Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Now we're seeing the rise of the "vigilantes" (actually they seemed pretty sorted, knowing their rights etc) in Enfield - a group of 50 or 70 guys are patrolling Enfield and policing the streets because they're pissed off that the police aren't.

Countries like Norway, Switzerland and Japan have fixed it.

MrH wrote:I'm sorry for not caring about dead criminals, I really am.

You apparently can't read. No one has asked for people to sympathize with the man.

MrH wrote:Maybe if this was happening where you lived and it was your family and friends scared to leave the house you wouldn't have such a hippy stance towards these animals.

You know nothing of what I have been through, other than I find ignorant gamers that advocate mindless violence to end mindless violence to be insipid, pitiable people. I also get the impression you don't know what a hippie is either. Again, this isn't a unique situation, has happened in other places throughout the globe, so it actually is fairly easy to understand what is going on.

warspawned wrote:Now we're seeing the rise of the "vigilantes" (actually they seemed pretty sorted, knowing their rights etc) in Enfield - a group of 50 or 70 guys are patrolling Enfield and policing the streets because they're pissed off that the police aren't.

More than that dude. My sister just showed me Facebook photos of the 'keep Enfield Safe' (or something like that) and there are a couple hundred that i can see.

Good on em. problem is that they will be targetted by the police because they think they will comply.

Ravenous D wrote:I dont think it has a fix. Poor people are generally under-educated, and turn to crime easier.

*Snip*

I mean how to you fix poor and stupid? Its like tossing money into a flaming hole and hoping it eventually fills up.

Well, the solution for this is schooling, which has to be funded by the government, which is in turn funded mostly by taxes. In an economic depression, corners have to be cut, and if you cut education (Like a great deal of the U.S. is doing) and/or police forces (Which, iirc, has occured across the pond in the UK), it fosters environments that are ripe for events like these riots/looting.

As for poor, in some (not all) cases, you have no choice. If you suddenly broke your [insert valuable organ here], and had a $100K (Sorry, ~50K pounds I think? Not sure on exchange rates) medical bill, what would you do if you couldn't afford it. Would you resort to the "...bandaid [that] dont really encourage bettering yoursellf?"
People abuse social welfare programs, but the programs are also a great benefit to people who are either struggling for a short period financially, or have been doing so for a majority of their lives.

Plus, I really, really hope you were joking about sterilizing/segregating against poor people...

Ahtman wrote:Oh I am sure it is as simple as the kind hearted police shooting an evil man that lead to the riots, but what if we suppose that it is more complicated than that? People rarely riot because of one incident, but a series of incidents until there frustration erupts into violence. I suppose you are all right, just a bunch of uppity coloreds and foreigners that just have a distaste for law and order.

Your blatant racism is very offensive.

Revenent Reiko wrote:

warspawned wrote:Now we're seeing the rise of the "vigilantes" (actually they seemed pretty sorted, knowing their rights etc) in Enfield - a group of 50 or 70 guys are patrolling Enfield and policing the streets because they're pissed off that the police aren't.

More than that dude. My sister just showed me Facebook photos of the 'keep Enfield Safe' (or something like that) and there are a couple hundred that i can see.

Good on em. problem is that they will be targetted by the police because they think they will comply.

Frankly, I think all the other towns, villages and cities need something like this.

But they really need to work with the police. They could be issued with those reflective jackets and what have you to indicate they mean business. It'll also make them look less like a mob and more like people actually working with the police.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

darkPrince010 wrote:As for poor, in some (not all) cases, you have no choice. If you suddenly broke your [insert valuable organ here], and had a $100K (Sorry, ~50K pounds I think? Not sure on exchange rates) medical bill, what would you do if you couldn't afford it. Would you resort to the "...bandaid [that] dont really encourage bettering yoursellf?"
People abuse social welfare programs, but the programs are also a great benefit to people who are either struggling for a short period financially, or have been doing so for a majority of their lives.

Well, at least for the meantime, we have the NHS which provides free care and treatment in most circumstances.

romegamer wrote:

Ahtman wrote:Oh I am sure it is as simple as the kind hearted police shooting an evil man that lead to the riots, but what if we suppose that it is more complicated than that? People rarely riot because of one incident, but a series of incidents until there frustration erupts into violence. I suppose you are all right, just a bunch of uppity coloreds and foreigners that just have a distaste for law and order.

Your blatant racism is very offensive.

You'd think someone ready to say that would at least stand by it and not edit it out.

Ahtman just lost my respect.

Home Brew Nuke wrote:

Revenent Reiko wrote:

warspawned wrote:Now we're seeing the rise of the "vigilantes" (actually they seemed pretty sorted, knowing their rights etc) in Enfield - a group of 50 or 70 guys are patrolling Enfield and policing the streets because they're pissed off that the police aren't.

More than that dude. My sister just showed me Facebook photos of the 'keep Enfield Safe' (or something like that) and there are a couple hundred that i can see.

Good on em. problem is that they will be targetted by the police because they think they will comply.

Frankly, I think all the other towns, villages and cities need something like this.

But they really need to work with the police. They could be issued with those reflective jackets and what have you to indicate they mean business. It'll also make them look less like a mob and more like people actually working with the police.

Agreed.
But then militia groups have always been frowned upon because they dont follow the law. What a joke.

romegamer wrote:

Ahtman wrote:Oh I am sure it is as simple as the kind hearted police shooting an evil man that lead to the riots, but what if we suppose that it is more complicated than that? People rarely riot because of one incident, but a series of incidents until there frustration erupts into violence. I suppose you are all right, just a bunch of uppity coloreds and foreigners that just have a distaste for law and order.

Your blatant racism is very offensive.

He is being sarcastic.

He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

Kilkrazy wrote:

romegamer wrote:

Ahtman wrote:Oh I am sure it is as simple as the kind hearted police shooting an evil man that lead to the riots, but what if we suppose that it is more complicated than that? People rarely riot because of one incident, but a series of incidents until there frustration erupts into violence. I suppose you are all right, just a bunch of uppity coloreds and foreigners that just have a distaste for law and order.

Your blatant racism is very offensive.

He is being sarcastic.

Ah, I see it now. Quick reading and the lack of intonation on the internet gets us all again.

Ahtman, you have regained my respect good sir.

warspawned wrote:Now we're seeing the rise of the "vigilantes" (actually they seemed pretty sorted, knowing their rights etc) in Enfield - a group of 50 or 70 guys are patrolling Enfield and policing the streets because they're pissed off that the police aren't.

Good. Neighborhood watches.

The criminals are looking for easy pickings. It just takes people standing up for themselves to get them to back down and move on.

That, and more police and military folks rounding up the bad guys.

I hope the video survelance (sp?) tapes at the looted stores net a ton of bad guys. And that the twitter/Black berry messages net the ring-leaders and instigators.

Stay safe, guys.

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

Sorry, did not pick up on the sarcasm. Hope everyone in London is safe. And I agree, Citizens standing up for themselves is the best idea. Think of the Korean shopkeepers during the LA Riots.

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

This is true.

darkPrince010 wrote:
Plus, I really, really hope you were joking about sterilizing/segregating against poor people...

Partially, its mostly that I believe you should need a license to be a parent and that raising 3+ kids on minimum wage should classify as abuse as essentially you are knowningly destroying someones life without penalty.

My point is that with any social problem, doing nothing or quick fixes dont solve anything, sometimes drastic ideas are needed even if it is hard to stomach.

Now the Sikhs in Southall are out - good guys

I agree most communities should do this, but it's dangerous also, not just for them but it could spread anarchy even more if we're not careful (I'm probably giving them too much credit - they'll likely buckle under any heavy community pressure).

I'm actually agreeing with Sky News ...our politicians have been too slow and seem completely adrift of the reality/mentality of some people - it's like they're surprised after the second day that the violence escalated after little was done to oppose it. They should always ask the question: what would Churchill have done? Hell, even Thatcher would be better for this kind of thing.

Although some of them are so stupid they should be easy to catch. There was a picture in the papers today that really caught my eye. It was of a young man, posing behind a coffee table that was full to overflowing with gadgets, blu-rays and games. And where did he post it? That's right, on his own Facebook account...... Idiot

So can any British people answer my question on whether or not there is any instituitionalized racism in Scotland Yard?

Mr Hyena wrote:

MrH wrote:He was clearly being sarcastic, although not to stir the pot or anything the majority of looters/rioters are colored, that's just a fact and you shouldn't label people as racist for telling it how it is.

This is true.

I agree, simply did not pick up on his sarcasm, and without that, it seemed to have racist overtones.

I'd definitely be up for some limits on how many children poor people can have, if you're on benefits you should be allowed 1 child maximum.

So can any British people answer my question on whether or not there is any instituitionalized racism in Scotland Yard?

There isn't. Its kinda stupid to think so.

warspawned wrote:Now the Sikhs in Southall are out - good guys

I agree most communities should do this, but it's dangerous also, not just for them but it could spread anarchy even more if we're not careful.

I'm actually agreeing with Sky News ...our politicians have been too slow and seem completely adrift of the reality/mentality of some people - it's like they're surprised after the second day that the violence escalated after little was done to oppose it. They should always ask the question: what would Churchill have done? Hell, even Thatcher would be better for this kind of thing.

And then they get lambasted for going in "heavy" when they should have been handing out fluffy kittens and butterflies.

There's no way to win in a situation like this. If you go in too heavy, you get an outcry of fascism. If you go in too light and the police get beat back, you get outcries of incompetence and demands for "something to be done!"(no actual suggestions of what, just "something!").

There is likely a Goldilocks zone of "just right", but I don't think it's ever been actually found in regards to riots.

Mr Hyena wrote:

So can any British people answer my question on whether or not there is any instituitionalized racism in Scotland Yard?

There isn't. Its kinda stupid to think so.

Or just unknowing. Bear in mind that theres no way Kamikaze could know is there?

To further answer, there probably was back in the day, but there isnt any more. Its not that sort of Institution thankfully.
(although there are rumours of course)

Actually there was a pretty big enquiry (we love those here) into racism in the Met a few years ago.... After the Stephen Lawence murder I believe. I'm not sure thou, I'll have to check it out.....

when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Ah ha! Found it....

In 1999, an inquiry headed by Sir William Macpherson examined the original Metropolitan police investigation and concluded that the force was "institutionally racist" and has been called 'one of the most important moments in the modern history of criminal justice in Britain'.[4] This led to the publication of the Macpherson Report 1999, which investigated institutional racism within the Metropolitan police.

Although please bear in mind that I'm using my iPhone and that is from Wikipedia. Make of it what you will.....

sarpedons-right-hand wrote:Actually there was a pretty big enquiry (we love those here) into racism in the Met a few years ago.... After the Stephen Lawence murder I believe. I'm not sure thou, I'll have to check it out.....

To be fair whenever someone colored is murdered racism is always brought up, even if there's no reason to think it was racially motivated.

Kanluwen wrote:

warspawned wrote:Now the Sikhs in Southall are out - good guys

I agree most communities should do this, but it's dangerous also, not just for them but it could spread anarchy even more if we're not careful.

I'm actually agreeing with Sky News ...our politicians have been too slow and seem completely adrift of the reality/mentality of some people - it's like they're surprised after the second day that the violence escalated after little was done to oppose it. They should always ask the question: what would Churchill have done? Hell, even Thatcher would be better for this kind of thing.

And then they get lambasted for going in "heavy" when they should have been handing out fluffy kittens and butterflies.

There's no way to win in a situation like this. If you go in too heavy, you get an outcry of fascism. If you go in too light and the police get beat back, you get outcries of incompetence and demands for "something to be done!"(no actual suggestions of what, just "something!").

There is likely a Goldilocks zone of "just right", but I don't think it's ever been actually found in regards to riots.

Then go in heavy, and when someone complains, take them somewhere quiet and ask them politely why they think the looters should be defended (notice how good im being? no violence to keep the idiots mouth shut ).

Thats my opinion though. Noone has an excuse for looting and if they try to sue, get it thrown out of court (i am not a lawyer, but even i know this isnt possible, im wishlisting a little bit).

I think recent history has shown a trend in our government to not be able to do much good anyway.

romegamer wrote:when the government tries to curtail one of the most basic human rights like reproduction, it sets a horrible precident that history has demonstrated is not the right way to go.

Some people aren't fit to be parents and it's the children that suffer. When young girls are having more and more children just to receive more benefits you know there's a problem.