Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

Riots in the UK...

Status
Not open for further replies.
To be fair to the NYPD though, monitoring social media is a bit of a no brainer, and certainly something all organisations should be doing already. Banning access to it though is a whole other kettle of fish, and Cameron is off his rocker with that suggestion.
 
Bruce Wayne said:
To be fair to the NYPD though, monitoring social media is a bit of a no brainer, and certainly something all organisations should be doing already. Banning access to it though is a whole other kettle of fish, and Cameron is off his rocker with that suggestion.
Click to expand...
Daily mail politcs Bruce,the politics of playing to the crowd

I thought with the storm going on with Murdch it would come to an end but no sadly it's still alive and well and then you wonder why the public at large fails to connect with politicians.

All governments are scared of new tech,the media too is terrified of it mainly becuase the net will,perhaps replace it altogether,but of course thats a long way off yet.

As for the monitoring of course it goes on,but riddle me this are people so utterly thick as to post riot plans on facebook? really? if so they frankly deserve to get caught and be charged with utter stupidity
 

linglong said:
Daily mail politcs Bruce,the politics of playing to the crowd

I thought with the storm going on with Murdch it would come to an end but no sadly it's still alive and well and then you wonder why the public at large fails to connect with politicians.

All governments are scared of new tech,the media too is terrified of it mainly becuase the net will,perhaps replace it altogether,but of course thats a long way off yet.

As for the monitoring of course it goes on,but riddle me this are people so utterly thick as to post riot plans on facebook? really? if so they frankly deserve to get caught and be charged with utter stupidity
Click to expand...

Of course, the prospects of uncovering anything major are quite small, but I'd be surprised if law enforcement agencies didn't monitor Twitter et al for keywords etc. It's pretty easy to do.
 
trigger the blue said:
They must monitor whats on the web,im convinced they do!
But then i am a bit paranoid!
Click to expand...
I'd be amazed if they don't

Must be a boss job that think of all those "funny" youtube vids they have to shift through,you know the ones a lardy amarican boy on skateboard falls on his arse,that type of thing they earn their money doing that
 
linglong said:
I'd be amazed if they don't

Must be a boss job that think of all those "funny" youtube vids they have to shift through,you know the ones a lardy amarican boy on skateboard falls on his arse,that type of thing they earn their money doing that
Click to expand...

I want the job! ha,ha,ha! (just that im shoit on computers)
 

davek said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14510329


"The police watchdog has admitted it may have misled journalists into believing police shooting victim Mark Duggan fired at officers before he was killed."

*Cough*
Click to expand...

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is a non-departmental public body in England and Wales responsible for overseeing the system for handling complaints made against police forces in England and Wales.

It can also elect to manage or supervise the police investigation into a particular complaint and will independently investigate the most serious cases itself. While some of the IPCC's investigators are former police officers, the commissioners themselves cannot have worked for the police by law.[1] It has set standards for police forces to improve the way the public's complaints are handled. The IPCC also handles appeals by the public about the way their complaint was dealt with by the local force, or its outcomes. The IPCC was given the task of increasing public confidence in the complaint system. It aims to make investigations more open, timely, proportionate and fair.

Since April 2006 the IPCC has taken on responsibility for similar, serious complaints against HM Revenue and Customs and the Serious Organised Crime Agency in England and Wales. In April 2008, it additionally took on responsibility for serious complaints against Aston Villa Football Club.

*splutter*
 
MikelsGoat said:
The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is a non-departmental public body in England and Wales responsible for overseeing the system for handling complaints made against police forces in England and Wales.

It can also elect to manage or supervise the police investigation into a particular complaint and will independently investigate the most serious cases itself. While some of the IPCC's investigators are former police officers, the commissioners themselves cannot have worked for the police by law.[1] It has set standards for police forces to improve the way the public's complaints are handled. The IPCC also handles appeals by the public about the way their complaint was dealt with by the local force, or its outcomes. The IPCC was given the task of increasing public confidence in the complaint system. It aims to make investigations more open, timely, proportionate and fair.

Since April 2006 the IPCC has taken on responsibility for similar, serious complaints against HM Revenue and Customs and the Serious Organised Crime Agency in England and Wales. In April 2008, it additionally took on responsibility for serious complaints against Aston Villa Football Club.

*splutter*
Click to expand...

It all makes sense now.
 
What the IPCC statement actually said:

Analysis of media coverage and queries raised on Twitter have alerted to us to the possibility that we may have inadvertently given misleading information to journalists when responding to very early media queries following the shooting of Mark Duggan by MPS officers on the evening of 4th August.

The IPCC's first statement, issued at 22:49 on 4th August, makes no reference to shots fired at police and our subsequent statements have set out the sequence of events based on the emerging evidence. However, having reviewed the information the IPCC received and gave out during the very early hours of the unfolding incident, before any documentation had been received, it seems possible that we may have verbally led journalists to believe that shots were exchanged as this was consistent with early information we received that an officer had been shot and taken to hospital.

Any reference to an exchange of shots was not correct and did not feature in any of our formal statements, although an officer was taken to hospital after the incident.
Click to expand...

To which the Guardian adds:

The family has said that if Duggan was carrying a gun they do not think he would have fired at police.

The firearms officer who shot Duggan has said that he never claimed he was fired at and is understood to be upset that the family might have been misled into believing this.

Ballistics tests on Duggan's gun which was found at the scene show that it was loaded.The family has said that if Duggan was carrying a gun they do not think he would have fired at police.
Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/blog/2011/aug/12/uk-riots-day-six-aftermath
 
From the small bits and Pieces I have read it seems that.

He had a illegal firearm with a bullet in the chamber....
Police shot him, he did not shoot.


So I ask... do you have to wait for someone to shoot at you before you can shoot back as a Policeman? I think not.... So it seems that this is not a legit reason to riot.

Is this just the straw that broke the proverbial camels back and has to do more with other social issues and nothing to do with the Police/Public interaction ?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top