Met police request support from army after officers down firearms

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

on the whole the legal/social/welfare establishment leans away from those its meant to help/protect, I doubt most of those who work in those institutions support this, which is one of the key issues that they end up tainted by a failing system.. the thing I am seeing is those who are normally on opposite sides coming together to oppose the current system as its failing everyone and plugging the gaps for some its schools, others its medical care and it will be policing at some point.. my worry is the far end it'll be justice.

a reply to: Insurrectile

How so? Isn't immigration, racism, police profiling et al part of this picture?

Do you want a cookie? Just ask.

a reply to: Insurrectile

the title of the thread actually says something about the perilous state of the country, and as most western countries are mirrors of each other it reflects on them to..

the last time the military policed uk streets it was during the troubles if we look at the mainland streets it was 1919 and the legacy of the battle of George square, the after effects of Peterloo will linger with england for a long time.

a reply to: nickyw

the last time the military policed uk streets it was during the troubles if we look at the mainland streets it was 1919 and the legacy of the battle of George square, the after effects of Peterloo will linger with england for a long time.

Probably a good moment to review a few studies on that, forgot about that for a second.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Do not behold the political motivation of a headshot!

Okay, Boomer.

I'm trying to understand this, someone please correct me if and where I go wrong.

The "Met", I assume, are the local police. They believe that an Audi Q8 owned by rapper Chris Kaba was "linked" to a "firearms incident." I assume they were looking for the car based on a license plate number and not just by a description of make and model. Does anyone know this for sure? What was the "firearms incident"? If was a shooting, why not say so?

In any case, did the police have evidence that Kaba was involved in the "firearms incident", or just his car? I'm no cop, but it seems to me that the best way to handle the situation would be to call or make personal contact with Kaba at home and ask him some questions. But, for whatever reasons, they chose to set up a roadblock and use a patrol car to box him in. An ambush. They command Kaba to exit the vehicle.

Mr. Kaba makes the very poor decision of refusing to get out of the car and tries to drive off and hits a patrol car. Officers feel they are in danger, at least one fires at and kills Kaba.

So far so good, for everyone except Kaba.

But then, some members of the community raise a stink about the killing of an unarmed man. In response, officials decide to launch an investigation, just like they would in any non-officer related shooting, to appease the public. I'm sure the officials are confident the officer would be fully exonerated.

However, members of the Met bristle at the idea that the shooter should be treated like a common citizen. In protest, they decide to "down" their weapons. I assume this means they intend to patrol without guns, a form of protest since they can't actually go on strike. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on that. But, because they feel vulnerable without their guns, they want to bring the army in to protect them.

I may be wrong on some of my points and assumptions, but if I'm right ...

Why would the Met be opposed to an investigation? If everything is as they say, they should welcome an open investigation to clear the shooter of any wrongdoing.

If members of the Met voluntarily decide to patrol unarmed, why ask the military for help? Britian is supposed to be pretty much gun free anyway. If you feel you need guns, carry them. Don't ask someone else to carry them for you.

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

Nah, Victor. You're making too much sense, the kids are going to be offended now!

but if I'm right

Right? Don't have much to add, but the term reminds me of good old John Locke, and our right to revolt.

Whenever the Legislators endeavor to take away, and destroy the Property of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence. Whensoever therefore the Legislative shall transgress this fundamental Rule of Society; and either by Ambition, Fear, Folly or Corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other an Absolute Power over the Lives, Liberties, and Estates of the People; By this breach of Trust they forfeit the Power, the People had put into their hands, for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the People, who have a Right to resume their original Liberty.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

A huge proportion of cars on our roads are 'ringers'. The licence plate number actually belongs to a different car, but usually of the same make, model and approximate age. I've experienced this myself when I was asked to explain a minor crash in a part of the country I've never been to. When the insurance company realised the car involved was most likely a ringer they ended the phone call almost instantly. It seems few people want to acknowledge how widespread the scam is.

Frequently gangs driving ringers will go on a crime spree and it has to be stopped as soon as possible.

The daughter of the woman I bought that car from also had her cars number used for a ringer. I assume the criminals noted both numbers when she was parked at her mothers house. She had a visit from the police one day because a car almost identical to hers, and with the same plate, had been used for a series of armed robberies by a gang of black males. She only had to point out that the car in the CCTV stills they showed her had a couple of modifications that didn't exist on her car and she was off the hook. Before they left the police told her it was fortunate for her she wasn't a black male, because a black male driving a car with that plate could have been roughly arrested. Not because they were black but because black was the description. You'd have to try and ram your way out of it in a way that threatened life to risk getting shot, even then more than 99% of the time you wouldn't get shot unless you showed a gun. It's ridiculous the way criminals are coddled here.

If I and a British policeman both shot a man in identical circumstances the investigation into the policeman would be far longer, deeper and cause vastly more damage to the policeman's life.

The decision to use the military was to deal with gun crime, not protect the police. Personally I found that the most amusing part of the story. I was waiting for an interview with an armed robber saying how affronted they were that instead of facing men and women who were very reluctant to touch the trigger, instead they were facing people who I believe would be far less likely to hesitate.

Gun crime in the UK is vastly underreported to keep up illusions. If you have time this interview is very informative.

At 22:50 he describes how criminals in Britain will try to fight their way out if their car is blocked in because they think they'll just be facing cops with useless batons and incapacitant spray. Then they freeze up when a cop with a pump action shotgun loaded with lead powder wax slugs shoots out their wheels " . . . because it's England and that doesn't happen . . ." If one of the criminals pointed a gun and got shot with a wax slug that would cause extreme problems for the cop because the criminal would be too dead. It's complicated and it's mostly hidden from the general public.

removed