For my two penny worth there is no excuse for rioting.

The underlying facts of this seem to be.

1. Bloke has a firearm in Tottenham.
2. Firearms licence for carrying a concealed weapon is very unlikely to be in the hands of said indiviual! For numerous reasons.

Personally if I was carrying said weapon and did not comply with direct instructions from an authority figure (Police) I would expect to be shot. Whether I was shot and injured or shot and killed is entirely down to luck and the skill of the Policeman with the gun – and how threatend he felt.

This is rather similar to mountain biking – I go out and ride stuff – I make a choice about what I ride and in some instances recognise the opportunity to injure my self. The choice is mine – ride that chute, jump, etc or don’t. Similar to ‘carry that firearm and then disobey orders’. It is not difficult. People in posession of illegal firearms should be locked up for a very long time.

People looting should be similarly treated – and be expected to work hard while in jail!

People need to take responsibility for their own actions whether that means being shot because you have an illegal weapon, accepting injury because you take a risk too many, or being locked up because you are looting, rioting scum is irrelevant.

OK Rant over.

Nowt unusual about hollowpoint rounds – they’re banned from normal FAC holder ownership in the UK, but with a dispensation for hunting/wildlife dispatch – and I’ve got permission for three different calibres of hollowpoint on my firearms certificate.

To be fair, I’m fairly confident that Gangsta firearms dealers aren’t all that bothered about the intricacies of the firearms act or international military treaties either 😉

quality Hora, quality… 😯 🙄

IIRC Hallowpoint rounds have been ‘outlawed’ by international treaty re: warfare

Banned in warfare in the late 1800s I think. As an aside though, quite an interesting thing to ban things for use in warfare that are too lethal. Seems to miss the objective of shooting someone I’d have thought; surely better to stop shooting people altogether if you’re squeamish about the outcome.

Is that a capital crime?

maybe, maybe not – it depends what he was doing with it at the time. But I don’t believe any of those rioters would be able to answer that question any better than you or I could at this stange.

To be fair, I’m fairly confident that Gangsta firearms dealers aren’t all that bothered about the intricacies of the firearms act or international military treaties either

Valid. Entirely valid.

He had an illegal firearm, why should he use legal ammo?

Banned in warfare in the late 1800s I think. As an aside though, quite an interesting thing to ban things for use in warfare that are too lethal. Seems to miss the objective of shooting someone I’d have thought.

Nope standard practice in warfare, an injured enemy ties up more resources than a dead one.

This is rather similar to mountain biking

it took 8 pages to get to a cycling analogy?
poor
very poor

whilst Hora’s mind-dump above is a little reactionary, he’s saying what a lot of people are thinking

project – Member

So just because the police shoot at somebody and they kill him,does it then make it right for certain members of the feral population, to set fire, loot and destroy peoples homes and buisness, along with injuring the police officers doing their job.

Of course not. But do you think it’s so simple? I doubt it.

People have described it as a “powderkeg” situation and that’s probably quite accurate, since gunpowder doesn’t usually go off by itself. So there’s 2 seperate issues here- the riots, and the trigger. It’s not making excuses for the rioters to say “What was the trigger, why did that happen?”

And from what we’re seeing now there seems to be a fair amount of mishandling leading up to it, which if it had been done right might have avoided the whole mess.

convert – Member

“Is that a capital crime?”

maybe, maybe not – it depends what he was doing with it at the time. But I don’t believe any of those rioters would be able to answer that question any better than you or I could at this stange

Oh I agree, but the police haven’t helped. They must know if he was waving it around or if they found it in the car after they shot him…

So there’s 2 seperate issues here- the riots, and the trigger. It’s not making excuses for the rioters to say “What was the trigger, why did that happen?”

That’s what I was trying to get at.

Some reports say that his gun was in a sock at the time he was shot – if true he clearly wasn’t waving it around.

But if the police had reason to believe it was a gun in a sock that he was waving around he is equally guilty.

Some reports say that his gun was in a sock at the time he was shot – if true he clearly wasn’t waving it around.

Its not like it was a table leg in a carrier bag either though, is it!

Carry an illegal firearm, you’re gonna run the risk of getting shot.

Carry ANY firearm shaped thing, and act in a belligerent, uncooperative or threatening manner whilst undergoing a Hard stop by armed police, and you’re almost certain to get shot

And I say that as someone who has been challenged by armed police, whilst travelling with perfectly legal, fully certificated and responsibly help weapons. (stopped for speeding, plod saw firearms cases in car and radioed for backup)

Believe me – you’re left under no illusions whatsoever as to who is stopping you, and what you’re supposed to do – rightly or wrongly, you do what they say, there and then, without hesitation – the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

So there’s 2 seperate issues here- the riots, and the trigger. It’s not making excuses for the rioters to say “What was the trigger, why did that happen?”
That’s what I was trying to get at.

Me too.

This would not have happened in other parts of the country or in other countries. Smashing up your own neighbourhood doesn’t happen in affluent areas. It happens where people have **** all to lose. The reversion to lawlessness by a community is a reaction, until we find out why (or are brave enough to admit we already know) then nothing will change. This is not liberal ‘pc’ bollocks. It’s the only **** way forward. Until we start treating people equally and actually confronting child poverty and placing community at the heart of society rather than business growth absolutely **** all will change.

In no way am i condoning the looting etc, but I think some people need to wake up and realise how the police are viewed in a lot of poor inner city areas. A lot of people regard them (with some justification) as little more than a militia. Their dealings with the police are universally negative. So when something like this happens they automatically assume the worse.

If a controversial incident resulting in a death had happened in a nice middle class suburb and a couple of hundred polite, white, middle class mumsnetters had arrived at the police station to ask for answers, do you honestly think they’d have been locked out and stonewalled for 5 hours? Of course they wouldn’t

The police have to take some responsibility for their appalling, but fairly typical, handling of the initial protest. I think that now this whole situation may have already become self-fuelling. Its started an out-pouring of a lot of legitimate grievences and as such will probably snowball. I certainly don’t think last night was the last of it. Which city next then?

the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

Are you for real? Was Charles De Menezes acting like a penis? I was under the impression he was just getting on a tube train

Its not like it was a table leg in a carrier bag either though, is it!

Carry an illegal firearm, you’re gonna run the risk of getting shot.

Carry ANY firearm shaped thing, and act in a belligerent, uncooperative or threatening manner whilst undergoing a Hard stop by armed police, and you’re almost certain to get shot

And I say that as someone who has been challenged by armed police, whilst travelling with perfectly legal, fully certificated and responsibly help weapons. (stopped for speeding, plod saw firearms cases in car and radioed for backup)

Believe me – you’re left under no illusions whatsoever as to who is stopping you, and what you’re supposed to do – rightly or wrongly, you do what they say, there and then, without hesitation – the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

So you’re saying that the police never get it wrong? Ever heard of Jean Charles de Menezes?

Listen, you don’t know what happened and neither do I. What we do know is that there are reports contradicting the official police line. A sequence of events that is depressingly familiar…

I kind of get the feeling he was a ‘mule’ or ‘runner’ for the weapon in question, not that he was carrying it for his own use. A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family – doesn’t seem to me that he was a hard-ass drug dealing bank robbing gangster? Cops get wind (under Operation Trident) that someone is moving a weapon, hence the raid, as there’s a gun involved they use the ‘Special Forces’ (or whatever they’re called), something goes wrong and the guy ends up dead… Family is understandably pissed off at this, demands answers from the Police, not forthcoming (and it appears the Police were rather recalcitrant in there actions in fact), crowd gets angry, a few hotheads do something stupid and it escalates from there…

MSP – Member

Banned in warfare in the late 1800s I think. As an aside though, quite an interesting thing to ban things for use in warfare that are too lethal. Seems to miss the objective of shooting someone I’d have thought.

Nope standard practice in warfare, an injured enemy ties up more resources than a dead one.

+1

a dead soldier means one less gun pointing at you….a wounded soldier takes away two or three….maybe 5 or 6 if they get the litter out

Threads like this make me wish I was right wing. Life would seem so much simpler.

Threads like this make me wish I was right wing. Life would seem so much simpler.

+1… I wish I didn’t have to think so much about things 😆

Threads like this make me wish I was right wing. Life would seem so much simpler.

True dat. Who needs nuance and the need for creative inclusive solutions when knee-jerk reactionary rhetoric is all that’s actually required 😀

I kind of get the feeling he was a ‘mule’ or ‘runner’ for the weapon in question, not that he was carrying it for his own use. A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family

Really ??

I kind of get the feeling he was a ‘mule’ or ‘runner’ for the weapon in question, not that he was carrying it for his own use. A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family – doesn’t seem to me that he was a hard-ass drug dealing bank robbing gangster? Cops get wind (under Operation Trident) that someone is moving a weapon, hence the raid, as there’s a gun involved they use the ‘Special Forces’ (or whatever they’re called), something goes wrong and the guy ends up dead… Family is understandably pissed off at this, demands answers from the Police, not forthcoming (and it appears the Police were rather recalcitrant in there actions in fact), crowd gets angry, a few hotheads do something stupid and it escalates from there…

From what I have read, he is the cousin of someone else who was killed in a gangland incident and he was being watched by the police as they thought he was going to launch a revenge attack.

Be funny if a a looter came home to find their flat burnt out and the place where they work looted. They wrecking there own areas, seems a bit pointless to me, go up the city and have a good old riot there, like the Stop the City marches in the 80’s.

I think all this riotin’ ‘n’ lootin’ needs a tried and tested approach as seen in that fantastic film Zulu (although the mention of that film and the circumstances may get some people excited for the wrong reasons) Several lines of officers firing rubber bullets, one line kneel take aim and fire, next line step forward, kneel, aim, fire and so on. If the “natives” use some ingenious attempts to block said rubber bullets then lets not be afaird of using some more conventional techniques of water cannon, which can be “ratcheted” up by electrifying it with 50,000 volts. When all is said and done, the UK (or London) is NOT a police state. What we have here is a bunch or people used to gorging themselves at the teats of the state, but never feeding the state. Now the state has less food to eat and the milk is drying up. So the underclasses are revolting (pun intended) and this won’t be the last time this happens. Nowt to do with the babylon or the po-po. Best arm up, ‘pocalypse is a comin.

From what I have read, he is the cousin of someone else who was killed in a gangland incident and he was being watched by the police as they thought he was going to launch a revenge attack.

Well there you go, I didn’t know that 😳

The facts of the matter are not what’s driving this situation. Its the perception of what’s happened, as viewed by the population of the area that is the issue. And the police refusing to give straight answers is hardly helping matters

And the police refusing to give straight answers is hardly helping matters

So, they give rushed answers, that turn out to be wrong, and its all a police conspiracy and deliberate misinformation!

but if they wait till they can give us the facts to get a complete picture, then its all a cover up, and they’ve got something to hide!

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t – If you wait till you can give the facts then the press start insinuating and making up “facts”, and publishing unverified stories – like the one about the bullet in the radio, from unnamed, unknown “sources” – that inflame the situation and make things worse, and people claim that the police were behind all sorts of misinformation. Just like happened with De-Menezes, and Tomlinson, and pretty much every other case!

why can’t the press just STFU till the facts are known? hows about that for a radical idea.

Just like happened with De-Menezes, and Tomlinson, and pretty much every other case!

With Tomlinson they only changed their story once the video taken by a protester was released by the guardian.

Believe me – you’re left under no illusions whatsoever as to who is stopping you, and what you’re supposed to do – rightly or wrongly, you do what they say, there and then, without hesitation – the only way to get shot by armed police in that situation is to act like a penis!

So you were there and saw what happened? Otherwise you’re just

insinuating and making up “facts”

The problem isn’t the police giving rushed answers. The problem is the police giving NO answers to some perfectly understandable questions. You don’t have to be Kofi Annan to relise that point-blank refusing to talk to the family is a pretty ****ing stupid attitude to adapt. And immediately looks like you’ve got something to hide.

And frankly, its asking for people to put 2 and 2 together and get 97

Lifer – Which proves my point – they made announcements to the press before the investigation was complete!

damned if they did, damned if they didn’t!

(edit, cause of your edit)

Are you suggesting that the police shot this bloke without issuing a challenge?

There’s press reports from the day, in which independent witnesses say he was repeatedly challenged before the shooting occurred – which ties in with a normal police hard stop.

like I said, when the police are shouting “ARMED POLICE, ARMED POLICE, STAND STILL” you do what they **** well say… it seems in this case, he didn’t.

Binners – I have not seen any suggestion that the people outside the police station demanding “justice” on Saturday included any members of the family, or that the police refused to talk to the family, I’d suggest to you that you’re extrapolating “community” to include “family” Well, sorry, but as far as I’m concerned the correct reaction from the police would be “we have nothing to say until our investigations are completed” – which is clearly the way to avoid confusion, rumours or accusations of a cover up!

A father of 4 with limited prospects, undertaking an illegal activity in desperation simply to raise some cash for his family

Perhaps he should of sold some of his jewellery instead? See photo in Really ?? link above.

From what i’ve read on here and seen on the news, yes the police reacted wrong to the family and friends who went to the police station initially. They should of had a proper meeting with them – and them alone. Not the other 100+ people who had walked down with them. The police f**ked up here.

But as for that woman pushing her trolly full of swag down the road, don’t tell me she only stole that because she was upset with how the police had gone about things. There were a load of people there on the night who just wanted to go out on the rob and what better than a riot to cover their tracks. Why else go to a retail park (thats not even on the same road) and go on the snaffle there?

I feel sorry for alot of people there who had nothing to do with it, those that are trying to build bridges between the police and the community, and to the family of the man that was shot (not him if he was carrying an illegal gun or shooting at people).

I do not feel sorry for those who set about destroying peoples lives with their nights on the rampage. You didn’t make me feel bad for you or even make me want to help you. You just made me think your a waste of a life.

They should of had a proper meeting with them

I’m sure the police had their reasons;
the rioting and looting was inevitable

A father of 4 with limited prospects

He created the block to a world of prospects himself.

The bit I struggle to understand is the original catalyst to the riots starting. 300 people descended on the police station demanding answers. I could understand immediate family wanting to know what was going on, and I would have assumed the police would have spoken to them.

But 300 people? Who were they all? Why did they think the police would speak to them all? Did they not think that perhaps the police would have seen it as a potentially explosive situation and tried (badly) to diffuse the situation perhaps?

The bit I struggle to understand is the original catalyst to the riots starting

Robbing, plain and simple.

apparantly messages like this…

Everyone in edmonton enfield woodgreen everywhere in north link up at enfield town station 4 o clock sharp!!!! Start leaving ur yards n linking up with you ****. Guck da feds, bring your ballys and your bags trollys, cars vans, hammers the lot!! Keep sending this around to bare man, make sure no snitch boys get dis!!! What ever ends your from put your ballys on link up and cause havic, just rob everything. Police can’t stop it. Dead the fires though!! Rebroadcast!!!!!”

are doing the rounds this afternoon. more riots tonight!

apparantly messages like this…

I knew there must be a use for BBM.