Yeah officers in the UK actively want those cameras, especially lone officers who dont have colleagues to back them up in the event of malicious allegations.
Michael Brown Case
- Thread starter cvp12gh5
- Start date
Yeah officers in the UK actively want those cameras, especially lone officers who dont have colleagues to back them up in the event of malicious allegations.
Exactly but equally, I would ask when did the community beat become riot police, the reality is that they didnt and the only place I have seen this happen has been in anti-policing propaganda.
Not anyones direct and actual experience and certainly not routinely as the propaganda would have people believe.
Now I can understand reasonable counsel about the authorities, in Norway Brevik the nazi gunman used the trust of young people in police officers in such a way that had his victims running towards him for help as he sprayed them with gun fire, there's been good fictional portrayals, such as Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Dean Koontz's Intensity, of similar phenomenon.
There's wisdom in the idea that you respect the individual and not the office, not simply because of corruption but simple questions about competence.
Although the propaganda I see being put out about police and policing isnt reasonable and proportionate at all, I see it all as a prelude to some sort of privatisation or worse still just some deep destabilising influence which has nothing positive to offer at all to anyone.
The point of training is that it overrides the stress response; effectively you act through reflex
But you are presuming that an aggressive situation has to arise in the first place that requires shooting to occur; if the police are less aggressive then situations might be less confrontational
Some people say michael stole something from a store while others say he paid for it
But even if someone has stolen soemthing...lets say a packet of cigarettes...is that really something a policeman needs to shoot someone over?
I'll give you an example of how policy is a factor
If you watch programmes on TV like police, camera, action the US police have a policy whereby they will aggressively shunt the cars they are pursuing off the road; this is more likely to lead to damage, injury or death
The British police on the other hand will hold back and pursue instead and set up a police trap ahead or a helicopter
In the military the US soldiers tend to kill more civilians than the UK sodliers because they do not have to account for the bullets they fire, whereas UK soldiers have to account for all bullets they fire
So when the UK government stupidly and belligerently sent paras in to police protestors on 'bloody sunday' the authorities knew fine well after the event who had done the shooting because all soldiers involved had to declare how many bullets they had fired
The authorities then know who has fired what number of rounds; also debriefing can then attempt to ascertain what the bullets were fired at
But the point i'm getting at is policy often dictates how aggressive a police officer is. Would a police investigation into the possible theft of some cigarettes (or whatever it was) back in for example the 1970's have ended in a shooting?
If the guy runs, let him run; police should be close enough to their neighbourhoods that they can track a suspect down through police work without needing to shoot at the guy
Last edited:
There shouldn't be lone officers
They should pay less managers and pay for less CCTV cameras and CCTV camera operators and pay for less 'community enforcement officers' and instead use the money to pay for more professional beat cops who can be on the ground amongst the people, speaking to them, having a laugh with them, getting to know them and properly patrolling
(ideally we'd live in an anarchist society without police but in the meantime...)
Seriously, @ what SpecialEdition said, the rioters burned vehicles and a building and tore apart private property.
Sometimes I think this case was more of an excuse for people to "fight the system" than about justice, cause the police kill people all the time but this one particular case everyone takes to the streets and start acting violent.
I think no matter what happened they would have rioted. It's just one of those situations were people were already charged up just WAITING for a reason, any reason, to go out and do what they want to do. I don't think anyone just riots, I think they just tip over the edge and do it or get caught up in the hive.
How do you know that government agent provocateurs planted within the mob didn't incite the violence and start the fires?
It happens all the time
That was actually a thought that crossed my mind too, especially since the Boston marathon bombings. But still I think this case was more people using the trial as an excuse to act out.
http://lastresistance.com/8656/agents-provocateurs-fbi-warnings-ferguson/
[h=1]Agents Provocateurs and the FBI Warnings on Ferguson[/h] Posted on November 20, 2014 by Michael Minkoff
The FBI released a warning concerning possible violence from agents provocateurs in Ferguson following the grand jury decision concerning the shooting death of Michael Brown:
And I’m not necessarily saying anything concerning the justice of the protestors’ cause. The grand jury for this case has been given the responsibility of determining whether or not Darren Wilson committed any wrong in the shooting death of Michael Brown, an incident that initially sparked a huge number of violent protests in Ferguson. The grand jury decision will be revealed in the next few days, and it is likely that it will also spark protests, whichever way it goes.
Will there be agents provocateurs in the crowds in Ferguson? Probably. Whether they are law enforcement officials pushing the situation to violence or out-of-state agents provocateurs trying to escalate the situation, it is likely to get ugly in Ferguson. I agree with law enforcement officials that have recommended law-abiding citizens buy a gun for self-protection. And perhaps they should stay at home for the next few days. Or visit relatives out of town for Thanksgiving.
[h=1]Agents Provocateurs and the FBI Warnings on Ferguson[/h] Posted on November 20, 2014 by Michael Minkoff
The FBI released a warning concerning possible violence from agents provocateurs in Ferguson following the grand jury decision concerning the shooting death of Michael Brown:
The FBI assesses those infiltrating and exploiting otherwise legitimate public demonstrations with the intent to incite and engage in violence could be armed with bladed weapons or firearms, equipped with tactical gear/gas masks, or bulletproof vests to mitigate law enforcement measures.
Of interest is the fact that the FBI and other law enforcement officials have actually “infiltrated” and “exploited” otherwise “legitimate public demonstrations” in order to “incite and engage in violence.” I’m thinking about many of the Occupy Wall Street protests that were infiltrated by agents provocateurs in order to create the opportunity to arrest what would have been otherwise “legitimate” protestors:
. . . In all the cases in which Occupy demonstrators have been charged with terror-related felonies, informants and police agents pushed youth to engage in terrorism and even supplied the necessary explosives.
This is troubling. Especially considering that many of the protestors currently descending on Ferguson are not from Ferguson. It would be impossible for any of the peaceful protestors there to determine whether the protestors in their midst actually have their best interest at heart. The situation could and probably will get very ugly.
And I’m not necessarily saying anything concerning the justice of the protestors’ cause. The grand jury for this case has been given the responsibility of determining whether or not Darren Wilson committed any wrong in the shooting death of Michael Brown, an incident that initially sparked a huge number of violent protests in Ferguson. The grand jury decision will be revealed in the next few days, and it is likely that it will also spark protests, whichever way it goes.
Will there be agents provocateurs in the crowds in Ferguson? Probably. Whether they are law enforcement officials pushing the situation to violence or out-of-state agents provocateurs trying to escalate the situation, it is likely to get ugly in Ferguson. I agree with law enforcement officials that have recommended law-abiding citizens buy a gun for self-protection. And perhaps they should stay at home for the next few days. Or visit relatives out of town for Thanksgiving.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/1...d-jury-decision-will-likely-lead-to-violence/
[h=1]FBI warns Ferguson grand jury decision 'will likely' lead to violence[/h] Published November 18, 2014
for video click on link above
The FBI is warning law enforcement agencies nationwide that a grand jury’s decision on whether a Missouri police officer will face charges for killing Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old, “will likely” lead to attacks on police officers and key infrastructure.
Violence could erupt following the decision whether or not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, who is white, in the Aug. 9 shooting death of Brown, a black man, and so-called “hacktivists” could also use the opportunity to launch cyber-attacks against authorities and institutions.
“The announcement of the grand jury’s decision … will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure,” the FBI said in a bulletin issued Friday. “This also poses a threat to those civilians engaged in lawful or otherwise constitutionally protected activities.”
There’s no indication an announcement by the grand jury is imminent. The St. Louis County prosecutor has said that he expects the grand jury to reach a decision in mid-to-late November.
The FBI bulletin also stressed the “importance of remaining aware of the protections afforded to the all U.S. persons exercising their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.”
FBI officials also cited specific tactics that could be utilized by extreme protesters, including violence against state or federal authorities.
“The FBI assesses those infiltrating and exploiting otherwise legitimate public demonstrations with the intent to incite and engage in violence could be armed with bladed weapons or firearms, equipped with tactical gear/gas masks, or bulletproof vests to mitigate law enforcement measures,” the bulletin continued.
Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency and activated the National Guard Monday in advance of the grand jury decision. Nixon said the National Guard would assist state and local police as needed in the event of civil unrest.
The potential unrest over Brown's death has caused some organizations to rethink holding their conventions in the St. Louis region. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports the Church of God in Christ's annual convention has contributed millions of dollars to the St. Louis economy. The church's presiding bishop sent a letter to Gov. Nixon last week over concerns about Brown's fatal shooting by Wilson. The letter said the church might consider relocating its annual conference.
An official with the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission says they've had several customers express their concern over unrest in the St. Louis region. But he says the pace of bookings has been good.
Meanwhile, police officials in Ferguson and other cities across America braced Monday for possible violence in the wake of the decision, one day after hundreds of people took to the streets of St. Louis briefly to block a major intersection to protest the death of Brown.
Dozens of protesters could be seen lying down in the street outside of a movie theater hosting a film festival, pretending to be shot in an action intended to evoke the memory of Brown, according to Reuters.
"This is a mature movement. It is a different movement than it was in August. Then it just had anger, justifiable anger," DeRay McKesson, a 29-year-old protest leader, told Reuters.
Two protests Sunday, which marked the 100th day of demonstrations, were peaceful.
Residents and officials in the region fear another wave of rioting if the grand jury decides not to indict Wilson.
"We are bracing for that possibility. That is what many people are expecting. The entire community is going to be upset," said Jose Chavez, 46, a leader of the Latinos en Axion community group.
For some cities, a decision in the racially-charged case will, inevitably, re-ignite long-simmering debates over local police relations within minority communities.
"It's definitely on our radar," said Lt. Michael McCarthy, police spokesman in Boston, where police leaders met privately Wednesday to discuss preparations. "Common sense tells you the timeline is getting close. We're just trying to prepare in case something does step off, so we are ready to go with it."
In Los Angeles, rocked by riots in 1992 after the acquittal of police officers in the beating of Rodney King, police officials say they've been in touch with their counterparts in Missouri.
"Naturally, we always pay attention," said Commander Andrew Smith, a police spokesman. "We saw what happened when there were protests over there and how oftentimes protests spill from one part of the country to another."
In Las Vegas, police joined pastors and other community leaders this week to call for restraint at a rally tentatively planned northwest of the casino strip when a decision comes.
In Boston, a group called Black Lives Matter, which has chapters in major cities, is organizing a rally in front of the police district office in the Roxbury neighborhood the day after the grand jury's decision.
In Albuquerque, N.M., police are expecting demonstrations after dealing with a string of angry protests following a March police shooting of a homeless camper and more than 40 police shootings since 2010.
Philadelphia police spokesman Lt. John Stanford said he anticipated his city will see demonstrations, regardless of what the grand jury returns.
But big-city police departments stressed they're well-equipped to handle crowds. Many saw large but mostly peaceful demonstrations following the 2013 not-guilty verdict in the case of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, who was shot and killed by neighborhood watch coordinator George Zimmerman. In New York, hundreds of protesters marched from Union Square north to Times Square, where a sit-in caused gridlock.
The New York Police Department, the largest in the nation, is "trained to move swiftly and handle events as they come up," spokesman Stephen Davis said.
In Boston, McCarthy said the city's 2,200 sworn police officers have dealt with the range of public actions, from sports fans spontaneously streaming into the streets following championship victories to protest movements like Occupy.
"The good thing is that our relationships here with the community are much better than they are around the world," he said. "People look to us as a model. Boston is not Ferguson."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
[h=1]FBI warns Ferguson grand jury decision 'will likely' lead to violence[/h] Published November 18, 2014
for video click on link above
The FBI is warning law enforcement agencies nationwide that a grand jury’s decision on whether a Missouri police officer will face charges for killing Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old, “will likely” lead to attacks on police officers and key infrastructure.
Violence could erupt following the decision whether or not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, who is white, in the Aug. 9 shooting death of Brown, a black man, and so-called “hacktivists” could also use the opportunity to launch cyber-attacks against authorities and institutions.
“The announcement of the grand jury’s decision … will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure,” the FBI said in a bulletin issued Friday. “This also poses a threat to those civilians engaged in lawful or otherwise constitutionally protected activities.”
There’s no indication an announcement by the grand jury is imminent. The St. Louis County prosecutor has said that he expects the grand jury to reach a decision in mid-to-late November.
The FBI bulletin also stressed the “importance of remaining aware of the protections afforded to the all U.S. persons exercising their First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.”
FBI officials also cited specific tactics that could be utilized by extreme protesters, including violence against state or federal authorities.
“The FBI assesses those infiltrating and exploiting otherwise legitimate public demonstrations with the intent to incite and engage in violence could be armed with bladed weapons or firearms, equipped with tactical gear/gas masks, or bulletproof vests to mitigate law enforcement measures,” the bulletin continued.
Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency and activated the National Guard Monday in advance of the grand jury decision. Nixon said the National Guard would assist state and local police as needed in the event of civil unrest.
The potential unrest over Brown's death has caused some organizations to rethink holding their conventions in the St. Louis region. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports the Church of God in Christ's annual convention has contributed millions of dollars to the St. Louis economy. The church's presiding bishop sent a letter to Gov. Nixon last week over concerns about Brown's fatal shooting by Wilson. The letter said the church might consider relocating its annual conference.
An official with the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission says they've had several customers express their concern over unrest in the St. Louis region. But he says the pace of bookings has been good.
Meanwhile, police officials in Ferguson and other cities across America braced Monday for possible violence in the wake of the decision, one day after hundreds of people took to the streets of St. Louis briefly to block a major intersection to protest the death of Brown.
Dozens of protesters could be seen lying down in the street outside of a movie theater hosting a film festival, pretending to be shot in an action intended to evoke the memory of Brown, according to Reuters.
"This is a mature movement. It is a different movement than it was in August. Then it just had anger, justifiable anger," DeRay McKesson, a 29-year-old protest leader, told Reuters.
Two protests Sunday, which marked the 100th day of demonstrations, were peaceful.
Residents and officials in the region fear another wave of rioting if the grand jury decides not to indict Wilson.
"We are bracing for that possibility. That is what many people are expecting. The entire community is going to be upset," said Jose Chavez, 46, a leader of the Latinos en Axion community group.
For some cities, a decision in the racially-charged case will, inevitably, re-ignite long-simmering debates over local police relations within minority communities.
"It's definitely on our radar," said Lt. Michael McCarthy, police spokesman in Boston, where police leaders met privately Wednesday to discuss preparations. "Common sense tells you the timeline is getting close. We're just trying to prepare in case something does step off, so we are ready to go with it."
In Los Angeles, rocked by riots in 1992 after the acquittal of police officers in the beating of Rodney King, police officials say they've been in touch with their counterparts in Missouri.
"Naturally, we always pay attention," said Commander Andrew Smith, a police spokesman. "We saw what happened when there were protests over there and how oftentimes protests spill from one part of the country to another."
In Las Vegas, police joined pastors and other community leaders this week to call for restraint at a rally tentatively planned northwest of the casino strip when a decision comes.
In Boston, a group called Black Lives Matter, which has chapters in major cities, is organizing a rally in front of the police district office in the Roxbury neighborhood the day after the grand jury's decision.
In Albuquerque, N.M., police are expecting demonstrations after dealing with a string of angry protests following a March police shooting of a homeless camper and more than 40 police shootings since 2010.
Philadelphia police spokesman Lt. John Stanford said he anticipated his city will see demonstrations, regardless of what the grand jury returns.
But big-city police departments stressed they're well-equipped to handle crowds. Many saw large but mostly peaceful demonstrations following the 2013 not-guilty verdict in the case of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, who was shot and killed by neighborhood watch coordinator George Zimmerman. In New York, hundreds of protesters marched from Union Square north to Times Square, where a sit-in caused gridlock.
The New York Police Department, the largest in the nation, is "trained to move swiftly and handle events as they come up," spokesman Stephen Davis said.
In Boston, McCarthy said the city's 2,200 sworn police officers have dealt with the range of public actions, from sports fans spontaneously streaming into the streets following championship victories to protest movements like Occupy.
"The good thing is that our relationships here with the community are much better than they are around the world," he said. "People look to us as a model. Boston is not Ferguson."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Have you ever been so angry that your robbed a toy-r-us to get your kids those Christmas present you couldn't afford, and then when you were having such hard time carrying those presents that you looted a Nike Factory Outlet on the way home so that you could finish the walk. While along the way you got hungry so you went to steal some pizza from domino's but couldn't cause it had already been hit so you burned the place down instead.
What evidence is there of government "agent provocateurs" or that it "happens all the time"?
I think there's a lot of bullshit being posted on forums and that happens all the time.
Yeah, I dont think this sort of rampaging is any kind of social protest but I think that a lot of middle class liberals far removed from the situations would love to believe that because it makes the world seem more explicable, a little less dangerous, a little more reasonable than it would otherwise.
You see what you're describing, that sort of build up is probably what was acting on an individual level when the assailant attacked the police officer, if there could be some decommissioning of those mindsets I doubt that things like this would happen.
I'm always really ambivalent about anyone describing this kind of thing as attacks upon the system, anyone getting up the next morning to go to a sucky job and discovering their car was wrecked or their premises destroyed so they wont be paid or working until its repaired has every right to say "the f**k this has to do with me?".
The reality is that if anyone wants to fight the system its going to be a hell of a lot more dull than street fighting and mayhem, if you want to engage in street fighting or mayhem at least call it that and not bluff anyone you're a modern day robin hood or outlaw rebel or che guevara.
Wait, this is the same lying rat bastard capitalist corporate jewish media that you're not treating as credible the rest of the time?
Its good to be consistent.
temper temper...just because you are being shown to be a spouter of bullshit...
Remember no one is making you spout bullshit...you are choosing to do it...so take responsiblity for your own error
[video=youtube;79Q5odNCQKU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79Q5odNCQKU[/video]