Altercation at Terminal 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
why does there have to be an inquiry, fuckers launch a brutal sustained attack on police, fuckers get arrested, end of inquiry, go straight to jail
 
Pretty sure the original video shows another male in shot.

Yes, there are two more males on scene late on.

The original officer in the skirmish had not deployed the taser, it was the secondary female officer also caught by the assailant that did so.

So three in the beginning, reduced to two with the injury, one of whom deployed the weapon. The kicking officer did not deploy a shot when he had his taser aimed at the offender.

That's my argument for that choice. Not sure why others are twisting what I said out of proportion, but it is what it is for this place.
operative words there are "later on"
 
why does there have to be an inquiry, fuckers launch a brutal sustained attack on police, fuckers get arrested, end of inquiry, go straight to jail
Because there is a "community " being led by "leaders" that will demand one. The same group will be on the streets again if the police officer is not sacked. In the UK it is policing by concent meaning that the police are trusted and respected by the people being policed. These two thugs,appear to come from a community that does not respect this system. I only hope that acts like this do not usher in a paramilitary type of policing where the police no longer are part of the community rather than a force to control the people.
 
Secondary tasers are used all the time, you fool!

So you'd rather a kick to the head to bring about a better solution??

Jog on!

Just have to throw in the personal attacks, eh?

A bit pathetic, but it follows what happens with these kinds of things for having a different PoV.

You carry on. Have your silly 'win'.

I can't be arsed talking to someone who cannot see the context of anything.

You started with the personal attack calling me a fool.

I can see context. There are thousands of examples of corrupt behaviour or assaults by Cops going back since the establishment of a force, I just don’t see this as 1.
 
You started with the personal attack calling me a fool.

I can see context. There are thousands of examples of corrupt behaviour or assaults by Cops going back since the establishment of a force, I just don’t see this as 1.

Here's what you said to me beforehand with your ad hominem attack "...but that would require judgement & respect for the law & I reckon you lack both as well."

That's why I responded to you in kind. You played your part. I don't do insults unless in response.

And again, you skew my point for your suited agenda, which doesn't come close to touching what I said. I didn't say the cop was "corrupt". That's your language.

I said he reacted, which nobody hasn't given clear it was not a reaction. I have laid out my reasoning with clear examples.

You and others have not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.