• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Summer 2024: Rioting across UK cities

The National Police Chiefs’ Council said on Thursday that 1,127 arrests had been made since the disorder started
Let's look at the bright side - at this rate they'll run out of room in the prisons in no time, and have to rethink things...

(I gradually lost confidence in this post as I wrote it)
 
Let's look at the bright side - at this rate they'll run out of room in the prisons in no time, and have to rethink things...

(I gradually lost confidence in this post as I wrote it)
Supposedly they already have so are letting violent immigrants out early so they can put more online posters in jail.
 
Interesting take on the different types of rioters (also archived here if link doesn't work) ....
Spoiler alert: this author sees them as either Combatants, "Geezers and Scallies" and Losers.
This is the common accepted categories when dealing with riots. The titles change a bit but the general British thinking in police and military fall in this category. Canada as well. Theres a psychologist I can’t recall the name of that’s usually linked with this as well.
 
Supposedly they already have so are letting violent immigrants out early so they can put more online posters in jail.
While I haven't confirmed this to be the case, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Like AT ALL...

And they wonder where all of us 'conspiracy theorists' suddenly came from...
 
This is the common accepted categories when dealing with riots. The titles change a bit but the general British thinking in police and military fall in this category. Canada as well. Theres a psychologist I can’t recall the name of that’s usually linked with this as well.

Oversimplified and a largely negative/ criminal description of rioters, which is not always the case.

There's also the 'thrill seeker'. Riots are alot of fun, believe it or not, for both the rioters and the riot control forces. Which has its own range of issues for both sides.

There are also the ideologues, who are there because they think they can force changes in the system in some way, or who are making a political point. These can be the most dangerous as their commitment to 'the cause', whatever it may be, can inspire a whole host of actions that common thugs wouldn't even consider.
 
... There are also the ideologues, who are there because they think they can force changes in the system in some way, or who are making a political point ...
I suspect something between "Ideologues" and "Combatants" might be a better identifier of such a group. And there would be subgroupings in there based on the ideology, too - like uber-right hyper-nationalists or uber-left ANTIFA-adjacents, or hard-core supporters of either side.
 
Oversimplified and a largely negative/ criminal description of rioters, which is not always the case.

There's also the 'thrill seeker'. Riots are alot of fun, believe it or not, for both the rioters and the riot control forces. Which has its own range of issues for both sides.

There are also the ideologues, who are there because they think they can force changes in the system in some way, or who are making a political point. These can be the most dangerous as their commitment to 'the cause', whatever it may be, can inspire a whole host of actions that common thugs wouldn't even consider.
Both of those are personality characteristics of the categories. The article is oversimplified not the category. The categories are silo’d as they are to assist with the response and how to split the crowds not to be a comprehensive psychological profile so people feel they are properly represented.

And rioters are criminals. Riots are by definition violent disturbances of the peace. Taking part in a riot even for fun or thrills is criminal.

The three categories also apply to the police officers because it’s also accepted that there are “combatant” natured cops as well.

People taking part in demonstrations or peaceful assembly or a protest are not criminals. Rioters are.
 
Both of those are personality characteristics of the categories. The article is oversimplified not the category. The categories are silo’d as they are to assist with the response and how to split the crowds not to be a comprehensive psychological profile so people feel they are properly represented.

And rioters are criminals. Riots are by definition violent disturbances of the peace. Taking part in a riot even for fun or thrills is criminal.

The three categories also apply to the police officers because it’s also accepted that there are “combatant” natured cops as well.

People taking part in demonstrations or peaceful assembly or a protest are not criminals. Rioters are.

Good points, of course...

And now is probably a good time to 'talk to the disaffected multitudes', whether they like it or not, before the action spools up again. But watch out for the Scouser's head butt ;)


Liverpool leaders seek dialogue with UK rioters to heal divides​


Shocked by violence on the streets of Liverpool as racist riots spread across Britain this week, community leaders in the once close-knit city say people need to talk with rioters and disaffected residents, not just punish or shun them.

In a letter, opens new tab addressed to the city's council and politicians, heads of sports and arts collectives called for a local "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" to re-open lines of communication they argue were severed by social media and the COVID pandemic.

 
On hypocrisy, what-aboutism and flip-flopping.

Archive link here in case the OP link doesn't work.

Different groups holding the other side to a different standard than their own? Pshhaaaaaw ......
 
People taking part in demonstrations or peaceful assembly or a protest are not criminals. Rioters are.
Took the words right out of my mouth Booter.


People legitimately protesting are not criminals - it is their fundamental right to protest issues they don't agree with

Rioters have crossed the line of peaceful protest, and have resorted to violence or anarchy - and are criminals



For me, far right & far left are essentially the same to deal with. Whether it's an ANTIFA crowd or a far right 'extemist' crowd, both are dangerous & full of people who are batshit crazy, who can be very dangerous.
 
... far right & far left are essentially the same to deal with. Whether it's an ANTIFA crowd or a far right 'extemist' crowd, both are dangerous & full of people who are batshit crazy, who can be very dangerous.
And all each group needs are not that many "keeners" to poke the others into the shittier shit.
 
absolutely.

Including those who stoke the rage in person and online.

And it looks like the RCMP are doing the same, in Chilliwack...

Chilliwack RCMP arrest social media user over 'discriminatory' and 'racially offensive' posts​



 
And it looks like the RCMP are doing the same, in Chilliwack...

Chilliwack RCMP arrest social media user over 'discriminatory' and 'racially offensive' posts​



Very different set of facts.

The thought police are real and here
No. The accused has been public- Google Christine Loughead Chilliwack. She posted a copy of her undertaking identifying charges of Wilful Promotion of Hatred and Public Incitement of Hatred. She’s well known in the community for, eg, following and harassing minority kids, accosting minorities in the street… She posted a video of herself at a grocery store rubbing pork on Halal food preparation counters, etc. this isn’t a case of someone just saying shitty stuff on Twitter. From those who know of her antics in the community, she’s deeply and aggressively unhinged and has been for years.

That, of course, has not stopped certain people from pushing a ‘thought police’ narrative without making any effort to ascertain the facts.
 
Nice of you to link my general post to one specific event vice world events in general. Look at the way things are going in the world. It is already in the UK where a person standing silent can be approached by police, questioned and threatened with arrest because the officer believes they are silent praying. In all fairness they are standing in buffer zones which prevent demonstrations, but they do not prevent someone from standing there. Get arrested for posting that you don't want your tax dollars going to immigrants which is not the party thought. Post that your thought is that all illegal immigrants should be deported and you could face jail. This is thought policing, you can only voice an opinion that is government approved. Recent events in Canada seem to be shadowing the events in the UK so I won't be surprised if the same happens here. We already have it that certain stories will make a big splash but when debunked little is published. Girl claimed man tried to cut her hijab was pushed hard and highly condemned nationally by government at all levels. Once found to be a lie it became PR to give a quick "glad it didn't happen" then either rant on about hate crimes or just shut up. Some news agencies didn't even report that it was a lie, just went mum on the matter. CBC for once was at the forefront of making public the lie.

As for googling - only found one actual report in regard to the event in Chilliwack. Doesn't really provide much information so I will wait on the information to be released before judging this case rather than just rely on reddit. I will say though that as it is Chilliwack it wouldn't surprise me as in the time we lived there it was obvious there was a fair amount of prejudice towards Asian and Indigenous groups.
 
. . . It is already in the UK where a person standing silent can be approached by police, questioned and threatened with arrest because the officer believes they are silent praying. In all fairness they are standing in buffer zones which prevent demonstrations, but they do not prevent someone from standing there. Get arrested for posting that you don't want your tax dollars going to immigrants which is not the party thought. Post that your thought is that all illegal immigrants should be deported and you could face jail. This is thought policing, you can only voice an opinion that is government approved. . . .

Can you provide some specifics about numbers arrested/convicted/sentenced?

As for the "silent prayer", are you referring to this case?

Officers intervened after they suspected she fell foul of regulations introduced last year banning people from intimidating or harassing someone within 150 metres of an abortion clinic.

Vaughan-Spruce was arrested at the Birmingham clinic just weeks after she was found not guilty for doing the same thing weeks earlier in December 2022.

I tried to find, but was unsuccessful, the written judgement of not guilty to see how the judge came to that conclusion. There may be some explanation as to why there was a difference of interpretation by the police. Anyway, an apology and £13,000 was given to her.

As to arrests for "posting your thoughts", can you direct me to any examples of pers being arrested and charged for this. Of the two most prominent in the news and who pleaded guilty, a quick review of their sentencing remarks would indicate they did more than "think all immigrants be deported".

Rex v. Tyler Kay

Rex v. Jordan Parlour
 
Back
Top