Another attack

And yet its just being labelled as a religious group in the BBC it was raided over forced marriage --by 500 police, but nothing to see here move along and the story has been memory holed already by the BBC. It is quite clearly an Islamist training camp. A few of the neighbours have been secretly filming the large groups all dressed in black and they look like squaddies training on the parade ground
But this is your lot from the BBC about it
It's a typical 'cult' type group. Nothing to do with religion.
The reason for the investigation was mainly sex abuse, forced marriage, etc.
If you want to be informed via social media, you'd better wear your coloured specs'. :rolleyes:
 
You don't think that a lifetime of discrimination can affect someone's mental stability.

You claim to have experience of discrimination. do you not think it hasn't affected your outlook?
Perhaps you were protected as a child from such discrimination, or prepared for it?
 
You don't think that a lifetime of discrimination can affect someone's mental stability.

You claim to have experience of discrimination. do you not think it hasn't affected your outlook?
Perhaps you were protected as a child from such discrimination, or prepared for it?
I don't claim to, I have. Fact, not assertion. I will however say not to any great extent.

This mental health bandwagon thing is getting out of control. Are there folk out there with serious mental health issues? Yes, of course. Should they be helped? Yes, of course. Should they be in secure units and not in the community if deemed a possible risk to others? Yes, of course, however much of that was scrapped under care in the community, which is a dangerous policy in some cases.

As for the 9 years sentence and serving 4.5, what a complete farce of a sentence. But then what do we expect when, increasingly, the sentences that are dished out are pathetically short.
 
I don't claim to, I have. Fact, not assertion. I will however say not to any great extent.
And mild discrimination can have a large effect on some, creating the scenario of their withdrawal, which can become an ever increasing circle of cause and effect.

This mental health bandwagon thing is getting out of control. Are there folk out there with serious mental health issues? Yes, of course. Should they be helped? Yes, of course. Should they be in secure units and not in the community if deemed a possible risk to others? Yes, of course, however much of that was scrapped under care in the community, which is a dangerous policy in some cases.
So he, and his victims were considered less important than the cost of such care?

As for the 9 years sentence and serving 4.5, what a complete farce of a sentence. But then what do we expect when, increasingly, the sentences that are dished out are pathetically short.
Maybe prison wasn't the right place for him, but given the comment above, maybe it was the cheaper option.
If society creates such people, and doesn't take into account the result of such people walking around, what does society expect?

In the animal kingdom, such anomalies would be killed or excluded.
But we're not animals, we take care of our sick, injured, and incapable people. Or so we claim.
 
It's a typical 'cult' type group. Nothing to do with religion.
The reason for the investigation was mainly sex abuse, forced marriage, etc.
If you want to be informed via social media, you'd better wear your coloured specs'. :rolleyes:
BS
It is a military style training camp and the narrative of mainly sex abuse, forced marriage, is a cover story for the dummies that want to believe it. We know your google doesn’t work the same as everyone else’s but anyone can google it and you will find vids secretly recorded by scared neighbours.
 
BS
It is a military style training camp and the narrative of mainly sex abuse, forced marriage, is a cover story for the dummies that want to believe it. We know your google doesn’t work the same as everyone else’s but anyone can google it and you will find vids secretly recorded by scared neighbours.
They've been affected by chem trails.
 
And mild discrimination can have a large effect on some, creating the scenario of their withdrawal, which can become an ever increasing circle of cause and effect.

So he, and his victims were considered less important than the cost of such care?

Maybe prison wasn't the right place for him, but given the comment above, maybe it was the cheaper option.
If society creates such people, and doesn't take into account the result of such people walking around, what does society expect?

In the animal kingdom, such anomalies would be killed or excluded.
But we're not animals, we take care of our sick, injured, and incapable people. Or so we claim.

You're nothing but a whole lot of wrong if your 'mental health issues' lead you to attack innocent people. Get 'em locked up in the proverbial (or actual if needed) padded cell and keep 'em off the streets.

More and more it's about the poor perpetrators and what led them to commit their crimes. Less and less focus on the victims. P1ss poor sentencing etc.

That idiot leading the Greens re-tweeted a message about the police being too heavy handed when they were trying to stop the nut job!
 
You're nothing but a whole lot of wrong if your 'mental health issues' lead you to attack innocent people. Get 'em locked up in the proverbial (or actual if needed) padded cell and keep 'em off the streets.

More and more it's about the poor perpetrators and what led them to commit their crimes. Less and less focus on the victims. P1ss poor sentencing etc.
If the mentally unstable people were properly treated, or detained, there wouldn't be any, or as many, victims.

That idiot leading the Greens re-tweeted a message about the police being too heavy handed when they were trying to stop the nut job!
He was incapacitated by a taser.
Was the kick to the head really necessary?

When a brown man in an airport does it, it's an aggravated crime. When a policeman does it, it's necessary.
Do you not think there is an imbalance there?
 
If the mentally unstable people were properly treated, or detained, there wouldn't be any, or as many, victims.

Exactly and that is why we need to detain - lock up every single boat arrival until we have established who they are and their history.
 
Exactly and that is why we need to detain - lock up every single boat arrival until we have established who they are and their history.
An assessment is sufficient to identify anyone displaying dangerous intentions.
Locking up people for no reason is self-defeating, morally reprehensible and illegal.
Evidently that wouldn't bother you.
 
Interesting that people seem to think the police used too much force to wrestle the knife off the terrorist. I'm glad that Mark Rowley has actually stood up to Zac Polanski over his comments about it.

Also interesting for the people that think the police used too much force, that if this attack had happened in most European countries or America, he would have been shot rather than kicked until he dropped the knife.
100%. In other countries the attacker would have bullets in him not a taser needle. I still think our police are too soft on these criminals, they world has changed and they need to change with the level of threat. No law abiding citizen would worry about police carrying firearms, our police are highly trained and I for one would be confident they would use them on the right people. If you don't engage in crime, you will be fine. Simple but true formula.
 
He was incapacitated by a taser.
Was the kick to the head really necessary?

When a brown man in an airport does it, it's an aggravated crime. When a policeman does it, it's necessary.
Do you not think there is an imbalance there?
He had just stabbed two people.
He was an immediate threat to others.
He didn't immediately comply.
Adequate and appropriate force was used.

What approach should the police have taken? Offered him a cuppa and a biccy?

When a brown man in an airport does what? When a policeman does what? The former is most likely committing a crime, the latter is upholding the law. There's no imbalance.

Too easy for folk these days to say 'it's my mental health ...'
 
He had just stabbed two people.
He was an immediate threat to others.
He didn't immediately comply.
Adequate and appropriate force was used.

What approach should the police have taken? Offered him a cuppa and a biccy?

When a brown man in an airport does what? When a policeman does what? The former is most likely committing a crime, the latter is upholding the law. There's no imbalance.

Too easy for folk these days to say 'it's my mental health ...'
And he was also wearing a rucksack containing who knows what ! He needed to be incapacitated by any means as fast as possible he is lucky that the police were not properly armed.
 
He had just stabbed two people.
He was an immediate threat to others.
He didn't immediately comply.
Adequate and appropriate force was used.

What approach should the police have taken? Offered him a cuppa and a biccy?

When a brown man in an airport does what? When a policeman does what? The former is most likely committing a crime, the latter is upholding the law. There's no imbalance.

Too easy for folk these days to say 'it's my mental health ...'
Bit of a mismatch in the reports.
Were they struggling to wrest the knife from him
Or was he refusing to show his hands? In which case how could they know he was holding a knife?
Why shouldn't the IOPC look into it?
Why should it not even be considered?
Is it going to become acceptable that police immediately resort to kicking people in the head during arrest?

How long before people become instantly violent. fearing for their safety, when faced by the police using excessive force?
 
Back
Top