Current Affairs Met Police

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wizard said:
There's also a very good Errol Morris documentary called The Thin Blue Line which I think is from the 80's about the killing of an American police officer. So yeah, it wasn't started by racist police in response to BLM.
Click to expand...
And its connotation of supporting bereaved families would also match. As I said to @Hackbread, if they can't wear it and then do, so it's a clear-cut case.

The issue I've mentioned is that there in the UK people are suggesting it's used for this and that, yet from what I can tell it's an assumption that doesn't stand up.

I'm not saying that there isn't any cops who are wearing it for that reason or with that connotation, but to suggest the majority are (or have those views) is unjustified.
 
It's almost like these brave upstanding heroes of the modern day are a law unto themselves...

www.standard.co.uk

Police ‘should be punished for covering up ID’

MET commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson was told today he must discipline officers who have defied orders to identify themselves.
www.standard.co.uk www.standard.co.uk

"The officer, a constable trained in first aid, was directly defying Sir Paul's order that they should be worn at all times after riot police at the G20 protests hid their badges."
 
Blue 1 said:
Bravo, pigs. *slow handclap*

www.theguardian.com

Met rammed boy, 13, playing with water pistol off bike and pointed guns at him

Force apologised for incident where boy was handcuffed and which his mother said left him broken
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
The Met said: “Specialist officers are trained on specific tactics including using vehicles to bring cyclists to a stop. This tactic was used in this case, causing the boy to fall off his bike."

He didn't fall off his bike, this 13 year old black kid was knocked off his bike by a police* using a vehicle as a weapon. And in part there is a sliver that I agree with one of the police* at the scene, the kid was 'lucky', lucky he wasn't killed by the vehicle, lucky he wasn't shot (he was much more armed than Chris Kaba was) and lucky again that the police* inflicted this ordeal in July and only took till October to apologise. The young man that got his skull smashed in by an unidentified baton wielding police* required life saving brain surgery, was pursued for 13 years for invented crimes before the police* apologised.

Don't play with water pistols, not even water balloons, they might be considered grenades. For your own safety, you have been warned.

God bless and save the met.
 
skynews-water-pistol-choiseory_6327088.jpg
 
Rita_Poon said:
Yes, reportedly so. On his push bike. His sister had a similar pink one.
Click to expand...
Below are four genuine Glock 19 G4/G5 models. Now, I know what people will say - the big blue reservoir gives it away, and you're right. But has that been seen?

1698002053703.png
1698002127494.png
1698002187492.png
1698002216438.png

Now I can't discuss the actual incident as we're unaware of what occurred, but looking at that water-pistol alone then there are some potential issues.

The regulations and code of practice say that imitation weapons should have specific colours, sufficiently bright, to easily distinguish it from a genuine firearm.

Is that sufficiently bright? I would go towards no, when you see what they usually use (bright red, orange, yellow etc for the barrel, and blue etc. in the frame

Does that alone justify the cops knocking him off the bike etc? No, not alone, hence why we need to know more. Yet equally, for me, it isn't clear clut.
 
PhilM said:
Below are four genuine Glock 19 G4/G5 models. Now, I know what people will say - the big blue reservoir gives it away, and you're right. But has that been seen?

View attachment 232424
View attachment 232431
View attachment 232436
View attachment 232437

Now I can't discuss the actual incident as we're unaware of what occurred, but looking at that water-pistol alone then there are some potential issues.

The regulations and code of practice say that imitation weapons should have specific colours, sufficiently bright, to easily distinguish it from a genuine firearm.

Is that sufficiently bright? I would go towards no, when you see what they usually use (bright red, orange, yellow etc for the barrel, and blue etc. in the frame

Does that alone justify the cops knocking him off the bike etc? No, not alone, hence why we need to know more. Yet equally, for me, it isn't clear clut.
Click to expand...
The "big blue reservoir" in that picture looks like a 50 round drum.

Sort of.

If you squint a bit. And the sun is in the right place.
 
PhilM said:
Below are four genuine Glock 19 G4/G5 models. Now, I know what people will say - the big blue reservoir gives it away, and you're right. But has that been seen?

Now I can't discuss the actual incident as we're unaware of what occurred, but looking at that water-pistol alone then there are some potential issues.

The regulations and code of practice say that imitation weapons should have specific colours, sufficiently bright, to easily distinguish it from a genuine firearm.

Is that sufficiently bright? I would go towards no, when you see what they usually use (bright red, orange, yellow etc for the barrel, and blue etc. in the frame

Does that alone justify the cops knocking him off the bike etc? No, not alone, hence why we need to know more. Yet equally, for me, it isn't clear cut.
Click to expand...
Genuine crims could just as easily pink spray paint any real weapon, so although I agree to a point on the colour issue, I'm suggesting a less violent and belligerent initial contact is probably the better solution. Two things occur to me, firstly this 13 year old kid was actually more armed than Chris Kaba. Secondly, with anti police feeling at the extent it is, with a complete lack of faith in government and the authorities en mass, imagine if they'd hit him with their vehicle and he'd been seriously injured and died. I'm not sure the country can make it back from another set of riots like in the wake of the execution of Mark Duggan.
How of the two siblings did they only target one of them for possession of a 'weapon'? If the reservoir is not seen, why not? What else is going unseen?

For instance...
www.theguardian.com

Police Taser blind man mistaking his white stick for a samurai sword

The IPPC is investigating an incident in Chorley, where an innocent person was struck by a 50,000-volt stun gun
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Blue 1 said:
The "big blue reservoir" in that picture looks like a 50 round drum.
Click to expand...
Aye, it could. Like I said, I have no idea of the circumstances apart from he discovered to be thirteen, was on a bike and was seen by a uniformed officer on foot.

To answer you @Rita_Poon, straight away, I was asking myself from what distance they saw the child, what was their field of view and what time of day.

I noticed it was 3.45pm, so lack of light wouldn't be a factor, but distance or an obstructed view can impact on defined age, height and the weapon.

I would suspect it's been reported over the network, and as per policy, a firearms team have been called to intervene with unarmed officers holding at a distance.

An unarmed officer, if he thinks he's seen a firearm, shouldn't/won't intervene unless there is a genuine risk to life there and then, otherwise it's to contain.

You mention the reservoir not being seen, and why - should unarmed police approach a potential suspect to 'clarify'? That's a big ask.

So why have they knocked him off the bike? I don't know as I said. It could be an officer being overly zealous, or maybe the circumstances at the time 'warranted it'.

Now, with hindsight it doesn't look great at all that it's a thirteen-year old boy with a water pistol, but I refer back to the original observation part of my post.

We also don't know he responded to being stopped/asked to stop, if he was. We do not know the size/profile of the boy, what he was/wasn't wearing etc.

Again, it's all conjecture - I'm just trying to think of the potential circumstances that led to the officers deciding to knock him off his bike.

What we've got to hope is that there's enough evidence to prove it either way, and whatever the findings key learning is taken from it and if necessary action.

I understand and appreciate the sentiment that the country can't afford a young boy (of any race) being injured by police on a bike, but we have to balance it.

There are circumstances where you could quite correctly justify their actions; the issue here, is we have no idea if this is or isn't one of those circumstances.
 
PhilM said:
Aye, it could. Like I said, I have no idea of the circumstances apart from he discovered to be thirteen, was on a bike and was seen by a uniformed officer on foot.

To answer you @Rita_Poon, straight away, I was asking myself from what distance they saw the child, what was their field of view and what time of day.

I noticed it was 3.45pm, so lack of light wouldn't be a factor, but distance or an obstructed view can impact on defined age, height and the weapon.

I would suspect it's been reported over the network, and as per policy, a firearms team have been called to intervene with unarmed officers holding at a distance.

An unarmed officer, if he thinks he's seen a firearm, shouldn't/won't intervene unless there is a genuine risk to life there and then, otherwise it's to contain.

So why have they knocked him off the bike? I don't know as I said. It could be an officer being overly zealous, or maybe the circumstances at the time 'warranted it'.

Now, with hindsight it doesn't look great at all that it's a thirteen-year old boy with a water pistol, but I refer back to the original observation part of my post.

We also don't know he responded to being stopped/asked to stop, if he was. We do not know the size/profile of the boy, what he was/wasn't wearing etc.

Again, it's all conjecture - I'm just trying to think of the potential circumstances that led to the officers deciding to knock him off his bike.

What we've got to hope is that there's enough evidence to prove it either way, and whatever the findings key learning is taken from it and if necessary action.

I understand and appreciate the sentiment that the country can't afford a young boy (of any race) being injured by police on a bike, but we have to balance it.

There are circumstances where you could quite correctly justify their actions; the issue here, is we have no idea if this is or isn't one of those circumstances.
Click to expand...
Fair and balanced and even handed.

And now none of that from me...

They said they weren't involved in a pursuit and no police vehicle was there...
www.bbc.co.uk

Cardiff: Police dangerous driving probe over Ely teen deaths

Kyrees Sullivan, 16, and Harvey Evans, 15, died in the crash after they were followed by the police.
www.bbc.co.uk

They said body cameras were rolled out to improve policing and trust....
www.independent.co.uk

Woman left topless in prison cell accuses police officers of sexual assault

Zayna Iman, 38, recounted a 40-hour detainment by Greater Manchester Police, with the claims now referred to the force watchdog for investigation
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

Institutionally corrupt, racist, homophobic, and misogynistic. If they can't police themselves, they've no place policing anyone or anywhere else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top