Jump to content

Mass break into club boats


BWM

Featured Posts

11 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

 

 

Obviously we are a long way from being a fascist country, my point was that there are clear demonstrations of how these things can take hold. How, for example, Hitler, Mussolini etc were allowed to rise to power with the tacit consent of their country’s population, as a result of general difficulties in a country (or in this case, the world).

 

You think the people shouldn't give their tacit consent to the new social distancing law to prevent the spread of coronavirus? Sorry, I'm sure we agree on many things but I still think your parallel to the rise of fascism in Germany and Italy in the 1930s sounds pretty silly.

Edited by blackrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, blackrose said:

 

You think the people shouldn't give their tacit consent to the new social distancing law to prevent the spread of coronavirus? Sorry but I still think your parallels to the rise of fascism in Germany and Italy in the 1930s is silly.

No I didn’t say that. Nor do I think that. You have got completely the wrong end of my stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nicknorman said:

There is no mention in the new Coronavirus law of “unnecessary journeys”. It is a made up thing by the police, like no buying of non-essential goods from supermarket aisles (eg Easter eggs) little Johnny can’t play in the front garden, you can’t walk alone in the Peak District etc.

 

What the law actually says is that one can’t leave home except with a reasonable excuse. Receiving Information that your boat has been broken into is, in my opinion, a reasonable excuse.

 

Really interesting to see how fascism rears its head when there is a crisis on, I guess that’s how it takes hold.

In the longer term I share some of your concern about how much of the emergency legislation will longer longer than originally promised. However, you don'y help your case by misrepresenting the 'reasonableness' test which is increasingly used to legislate in complex contexts. Society to day has too many contexts to define rules in detail so the primary legislation leaves it up to others to apply justice in individual cases. Trying to produce some degree of consistency is never easy and a police chief this morning, according to R4, pointed out that normally with legislation like this they have months to train police officers at every level so that each knows what is expected of them. This has just not been possible this time - not least of they are all social distancing and not allowed to go to training courses! It is highly likely, indeed almost expected, that there will; be glitches with some officers being unduly strict and others too lenient. (Even if that happens all the time) In general I would only get worried if the legal system fails to make adjustments and allows 'silly' interventions to be quietly forgotten with individual officers having to have a talk with their sergeant! This will work best if those who feel that they have been at the receiving end of silliness raise the matter calmly and through proper channels. What will not help is if they rant and exaggerate on social media so that folk start to believe that there is a conspiracy, rather than a cock-up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, frangar said:

I found it interesting that they blamed one particular officer rather than accepting that they made a policy mistake as a force....says a lot that they sacrifice the foot soldiers.....

Northants Chief Constable yesterday actually warned people that road blocks and trolley checks for non-essential items would be brought in if people didnt behave themselves.

He was later forced to amend his statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, matty40s said:

Northants Chief Constable yesterday actually warned people that road blocks and trolley checks for non-essential items would be brought in if people didnt behave themselves.

He was later forced to amend his statement.

He said he was misquoted...interesting given there was a video recording of what he said so hard to deny it....not the sharpest tool in the box! 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, frangar said:

He said he was misquoted...interesting given there was a video recording of what he said so hard to deny it....not the sharpest tool in the box! 

Sharp enough to have got himself a salary in excess of 150k a year!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, frangar said:

I’m not sure those in Northamptonshire are getting value for money. 

I agree. In a lot of cases its jobs for the boys. But that is the same for many jobs innitt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

So a non essential journey then?

Totally understandable and necessary journey, even if not broken into, you may wish to improve security or retrieve items of value to discourage thieves. 

 

 A couple of pictures of one of the boats targeted.

FB_IMG_1586591519995.jpg

FB_IMG_1586591514773.jpg

3 hours ago, nicknorman said:

There is no mention in the new Coronavirus law of “unnecessary journeys”. It is a made up thing by the police, like no buying of non-essential goods from supermarket aisles (eg Easter eggs) little Johnny can’t play in the front garden, you can’t walk alone in the Peak District etc.

 

What the law actually says is that one can’t leave home except with a reasonable excuse. Receiving Information that your boat has been broken into is, in my opinion, a reasonable excuse.

 

Really interesting to see how fascism rears its head when there is a crisis on, I guess that’s how it takes hold.

A perfect take on the creeping madness afflicting the smaller minds amongst us.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my younger days a friend of mine's twin sister was going out with a police officer so we saw quite a bit of him, I thought then that the thin blue line is very thin and at times it was doubtful which side of that line he was.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

In the longer term I share some of your concern about how much of the emergency legislation will longer longer than originally promised. However, you don'y help your case by misrepresenting the 'reasonableness' test which is increasingly used to legislate in complex contexts. Society to day has too many contexts to define rules in detail so the primary legislation leaves it up to others to apply justice in individual cases. Trying to produce some degree of consistency is never easy and a police chief this morning, according to R4, pointed out that normally with legislation like this they have months to train police officers at every level so that each knows what is expected of them. This has just not been possible this time - not least of they are all social distancing and not allowed to go to training courses! It is highly likely, indeed almost expected, that there will; be glitches with some officers being unduly strict and others too lenient. (Even if that happens all the time) In general I would only get worried if the legal system fails to make adjustments and allows 'silly' interventions to be quietly forgotten with individual officers having to have a talk with their sergeant! This will work best if those who feel that they have been at the receiving end of silliness raise the matter calmly and through proper channels. What will not help is if they rant and exaggerate on social media so that folk start to believe that there is a conspiracy, rather than a cock-up.

No I am not concerned that the emergency legislation will go on for longer than necessary. Although it is hard to see exactly what the “exit strategy” can be.

I agree with the concept of “reasonableness”. Back to the old “man in Clapham omnibus” thing.

 

I am totally happy with the emergency legislation and the social distancing measure eg in supermarkets. Well, maybe not “happy” exactly, but I certainly see the need and support them.

 

What I was talking about was the actions of some individuals, not “the establishment”. Mostly, it has to be said, certain police people who seem to think they can make up the law. But also some people on here and other people I know, who see an opportunity to exert power and control over others, and rather like it. All done for the best possible reasons, of course (or so they say).

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blackrose said:

Ok, I can't be bothered to argue about it.

It’s an interesting concept - whether one can have an argument with someone when you have no idea what their view on the topic is. But in your case, yes I’m sure it is possible.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most police constables have they're own private notes of which garages give them a decent ''bung- tip''  for phoning a garage to call them out with breakdown trucks to vehicle accidents.  We had this happen a lot. Next  day they'ed saunter casually in to collect their bung, if you refused you wouldn't get another job from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MoominPapa said:

Cambridgeshire police blamed one particularly egregious tweet on an "over-exuberant officer". IMHO there's very few traits worse in a police office than "over-exuberance". 

 

MP.

 

Isn't there an argument that the best police officers are people who don't want to be police officers?

 

I was at a meeting a while back where the local chief constable spoke.

I wanted to ask her if she saw herself as the chief constable of a police force or a police service but didn't get the opportunity.

 

ETA   As an ex NUM member I saw exactly what the boys in blue can be like back in the winter of 1984/5.

Edited by Victor Vectis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

It’s an interesting concept - whether one can have an argument with someone when you have no idea what their view on the topic is. But in your case, yes I’m sure it is possible.

 

Well you discussed your views at some length and so did I so I'm not sure why you'd think I have no idea about your views or vice versa? 

 

You were talking about some isolated police actions in the UK in recent days and somehow equating that to fascism. I think that's nonsense. Fascism has become an overused and misused term these days by people who don't really know what they're talking about and display their ignorance by insulting the memories of the millions who've died at the hands of fascist regimes. In your case that's exactly what you were doing.

Edited by blackrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago a friend and customer of mine, a fire brigade officer organized a coach tour of East London, an evening pub crawl really, sfter visiting many pubs we ended up at a pub in Hackney at 1am. The pub was heaving with off duty police and fire brigade officers, mainly Free masons I was told and that the pub never actually closed,  all night long after hours drinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

It’s an interesting concept - whether one can have an argument with someone when you have no idea what their view on the topic is. But in your case, yes I’m sure it is possible.

 

Duplicated post

Edited by blackrose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the police have in the midst of crisis forgotten some of the fundamental tenets of policing in the UK - those of policing by consent. I don't think anyone could successfully argue that checking people's shopping trolleys in Tesco and publicly shaming people on social media with drone footage is done with the implicit consent of society. The worry, I feel, is that this shift lingers long after coronavirus becomes a footnote in history.

 

It's a difficult line to draw, but they lost me as soon as they drone-shamed walkers going about their legitimate exercise in the Peak District, not disobeying the letter of the law and before an official lockown was implemented.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, blackrose said:

 

Well you discussed your views at some length and so did I so I'm not sure why you'd think I have no idea about your views or vice versa? 

 

You were talking about some isolated police actions in the UK in recent days and somehow equating that to fascism. I think that's nonsense. Fascism has become an overused and misused term these days by people who don't really know what they're talking about and display their ignorance by insulting the memories of the millions who've died at the hands of fascist regimes. In your case that's exactly what you were doing.

I think that because you “put words into my mouth” and it was clear you had misinterpreted what I said. You didn’t seem interested in having your misapprehension corrected.

 

And it seems you still don’t “get” my point which is not that, for example Britain is turning into a fascist state.

 

My point was to ponder how countries like Germany and Italy got into the situations they got into in the 30s and 40s, Germans always seem nice people to me so I have never really quite understood how it could happen. But as I’ve said, there have recently been some little glimpses of how it can happen.

 

We are a long way from it happening in the U.K., but I now understand better how it could happen. Perhaps you could explain how that is “insulting the memories of millions...”. IMO what would be insulting to them is to believe that it doesn’t matter what we do, that could never ever happen again.

 

It was just a little observation, that was all. Not intended to be fodder for you to be outraged and grossly offended. But then of course this is CWDF in lockdown!

Edited by nicknorman
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.