Guest Steve Cook Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 It's the same here in Canada - what with the police busy tazering innocent people to death and the like. Scum, all of them. I wouldn't go so far as to call all of them scum, though some of them undoubtedly are. However, I would argue that they are all trained to act in scummy ways if ordered to, in the final analysis. I suspect the majority are simply heavy conformists. Non-conformists will just get weeded out in the selection process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
50%deposit Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 its an evil state of evil tyrants aiming to destroy our freedom and gain control of our lives the police are just pawns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 its an evil state of evil tyrants aiming to destroy our freedom and gain control of our livesthe police are just pawns yes However, some of them are disconcertingly willing pawns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOP Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Dangerous Woman started a thread a while back that would fit well in here: We Are Now In Stalin's Soviet Union http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...15312&st=15 Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) tasked to intimidate critics of Jacqui Smith?The UKColumn was shocked to learn that a member of the public, who wrote letters and emails calling the Home Secretary a communist and criticising her for creating a police state, has been summoned for an interview with his GP. The individual, who wishes to remain anonymous, informed the Column that he was recently surprised to receive a call from his GP asking him to attend the surgery. Once in front of his doctor, Mr X was stunned to be told that the GP had received a letter from the highly secretive Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) following instructions from the Home Secretary herself. Although embarrassed, the GP understood from the communication that he was required to interview Mr X to establish his ‘state of mind’. The implications of this incident are extremely serious, as they suggest that anyone who dares to criticise the Home Secretary, or perhaps even the government itself, will be regarded as mentally ill. Clearly for Mr X, Smith’s actions were intended to be a warning and the first step in attempting to brand him mentally ill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crash2006 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 most newspapers have been reporting guess who hasnt reported it yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Mario Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I wouldn't go so far as to call all of them scum, though some of them undoubtedly are. However, I would argue that they are all trained to act in scummy ways if ordered to, in the final analysis.I suspect the majority are simply heavy conformists. Non-conformists will just get weeded out in the selection process. Yes - I am probably over-generalizing. However, my default behaviour when dealing with the police is suspicion and mistrust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quagmire Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I don't think a great deal has changed with respect to hierarchy in society (the ant analogy above is great). Technology has simply brought it into much sharper contrast, in two ways. Firstly, tools such as tazers, ID cards, fingerprinting and CCTV have been invented which are much more "in your face" than the previous method of control, which was simply the threat of violence (arrest, imprisonment). Secondly, it has allowed those at the bottom of the hierarchy to see more clearly those at the top, and to discuss them. The internet (particularly blogs and forums like this one), mobile phones (most of which have cameras) and 24 hour news have all contributed. The 'elite' have fallen behind a bit on the second point and now we're seeing moves to counter this - compulsory internet traffic logging, snooping laws, reduction in freedom of speech (using hate laws) and censorship (see Australia's China style firewall). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Steve Cook Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I don't think a great deal has changed with respect to hierarchy in society (the ant analogy above is great). Technology has simply brought it into much sharper contrast, in two ways. Firstly, tools such as tazers, ID cards, fingerprinting and CCTV have been invented which are much more "in your face" than the previous method of control, which was simply the threat of violence (arrest, imprisonment). Secondly, it has allowed those at the bottom of the hierarchy to see more clearly those at the top, and to discuss them. The internet (particularly blogs and forums like this one), mobile phones (most of which have cameras) and 24 hour news have all contributed. The 'elite' have fallen behind a bit on the second point and now we're seeing moves to counter this - compulsory internet traffic logging, snooping laws, reduction in freedom of speech (using hate laws) and censorship (see Australia's China style firewall). yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandcyclist Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Yes - I am probably over-generalizing. However, my default behaviour when dealing with the police is suspicion and mistrust. seems like you have something to hide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Number79 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Yup. Waterboarding leaves no bruises..... remember how many times suspects used to appear in court with obvious facial injuries, and the judge would be told, well, he tripped up, Sir. Two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest มร หล Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Yes - I am probably over-generalizing. However, my default behaviour when dealing with the police is suspicion and mistrust. TIT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I want a house! Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Personally I prefer the Politically Correct name Cannabis Importer or Grower instead of Drug Dealer.Drug Dealer is too general. You know what really irritates me about this whole Canna story. Yes, Cannabis can cause mental issues but so can booze and I think the numbers for booze are higher. I could find the articles out there but they are all over the show. Cannabis has never caused a death except from news reels that say some dude was SMOKING Cannabis and drinking (really small print) whilst driving a car. The evil Cannabis made him die. They is no objectivity. Making cannabis illegal has caused huge crimes against individuals for smoking a plant. For example, as cannabis isn't a product one can buy, people mix it with tobacco, a very dangerous drug which is known to call and have people's ligaments to be dismembered. Cannabis can only be acquired by drug dealers, hence its a gateway drug as dealers want to push the harder addictive rubbish on their marks. We have no quality control over the illegal substance so people are mixing with rubbish to make it heavier in order to make a profit and ruining the health of many law abiding (bar canna) citizens who pay tax for the police to arrest them, one of life's ironies. Police time is better used to protect victims from crime (rape, murder, robbery and so on) and not from smoking a plant, a personal descision. I think the government would like to breast feed up if it could! We could deal with Canna socially and there would be no police brutality and now more Cannabis farms (can 6 plants be called a farm now?) as we could grow it commercially and not give the money to drug lords, Al queda or the Taliban. Perhaps, we should just let the freaking Taliban grow the plant and smoke it. It may sort out the war in the area. Damn opium! Anyway, not that anyone asked but that is my two pence to this part of the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrivateerMk2 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Yes - I am probably over-generalizing. However, my default behaviour when dealing with the police is suspicion and mistrust. That's my default behaviour when dealing with anyone. To paraphrase Lord Vetenarii: 'There are not good people and bad people. There are only bad people, but sometimes they're on different sides.' Nearly all human beings are ignorant, stupid scum, prone to violence when not in fear of retribution, so you shouldn't be surprised to find individuals like that in the police. Ironically, nuclear war seems to be our species' best hope for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starsky Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Has anything been proven yet? Also, incidents like this do not imply a general policy or trend. How many cops are there in London? They aren't all going to behave well all the time, any more than any of us. The amount of surveillance does concern me though, as does the geezer going to the doctor for a headcheck. A couple aspirins probably sorted him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.