Riots in Tottenham, London! (NO RACIST COMMENTS)

philip2009 · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:36

Speirs said:
Yep, kicking off in Wolverhampton town centre. Primark and Game looted.

Wolverhampton town centre isn't that large (IIRC it's basically the Mander centre and surrounding streets). Would have thought the police stood a fair chance of protecting most of it. :confused:

Robbo · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:36

simulatorman said:
The judge and jury have arrived. Case closed.

He had a handgun in public. They are extremely illegal and extremely dangerous.

The most likely scenario is that he didn't comply with police when told to put it down, and made a sudden movement which caused them to open fire. Which is absolutely justified.

Something along those lines.

101001101 · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:37

Family just confirmed 100 kids trying to break into HSBC in Leeds

Biohazard · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:37

ghost101 said:
Yep some ridiculous claims here. Did they even know he had a gun for sure?

At most they suspected he had a gun unless he was flashing it about.

Who knows. But god damn he deserves to be dead!!!! :rolleyes:

Ahleckz · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:37

Biohazard said:
Do people with knives also deserve instant death also with no chance of trial, punishment and rehabilitation?

Think about what you lot are actually saying. Especially you given your educational reading.

He deserved to be apprehended and if posed a risk he deserved to be shot. Yes, there may be no evidence that his gun discharged but that doesn't mean he wasn't a credible threat towards the officers and members of the public.
It's a shame that he is dead, as it is when anyone dies. Though the live by the sword, die by the sword, saying is quite apt I believe.
Don't get me wrong, I would have much preferred to see him being brought under control and put before a court and dealt with through that. However, that didn't happen.
If it turns out that he didn't pose a credible threat then I'll change my view but as it stands I have little issue that he is dead.

scorza · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:37

Nexus said:
Mark Duggan didn't fire, but he still had a handgun that had been converted to fire live rounds and had one in the magazine.

How anyone carrying a gun can be free of any blame is ridiculous.
If I was wondering around with a gun, the fact I might get killed would be a direct consequence of doing just that.

Not really the point is it? carrying a handgun doesn't mean the police can just gun you down. If some evidence appears that Mr Duggan was a threat to the police e.g. by pointing his gun at them, then it becomes a different matter.

SuperTronNarwhal · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:37

Noel Gallagher said:
Wouldnt that mean streets full of homeless chavs? is that really better? :<

Parents will react seeing as now they can become homeless. Corpal Punishment will come into place. Less youths on streets. But also we get a chance to shame them

Danthus · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:38

Will21st said:
I think you'll find that your quite wrong about that one... police shoot to stop the threat,and that's means targeting the upper torso,or the head for that matter.

Wrong, they shoot to incapacitate, that means aiming at the central mass. The are only very specific circumstances where the head is targeted.

Tummy · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:38

TS7 said:
Anyone have the latest on Leicester? Following the Twitter feed is an absolute joke. Been keeping an eye on both Chiswick and Leicester all day and the tweets pretty much consist of:

''RIOTS going on! Roads are closed, shops boarded up, people have been sent home!!!!!!!!!'

and then a few minutes later someone else posts:

'Absolutely fine here, high street is buzzing with shoppers, here's a picture'.

It seems people are getting kicks out of completely making stuff up and lying about there being riots. Bizzare people.

There are things happening in the city center which is a shame, London Road apparently has people on it

semi-pro waster · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:38

wordy said:
Depends on what you would class as police bruatlity though doeasn't it. In this case I would argue water cannon, rubber bullets and horse charges are methods used by the police to defend lives and property of innocents against scum who are not trying to make a political statement and who are just out on the rob.

And I'd agree those would be valid methods* of trying to control the situation, however there are and have been a number of people advocating punishment beatings, snipers and so on - I'm struggling to conceive a situation where that doesn't constitute police brutality or worse. All I'm really trying to suggest is that people think a little before being too keen to wish away what we have judged to be a suitable way for our police force to behave - our police aren't perfect by any stretch but I'd take them over most others in the World.

*possible exception of rubber bullets - which can be just as lethal as ordinary bullets.

Sh3rlock · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:38

And so it begins for the fourth night.

Disorder confirmed in Wolverhampton and cars set alight in Croydon.

qqg3 · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:38

Sky just showed a car on fire in Croydon, firefighters already there though.

[TW]Sponge · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

Car on fire in Croydon. Here we go again.....

Robbo · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

Biohazard said:
Who knows. But god damn he deserves to be dead!!!!

Yes. He did have a gun. They even confirmed the specific model and type of it.

You love to defend the bad guys don't you. I think you get some sort of strange kick out of it.

MOOGLEYS · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

Armed police are amazingly well trained, they do not shoot to kill in this country either.

This is incorrect every police officer and military person carrying a firearm operates to the same rules of engadgment. If it is deemed necesary to open fire under these rules then you are shooting to kill and nothing more. You are only authorised to fire aimed shots at the trunk of the body (Biggest bit)..

Will21st · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

scorza said:
Not really the point is it? carrying a handgun doesn't mean the police can just gun you down. If some evidence appears that Mr Duggan was a threat to the police e.g. by pointing his gun at them, then it becomes a different matter.

Yes it does,I'm afraid.You don't have to point the gun at police to be shot.Even trying to grab it can be enough to be shot.

Neil79 · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

These Politicians make me sick they are a complete waste of space

SuperTronNarwhal · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

[TW]Sponge;19788313 said:
Car on fire in Croydon. Here we go again.....

Got my popcorn ready.

Bennie-Mac · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

Just heard on LBC that a woman witnessed several parents dropping thier kids off to participate in riots. They were parking in her street and waiting for them to return with stolen goods, popping them in the boot and sending them back out again. :mad:

Ahleckz · 9 Aug 2011 at 17:39

Will21st said:
Your view is thought out,and proven? Proven where? I've lived in countries that have used all those tools I mentioned,and they are highly effective,even in running battles.
Police officers and security experts agree with you? You mean the ACPO,commander types and rent-a-mouths on the telly?
Go to Inspector gadgets blog,or other dedicated police blogs,then you'll see what front-line REALLY think.
Where did I say I'm right? You post that these tools aren't needed in such a patronising fashion,you pretend that your opinion is authoritative,and anyone who dares to differ gets shot down.

So,you think it's ineffective,and I think it's effective and shall continue to post my opinion.Feel free to post yours.

BTW,I don't really think you're in a position to suggest I 'go away',but nice try nontheless.

I've posted plenty about this. I'm not going to discuss it with you yet again. You keep throwing odd sentences towards me and I'm not really sure why you're doing that. Your entire way of coming across is quite odd, for example "BTW,I don't really think you're in a position to suggest I 'go away',but nice try nontheless.

". Bizarre.
Your disregard and disrespect of senior officers is also very sad.