Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Seriously? On what basis are you making the very bold claim that the officer didn't follow "the strict procedure for firearms officers?"

-Have you read the comments from Sal Naseem (IOPC) regarding why the charge was levied?
-What qualifies you to opine that the officer showed poor judgement? Have you ever professionally carried a firearm?
-Have you ever had someone drive a 1.2 tonne vehicle at you, when you've got a duty to stop them?
-If other members of the team felt the same way and would have taken the same actions does that not suggest to you that they were acting very much within their training?
-If "all guns" are off the streets, who's taking them from the criminals? Who responds to terror attacks?
-Do you understand Common Law right to self defence, S76 CJIA, S3 CLA and S117 PACE?

And finally the really big question that tankies never real feel like answering, what would you have done to resolve the situation in the same circumstances?

Let's not forget though that Kaba shot at more members of the Black community then the Met did the year he died.


Ian, obviously you owe me **** all, but I'd be really interested in your responses to those questions.

If the board can give Os **** for dump posting and running without explaining his points then the sane rules should be for the far left too
 
The Radio 4 report this evening stated that Blake was being charged with gross miconduct but did not elaborate on this. The BBC news website quotes Amanda Rowe , the director of IOPC, who states that the legal test for misconduct has a low bar and they believe in this instance there is a case to answer. This follows their own investigations and interviews.

I stand corrected about the issue of manslaughter and bow to Lincoln's greater knowledge. I have no axe to grind with anyone on this. No issues with Lincoln or Libby.

Just wondered if anyone had thought about the opposite argument that it is ok to make errors of judgement that result in the deaths of others and not to be held accountable ? Do you think SO19 should be given immunity from prosecution ? There was clearly an error of judgement in a febrile situation with a community that was already nervous after George Floyd.

I don't think my opinion is un anyway controversial but no doubt IOAG will be clutching his pearls.
 
The Radio 4 report this evening stated that Blake was being charged with gross miconduct but did not elaborate on this. The BBC news website quotes Amanda Rowe , the director of IOPC, who states that the legal test for misconduct has a low bar and they believe in this instance there is a case to answer. This follows their own investigations and interviews.

I stand corrected about the issue of manslaughter and bow to Lincoln's greater knowledge. I have no axe to grind with anyone on this. No issues with Lincoln or Libby.

Just wondered if anyone had thought about the opposite argument that it is ok to make errors of judgement that result in the deaths of others and not to be held accountable ? Do you think SO19 should be given immunity from prosecution ? There was clearly an error of judgement in a febrile situation with a community that was already nervous after George Floyd.

I don't think my opinion is un anyway controversial but no doubt IOAG will be clutching his pearls.


Again please refer to Sal Naseem's comments. It's interesting you mentioned George Floyd. Not only are we keen as a nation to import American politics, we're importing their notion of racist police brutality too. It's simply not the case. Look at the % of firearms operations in E&W (the stats are out there) look how many times a firearm is discharged. People are so desperate to kick the police they'll ignore all factual evidence.


What the IOPC are doing now is commonly known as going for a second bite of the cherry. The IOPC are anything but independent. If the rules they apply to police were applied to them, 99% of cases would get nowhere near a court. They're desperate, absolutely desperate to get an officer, particularly a firearms officer sent down. They believe it will help with their "independence" and credibility. If you're really bored take a look at some of their investigations on bog standard complaints. They'll always always find a reason to give an officer a GM hearing even when it's clear (like from CCTV/BWV) that the complainant lied.

No one thinks Police officers or firearms officers should be above the law. But AFOs are more scrutinised than any other police force in the world. If you're taking Rowes statement at face value, then please read the rest of it.

“This is a decision we have taken based on examining all the evidence, views of all parties and by applying the thresholds set out in legislation and guidance which govern our work. The legal test for deciding whether there is a case to answer is low – is there sufficient evidence upon which, on the balance of probabilities, a disciplinary panel could make a finding of misconduct. This has been met and therefore we need to follow the legal process.

A panel could state hippos are pink. Doesn't mean they are. That's literally how much thought they put into it

There's nothing here to suggest that the officer did anything wrong whatsoever, it's once again them bowing to external pressure so when MB is found no case to answer they can claim they tried
 
Thumwood's posts are generally high on wishful thinking but low on facts. He also has an annoying way of assuming everyone thinks the same as him and he speaks for us all. Annoying but insignificant when compared to his opinions.
I used to think he was a harmless but slightly eccentric poster. That was until he put up one of the most disgusting posts that I have seen on this board (not those about Kaba) and is still there for all to see. From that moment I treat his posts and him with contempt.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint
Again please refer to Sal Naseem's comments. It's interesting you mentioned George Floyd. Not only are we keen as a nation to import American politics, we're importing their notion of racist police brutality too. It's simply not the case. Look at the % of firearms operations in E&W (the stats are out there) look how many times a firearm is discharged. People are so desperate to kick the police they'll ignore all factual evidence.


What the IOPC are doing now is commonly known as going for a second bite of the cherry. The IOPC are anything but independent. If the rules they apply to police were applied to them, 99% of cases would get nowhere near a court. They're desperate, absolutely desperate to get an officer, particularly a firearms officer sent down. They believe it will help with their "independence" and credibility. If you're really bored take a look at some of their investigations on bog standard complaints. They'll always always find a reason to give an officer a GM hearing even when it's clear (like from CCTV/BWV) that the complainant lied.

No one thinks Police officers or firearms officers should be above the law. But AFOs are more scrutinised than any other police force in the world. If you're taking Rowes statement at face value, then please read the rest of it.

“This is a decision we have taken based on examining all the evidence, views of all parties and by applying the thresholds set out in legislation and guidance which govern our work. The legal test for deciding whether there is a case to answer is low – is there sufficient evidence upon which, on the balance of probabilities, a disciplinary panel could make a finding of misconduct. This has been met and therefore we need to follow the legal process.

A panel could state hippos are pink. Doesn't mean they are. That's literally how much thought they put into it

There's nothing here to suggest that the officer did anything wrong whatsoever, it's once again them bowing to external pressure so when MB is found no case to answer they can claim they tried
Again please refer to Sal Naseem's comments. It's interesting you mentioned George Floyd. Not only are we keen as a nation to import American politics, we're importing their notion of racist police brutality too. It's simply not the case. Look at the % of firearms operations in E&W (the stats are out there) look how many times a firearm is discharged. People are so desperate to kick the police they'll ignore all factual evidence.


What the IOPC are doing now is commonly known as going for a second bite of the cherry. The IOPC are anything but independent. If the rules they apply to police were applied to them, 99% of cases would get nowhere near a court. They're desperate, absolutely desperate to get an officer, particularly a firearms officer sent down. They believe it will help with their "independence" and credibility. If you're really bored take a look at some of their investigations on bog standard complaints. They'll always always find a reason to give an officer a GM hearing even when it's clear (like from CCTV/BWV) that the complainant lied.

No one thinks Police officers or firearms officers should be above the law. But AFOs are more scrutinised than any other police force in the world. If you're taking Rowes statement at face value, then please read the rest of it.

“This is a decision we have taken based on examining all the evidence, views of all parties and by applying the thresholds set out in legislation and guidance which govern our work. The legal test for deciding whether there is a case to answer is low – is there sufficient evidence upon which, on the balance of probabilities, a disciplinary panel could make a finding of misconduct. This has been met and therefore we need to follow the legal process.

A panel could state hippos are pink. Doesn't mean they are. That's literally how much thought they put into it

There's nothing here to suggest that the officer did anything wrong whatsoever, it's once again them bowing to external pressure so when MB is found no case to answer they can claim they tried

Lincoln

That is a well thought out post but it is interesting to read what you have highlighted in bold as this was precisely why i was arguing the GM enquiry had to proceed. In cases where lethal force is used , it is important that police officers are held to accoint and exonerated if necessary. As stated, the threshold for making a case is low but in these circumstances where someone not doing their job properly has cost a person their life. If a doctor had not followed proceedings with the consequence , they woukd face a GM enquiry. Why should it not relate to a firearms officer.

I think alot of the problem stems from the fact this involved the Met . Probably time for the Met to be reconstructed along the same lines that has happened in Northern Ireland.
 
Lincoln

That is a well thought out post but it is interesting to read what you have highlighted in bold as this was precisely why i was arguing the GM enquiry had to proceed. In cases where lethal force is used , it is important that police officers are held to accoint and exonerated if necessary. As stated, the threshold for making a case is low but in these circumstances where someone not doing their job properly has cost a person their life. If a doctor had not followed proceedings with the consequence , they woukd face a GM enquiry. Why should it not relate to a firearms officer.

I think alot of the problem stems from the fact this involved the Met . Probably time for the Met to be reconstructed along the same lines that has happened in Northern Ireland.


If a Doctor had someone die on their operating table, it does not necessarily follow that they have committed misconduct.

Just because someone died it does not mean that the officers have breached any powers, policies or infractions. The officer has already had accountability. He was tried in court, in front of a jury of his peers.

I asked if you'd read Sal Naseems comments. He clearly states they only brought this forward to appease community tensions. Rowe's full statement shows the IOPC are still playing to the gallery. This has nothing to do with misconduct and everything to do with showing "communities" that the IOPC are on their side.

I'd still genuinely be interested in your answers to those questions. What would you have done in those circumstances?

Edit- you keep saying the officer didn't follow procedure. Where are you getting that from?
 
The working class can kiss my arse,

I’ve got the foreman’s job at last.

You can tell old Joe I’m off the dole -

He can stick his Red Flag up his hole.

Then raise the Workers’ Bomb on high!

Beneath its shroud we’ll gladly die!

Though all our critics do shout “Balls!”

They’ll be beneath it when it falls!
 
The case of Chris Kaba continues to be controversial. I was very surprised that the police officer was not found guilty and i wonder if a conviction would have happened of charged with manslaughter.

The news that the IOPC feels that Martyn Blake needs to be charged with Gross Misconduct is a separate issue to the murder charge and appertains to the fact that the strict procedures for firearms officers were not followed. Unsurprisingly, the Metropolitan Police, who have a track record for institutional racism , are opposed to this action. The current action purely appertains to Blake's poor judgement. I do not understand why the other members of rhe team are not facing the same process. The whole scenario underscores why the Black community has much to be suspicious about the Met

The answer to these kinds of tragedies is obvious and that is to take firearms off the street whether it is criminals or police officers. Our police force is supposed to operate by consent. The police were unaware of Kaba's identity until after he was shot. Not sure that this is what the British public expect of the police especially when you consider they thought it fit enough to employ Wayne Couzins.

Despite IOAG's hysteria , i would suggest most sensible people would agree with the above.
I don't think so, most sensible people would leave the matter to those that know what they are talking about, it is far too complex for most of us to understand all of the nuances. Some would even think it was a justifable homicide, but who can be the judge of that? No doubt lessons will have been learned and put to good use in the event of similar future incidents. You insist on emphasising the Racist element, this is just one element in a whole raft of issues affecting the Met. These are being addressed we are told, and we can only wait and see if they can be resolved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LincolnSaint
Thumwood's posts are generally high on wishful thinking but low on facts. He also has an annoying way of assuming everyone thinks the same as him and he speaks for us all. Annoying but insignificant when compared to his opinions.
I used to think he was a harmless but slightly eccentric poster. That was until he put up one of the most disgusting posts that I have seen on this board (not those about Kaba) and is still there for all to see. From that moment I treat his posts and him with contempt.
Not sure what exactly you're referring to but I'd say his views are clearly not to be taken seriously. The post saying America poses a threat to the free world and we should work more closely with China in response was a classic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint
I think that the general public (excluding Reform nutters ) probably have a more informed and balanced view these days. Not sure that the English aren't sympathetic to Irish Republicanism these days. The perspective has certainly changed massively since 1980s and many English will be sympathetic to some of Kneecap's comments especially regarding Palestine. What will not be tolerated is calls to kill denocratically ekected MPs. Most English people feel guilty and ashamed about our government's policies in Ireland whilst condemning the violence on all sides. People will feel the same about how we have let down Palestine in 2024 and 2025 in about 20 years time.

Agree with all that. Very silly comment by them. Probably meant nothing by it but still unacceptable.
 
Not sure what exactly you're referring to but I'd say his views are clearly not to be taken seriously. The post saying America poses a threat to the free world and we should work more closely with China in response was a classic.

Puck

We should follow the EU's model and try to negotiate more trade with China. Given the fact that China is already caching precious materials necessary for tech products , we needs closer ties with China and not side with Trump.