Jump to content

Labour's Diane Abbott On the poor moped thieves


jumpship

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • The Real Maroonblood

    12

  • ri Alban

    12

  • Sharpie

    9

  • luckyBatistuta

    8

On 28/11/2018 at 22:42, jumpship said:

I agree 100% Police should not drive dangerously, same with the medics and fire services...

20mph in built up areas is the law. 

 

I don't care if an orphanage is hijacked by terrorists and set on fire. 

If it's got 20mph on the sign, follow it. 

I support the Labour party..

 

Good lord.

 

I wonder if you'd be ok knowing that, if your wife suffered a heart attack or fell down the stairs and hit her head, the paramedics coming to try and save her life were motoring along at 20mph. What a ****ing ridiculous opinion to hold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Good lord.

 

I wonder if you'd be ok knowing that, if your wife suffered a heart attack or fell down the stairs and hit her head, the paramedics coming to try and save her life were motoring along at 20mph. What a ****ing ridiculous opinion to hold.

 

you've been trolled....

 

surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Good lord.

 

I wonder if you'd be ok knowing that, if your wife suffered a heart attack or fell down the stairs and hit her head, the paramedics coming to try and save her life were motoring along at 20mph. What a ****ing ridiculous opinion to hold.

And if your wife and kid were wiped out , outside school by an ambulance, Fire engine or police car.  Would you still think it was a ridiculous opinion to hold. I don't think 100 ft is going to make a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

And if your wife and kid were wiped out , outside school by an ambulance, Fire engine or police car.  Would you still think it was a ridiculous opinion to hold. I don't think 100 ft is going to make a difference.

 

Yes. Because my partner would know not to cross a road when sirens are going off. And I'd make sure my child knew that too.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Yes. Because my partner would know not to cross a road when sirens are going off. And I'd make sure my child knew that too.

 

 

Shit happens, not ever speeding emergency vehicle has sirens blaring. Sometimes it's only lights. And most folk are hurt at lights or ped crossings.

 

I'm not arguing or in disagreement with you, just making a wee point. ?

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Shit happens, not ever speeding emergency vehicle has sirens blaring. Sometimes it's only lights. And most folk are hurt at lights or ped crossings.

 

I'm not arguing or in disagreement with you, just making a wee point. ?

 

I'd rather know that if I phone an ambulance for someone I care about, it's going as fast as possible to get here.

 

Same if I need the police or the fire service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Phil Dunphy said:

 

I'd rather know that if I phone an ambulance for someone I care about, it's going as fast as possible to get here.

 

Same if I need the police or the fire service.

Safely of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

Safely of course.

I would suspect that most emergency  vehicles, police fire and ambulance are equipped with sirens as well as emergency lights. There are however occasions where the siren is deemed not necessary. The use of emergency equipment is usually done according to the services policy, and drivers who cause an ac cident are investigated and if at fault proceeded against. Like everthing else there are abusers who overstep their authority.

Edited by bobsharp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bobsharp said:

I would suspect that most emergen cy vehicles, police fire aan ambulance are equipped wqith sirens as well as emergency lights. There are however occasions where the siren is deemed not necessary.

That was my point. I've seen cars hammering it with just the blues many a time. Great drivers, but all it takes is a daydreaming kid. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Yes. Because my partner would know not to cross a road when sirens are going off. And I'd make sure my child knew that too.

 

 

Mobiles are a distraction, and headphones mask sirens. Just two things of modern life of youngsters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governor Tarkin
9 hours ago, Bridge of Djoum said:

Having a black eye ain't a quarter.

 

Sporting the full Irish sunglasses this weekend, mate.

 

The Mrs is quarter ginger minx and three quarters ginger mentalist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

That was my point. I've seen cars hammering it with just the blues many a time. Great drivers, but all it takes is a daydreaming kid. ?

No disagreement from me your absolutely correct.

 

 

 

 

Edited by bobsharp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I am concerned the moped riders are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As for the police knocking them off their mopeds it is dangerous driving by the police and leaves the police open to prosecution by the riders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, grumpyjambo said:

As far as I am concerned the moped riders are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As for the police knocking them off their mopeds it is dangerous driving by the police and leaves the police open to prosecution by the riders.

Riding a stolen motorbike and failing to stop for the police but innocent. Not sure if serious? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Captain Sausage
1 hour ago, grumpyjambo said:

As far as I am concerned the moped riders are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As for the police knocking them off their mopeds it is dangerous driving by the police and leaves the police open to prosecution by the riders.

 

Moronic. Like saying we should calmly have asked the London Bridge terrorists to come to the station for a chat as they’re innocent until proven guilty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

luckyBatistuta
On 01/12/2018 at 22:55, ri Alban said:

That was my point. I've seen cars hammering it with just the blues many a time. Great drivers, but all it takes is a daydreaming kid. ?

 

Seen a police car absolutely tearing it down Minto street today at high speed in the pouring rain. He was in the car on his own and  there was loads of vehicles on both sides of the road at the time, so very difficult to observe everything around him. I don’t have a problem with emergency vehicles braking the speed limit, as long as they are sensible and aware of their surroundings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, luckyBatistuta said:

 

Seen a police car absolutely tearing it down Minto street today at high speed in the pouring rain. He was in the car on his own and  there was loads of vehicles on both sides of the road at the time, so very difficult to observe everything around him. I don’t have a problem with emergency vehicles braking the speed limit, as long as they are sensible and aware of their surroundings.

What speed is "absolutely tearing"? 

I only ask as Ive always considered the judging of speed in these circumstances difficult. 

I wonder what our, in leymans terms, is considered safe in these road conditions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

luckyBatistuta
1 minute ago, Dawnrazor said:

What speed is "absolutely tearing"? 

I only ask as Ive always considered the judging of speed in these circumstances difficult. 

I wonder what our, in leymans terms, is considered safe in these road conditions. 

 

Probably just dressed that up a bit bud, just criticised someone else for doing that too :facepalm:

 

 

Not sure really, but he was definitely over 40mph, but it was in heavy traffic in the pouring rain and he seemed like he was still accelerating as he passed. Yes, you need to get there in a hurry...but you also need to get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, luckyBatistuta said:

 

Probably just dressed that up a bit bud, just criticised someone else for doing that too :facepalm:

 

 

Not sure really, but he was definitely over 40mph, but it was in heavy traffic in the pouring rain and he seemed like he was still accelerating as he passed. Yes, you need to get there in a hurry...but you also need to get there.

No, I agree with your point but it is difficult to judge speed in these conditions, I always defer to people with the training and experience, I just hope the person driving the car had both, we  could all be in need of someone with these skills to get to us or a loved one one day. 

Edited by Dawnrazor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

luckyBatistuta
1 minute ago, Dawnrazor said:

No, I agree with your point but it is difficult to judge speed in these conditions, I always defer to people with the training and experience, I just hope the persons driving the car had both, we  could all maybe in of someone with these skills to get to us or a loved one one day one day. 

 

Definitely, there is some guys  driving the pandas though, who think it’s acceptable to drive like an idiot.. Seen some ludicrous manoeuvres at speed in the town centre from them, just to get to a fight in the street/pub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-46440172

 

So the police who have introduced the tactic now looking to prosecute their own! How do you draw the line between what's acceptable and what's not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎02‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 18:35, grumpyjambo said:

As far as I am concerned the moped riders are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As for the police knocking them off their mopeds it is dangerous driving by the police and leaves the police open to prosecution by the riders.

They have refused to stop and are being lawfully pursued.

In many countries - US/ France/Italy where the cops are armed they would probably shoot the feckers.

You don't want rammed? Stop your moped and talk to the officers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/12/2018 at 10:35, grumpyjambo said:

As far as I am concerned the moped riders are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. As for the police knocking them off their mopeds it is dangerous driving by the police and leaves the police open to prosecution by the riders.

You do have a point, but my point would be that it is not consistent with the true facts. When a person is say arrested it is done because from witnesses there is evidence that the now accused commited an offence.He is prcoessed and a dec ision made whether custody is required or release acceptable. At this point there is in fact a presumption of guilt, if in fact there was a presumption of innocencce the accused would have been released with no further action.  The use of both terms though at this point is actually superflous as there is no presumption of anything. The prosecution feel that there is evidence that the accused is responsible for commision of the offence, and the defence feel that there is not. The accused now appears in Court where he makes a plea of guilty or not guilty, at this point if the plea is not guilty a date for trial is arranged. I would say that at this stage any presumption of innocence enters, it is the duty of the court to hear all evidence  and decide  unbiased innocence or guilt.The fact that they are in Court suggests that there is a presumption of guilt at least by the prosecution, it is I would suggest at this point the to ensure fairness in trial presumption of innocence should be instituted.

I would suggest that in the pre trial period any presumptions are non valid, facts accumulated are what the decisions to proceed or not, only a formal hearing of the facts now evidence in an impartial setting are what is important. At this time police actions, actions of the accused and testimony of victims will be thoroughly examined and a decision presented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cade said:

Two officers under investigation for ramming mopeds already.

 

Summary justice is a slippery slope.

 

 

There is two ways to consider  this. The first is that it would be ludicrous to suggest that there are not police officers who would use this type of policy to further there own version of what is right and what is wrong, the fact that they are investigated is encouraging that they are being looked at, conversely that it has to happen is also concerning.

Again a long time ago, and I have no knowledge of todays attitudes, but I seem to suspect impulsive decisions by top brass which when not going right could be covered by sac rificing a couple of menials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
1 hour ago, Cade said:

Two officers under investigation for ramming mopeds already.

 

Summary justice is a slippery slope.

What a surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cade said:

Two officers under investigation for ramming mopeds already.

 

Summary justice is a slippery slope.

That's all good then- carte blanche for the crim scumbags to throw acid, rob folk and cause general mayhem because they cannot be safely stopped

time to require mopeds / bikes and everything to have number plates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/12/2018 at 19:02, Jamhammer said:

Riding a stolen motorbike and failing to stop for the police but innocent. Not sure if serious? 

If in stolen vehicle that is different as the police are correct in stopping the driver but knocking a motor cyclist off their bike? A driver will be killed at some point and then what?

 

Police have to obyy the law the same as anyone else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/12/2018 at 15:14, bobsharp said:

You do have a point, but my point would be that it is not consistent with the true facts. When a person is say arrested it is done because from witnesses there is evidence that the now accused commited an offence.He is prcoessed and a dec ision made whether custody is required or release acceptable. At this point there is in fact a presumption of guilt, if in fact there was a presumption of innocencce the accused would have been released with no further action.  The use of both terms though at this point is actually superflous as there is no presumption of anything. The prosecution feel that there is evidence that the accused is responsible for commision of the offence, and the defence feel that there is not. The accused now appears in Court where he makes a plea of guilty or not guilty, at this point if the plea is not guilty a date for trial is arranged. I would say that at this stage any presumption of innocence enters, it is the duty of the court to hear all evidence  and decide  unbiased innocence or guilt.The fact that they are in Court suggests that there is a presumption of guilt at least by the prosecution, it is I would suggest at this point the to ensure fairness in trial presumption of innocence should be instituted.

I would suggest that in the pre trial period any presumptions are non valid, facts accumulated are what the decisions to proceed or not, only a formal hearing of the facts now evidence in an impartial setting are what is important. At this time police actions, actions of the accused and testimony of victims will be thoroughly examined and a decision presented.

 

How long will it be before the first moped rider is killed?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grumpyjambo said:

If in stolen vehicle that is different as the police are correct in stopping the driver but knocking a motor cyclist off their bike? A driver will be killed at some point and then what?

 

Police have to obyy the law the same as anyone else

Won’t re-offend.

 

But seriously. My motorbike was nicked March. They set fire to it a couple weeks later. If the alternative to knockin them off is doing nothing when they ride past you with no helmet on then **** em ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grumpyjambo said:

 

How long will it be before the first moped rider is killed?

 

 

Probably in the same time as a victim of these criminals kill someone, I can see that you have made your mind up and are not willing to see fault on the part of the criminal element on mopeds. I can see problems on both sides of the equation, an unfortunate accident as a result of police ac tion, a case of serious injury because of police overreac tion. I can also see death or critical injury as a result of moped user criminal actions, I however am too life experienced to see life through one way glasses

Edited by bobsharp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
8 minutes ago, bobsharp said:

 

Probably in the same time as a victim of these criminals kill someone, I can see that you have made your mind up and are not willing to see fault on the part of the criminal element on mopeds. I can see problems on both sides of the equation, an unfortunate accident as a result of police ac tion, a case of serious injury because of police overreac tion. I can also see death or critical injury as a result of moped user criminal actions, I however am too life experienced to see life through one way glasses

Exactly.

Unfortunately some folk care more about the perpetrators than the victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I P Knightley
13 hours ago, grumpyjambo said:

 

How long will it be before the first moped rider is killed?

 

I'd be prepared to bet a hefty sum that it won't happen before there's been at least 10 deaths of victims of moped street crime.

 

Even then, it's a bet I'd be quite content to lose.

 

Edit: all bets off if one of the victims is Diane Abbott. Alanis Morrisette would have to write a new verse.

Edited by I P Knightley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, I P Knightley said:

I'd be prepared to bet a hefty sum that it won't happen before there's been at least 10 deaths of victims of moped street crime.

 

Even then, it's a bet I'd be quite content to lose.

 

Edit: all bets off if one of the victims is Diane Abbott. Alanis Morrisette would have to write a new verse.

Diane Abbott on a Moped?? 

Not unless Massey Ferguson have started making them!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, grumpyjambo said:

 

How long will it be before the first moped rider is killed?

 

Wonder how hard it would be to hit one of the moped bandits with a tazer?

 

Probably better to just use baton rounds.

To those not happy with the tactic- you cannot let people away with crime  merely because its dangerous to the suspect to arrest them?

 

By not stopping them you facilitate the crime and encourage that type of criminal activity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Thursday, November 29, 2018 at 12:28, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

They used to be lovers!!! Let that sink in for a moment!! 

Love is truly blind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/12/2018 at 10:17, doctor jambo said:

Wonder how hard it would be to hit one of the moped bandits with a tazer?

 

Probably better to just use baton rounds.

To those not happy with the tactic- you cannot let people away with crime  merely because its dangerous to the suspect to arrest them?

 

By not stopping them you facilitate the crime and encourage that type of criminal activity

Exactley! the rider is a suspect and has to be treated as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, how would you like to be arrested suspected of a crime but in the process ended up in hospital with injuries during the arrest process and then found not guilty. You would not be a happy chappy and rightly so.

The police issuing summary justice is not part of the law of the land and if not careful in time we could end up like the USA in that the President condones police violence. It is a dangerous road to go down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grumpyjambo said:

Exactley! the rider is a suspect and has to be treated as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, how would you like to be arrested suspected of a crime but in the process ended up in hospital with injuries during the arrest process and then found not guilty. You would not be a happy chappy and rightly so.

The police issuing summary justice is not part of the law of the land and if not careful in time we could end up like the USA in that the President condones police violence. It is a dangerous road to go down.

 

You keep repeating the same false statement, there is no presumption of innocence at the time of pursuit, or arrest. There is reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the subject of the chase. If a police officer is the arresting person, he presents the accused to an official, where he states that he has reasonable and probable grounds tro believe the ac cused commited the offence as listed. In the old days in Edinburgh that was presented to a station sergeant, and here in Canada it was to a justice of the peace. Based on that evidence and the offence commited the accused was either released or  confined until a court hearing. In court the accused was asked if he was guilty or not guilty, if the first he was processed if the second he was scheduled for trial. At trial the defence lawyer could make a statement and in that statement the word innocent could come up for the first time. The trial was the again first place that the term presumption of innocence may be used. The term has become a  household word since the Kavanaugh hearings and is just that words.

Police when involved with a suspect are entitled to use as much and only as much force as necessary to complete their actions, the moped policy it seems to me actually authorises the action, any excess by police is punishable after investigation and there is no presumption of innocence, there is either, only a plea of not guilty until proven otherwise.

Your primary opinion about police action is quite understandable, there is a quality of extreme about the policy, but your doggedness about presumed innocence in an arrest situation is again in my opinion quite wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bobsharp said:

 

You keep repeating the same false statement, there is no presumption of innocence at the time of pursuit, or arrest. There is reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the subject of the chase. If a police officer is the arresting person, he presents the accused to an official, where he states that he has reasonable and probable grounds tro believe the ac cused commited the offence as listed. In the old days in Edinburgh that was presented to a station sergeant, and here in Canada it was to a justice of the peace. Based on that evidence and the offence commited the accused was either released or  confined until a court hearing. In court the accused was asked if he was guilty or not guilty, if the first he was processed if the second he was scheduled for trial. At trial the defence lawyer could make a statement and in that statement the word innocent could come up for the first time. The trial was the again first place that the term presumption of innocence may be used. The term has become a  household word since the Kavanaugh hearings and is just that words.

Police when involved with a suspect are entitled to use as much and only as much force as necessary to complete their actions, the moped policy it seems to me actually authorises the action, any excess by police is punishable after investigation and there is no presumption of innocence, there is either, only a plea of not guilty until proven otherwise.

Your primary opinion about police action is quite understandable, there is a quality of extreme about the policy, but your doggedness about presumed innocence in an arrest situation is again in my opinion quite wrong.

and to add to your opening couple of lines. the police would/should only use this tactic if the rider fails to stop when requested to (blue light etc). So in that case they have failed to stop which unless someone can prove i'm wrong is a crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
4 hours ago, grumpyjambo said:

Exactley! the rider is a suspect and has to be treated as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, how would you like to be arrested suspected of a crime but in the process ended up in hospital with injuries during the arrest process and then found not guilty. You would not be a happy chappy and rightly so.

The police issuing summary justice is not part of the law of the land and if not careful in time we could end up like the USA in that the President condones police violence. It is a dangerous road to go down.

What a lot of shite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...