I think you're both being a bit extreme. You can never justify thievery, but shooting people for crimes is also wrong. Like everything there's a middle ground and that's what we should aim for.

I think it's pretty clear that the thugs rioting in London aren't doing it for any morale crusade, they just want to see the world burn. I am not advocating killing someone for stealing a melon, however when violence is threatened towards you and the safety of the innocent people that are to scared to leave their homes because of a bunch of yobs then something needs to be done. A building was burnt down last night and innocent people could have been killed caught in the middle of something they don't want a part of. I'm glad you are defending people burning buildings and throwing weapons at police officers though and causing destruction to the city, I guess you are morally superior to me.

And it isn't stealing if you steal your own property back. If you did it without threatening to kill someone then of course killing you would be wrong.

And that's when a riot, showing the dissatisfaction of a people, turns into an all out civil war because the government has drastically overstepped their bounds.

Anyway, yes this does remind me of LA with the Rodney King verdict. Police in general have too much wiggle room and to much protection from the laws they are supposed to uphold. But I do not know the nitty gritty of the beginnings of this riot so I cannot comment on the "righteousness" of the rioters.

By protecting the innocents of the city and of the local area, by stopping the thugs. How is that over stepping their bounds?

And they are not disatisfied at anything, they are scavengers and oportunists using it as a chance to commit crime. I bet most of them don't give a toss about the shooting of the local man that was killed by police officers.

Yes. Giving the Met more guns. Clearly the way forward. The Met is trigger happy, unemployment for young people is HUGE and then they shoot someone and don't give answers. Meh. What do you expect.

Things like that would make me take to the streets. There should never be a point where someones human rights are forfeit. EVER.

<_<

I mean, we hadhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta and then people come along as say "Heh, I don't understand why people are angry/frustrated/looting. There can't be any causes except young people being young people. The clear option is to use more violence because that makes it better.".

Arresting those that participate in such acts would be a wonderful place to start, rather than going on some barbaric rampage. There are quite a few non-lethal methods of taking down perpetrators that should be considered before "grabbing their shotguns and blowing them away." Lethal force should be a last resort, not your first line of defense.

Earlier you said they should all be shot, and there should be no middle ground for criminals, so I responded accordingly. I'm glad we both agree no one should be killed for stealing a melon. I'm defending the fact that just because you're near the people throwing weapons and burning buildings, you don't deserve to be shot.
I can't imagine a way to resolve these riots and have justice be done and be done fairly.

Clearly my no nonsense approach isn't appreciated. Fine we shall carry on with the gentle gentle approach.

To be fair, if you say "as far as I am concerened as soon as you break the law, your human rights should be irrelivent" then you can't blame someone for misinterpreting your post to mean that you want all criminals to be shot...

In any case, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, and since no one has been killed in this rioting so far, what you're advocating goes even further than that - to the realms of the medieval. If the police were in the habit of massacreing anyone involved in civil disobedience then perhaps we would have a reason to riot, so it's a good thing those making decisions about the law are more level headed than you.

By all I mean those that threaten the lives of others, stealing doesn't justify death but trying to kill a police officer, which is what they are essentailly doing by throwing large bricks at them needs a hard response, imo

I admit I can be hot headed and the fact that no one has been killed yet is more luck than anything else. The situation needs to be stopped sooner rather than later.

I doubt someone throwing a brick at someone in riot armour is trying to kill them. Cause harm maybe.


Sure, but do you really thing using excessive force is going to help? Really? You remember what started this?

Now, lets say what would happen if the police killed (by accident) a protester/rioter? Yeah...



Apparently part of the cause of this is the new police stop and search tactics. So possibly a lot of this is frustration against the police :shrug:

Ok what about the people that burnt down the supermarket, I bet they didn't check no one was inside first.

I agree, it does need to stop, but do you think that a riot that began (however dubious the connection) with a shooting can be ended with more?


Most buildings in the area were evacuated long before rioters got near them. You'd have a very hard time sticking an attempted murder charge on anyone involved...

Sure but there is no intention of murder. Destruction of property yes. You may as well charge everyone driving over the speed limit with attempted murder.

As for how to stop it, maybe my approach would work maybe it wouldn't. I just hate to see people who commit crime get off soft, which is what happens too much in this country.

I would sure try though

Funnily enough that would be in my manifesto when I run for Prime minister :thumbsup: Still wouldn't matter this is England you get out in 2 weeks for good behaviour here

So your method involves basically shooting indiscriminately at a crowd of rioters? Why not then, it seemed to work ok for Libya.

This is a separate argument about how to sentence prisoners (For harshly, look at how well, or not, the american system is working. Or how well it isn't).

However, getting back to the topic in hand, I would imagine the police are going to have a fun time going over evidence and there are a lot of arrests being made.

"We want our tea, and we want it NOW."

My best guess without reading the article.

Why? Some sort of desire for vengeance? Because harder punishment has precisely squat effect on actually reducing crime, so I can't think of any other reason... And the law exists to make vengeance unnecessary. You may as well throw people to the mob yourself if that's your motivation.


Ah, I see, you subscribe to the Daily Mail school of random conjecture and lies in place of facts...

Uh. No you don't. We have one of the highest incarceration rates in Western Europe which is why we have a far lower homicide rate than places like Germany. Oh. Wait.


Anyway. Come to Scotland. It is just better

?_?

This is England. We'd sooner run out of rain than we would tea.

Your avatar just changed before my eyes.

On topic: Is it really bad?