ongoing culture war. Sending a loud and clear message to the gammons that we will protect the monuments to slave traders the glorious empire from the gangs of rampaging, lawless, lefty hooligans intent on ‘doing down’ the UK

So on that score, last nights protestors did exactly what our evil Tory overlords wanted them to do, in making their case for their harsher laws (but only for selected crimes) and the need to further curtail civil liberties

Well done to all involved

It does make you wonder how clearly ‘the left’ need to have their elephant traps signposted, as the present 30 ft high neon lights with big arrows pointing at them seem clearly insufficient

Yep, if only they were well behaved like those nice ladies on Clapham Common it all would’ve been ok.

The people that caused the violence weren’t protesters, they were thugs looking for any excuse to break the law with little consequence. They went there looking to have a laugh, a get together, a fight and they started one.

The irritation is that this plays right into Patel’s hands and does even more damage to the real issue.

Also, why is it ALWAYS men and often young men that start the violence? More needs to be done to stamp out violence at a young age.