Conservative MP - Police Rant.
Discussion
Gene Vincent said:
I look at it slightly differently, the bloke lives in that street, at No12 in fact. So if he wants the fking gate opened into the road where he lives then he has every fking right to!
The problem with the moron of a cop at that time was he couldn't see this because he was a jobsworth who was too dumb to even work out why he was there in the first instance, so in the Chief whips place I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either.
I didn't realise you were there and witnessed it all. I mean, nowhere on any other media site has there ever been a suggestion that the Officer was anything but civil. The problem with the moron of a cop at that time was he couldn't see this because he was a jobsworth who was too dumb to even work out why he was there in the first instance, so in the Chief whips place I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either.
What it does demonstrate is that you are definitely the same kind of person as Mitchell. A self serving, arrogant individual.
Now why don't you just start an ACAB thread and post in there. You might just be happy then.
Elroy Blue said:
Gene Vincent said:
I look at it slightly differently, the bloke lives in that street, at No12 in fact. So if he wants the fking gate opened into the road where he lives then he has every fking right to!
The problem with the moron of a cop at that time was he couldn't see this because he was a jobsworth who was too dumb to even work out why he was there in the first instance, so in the Chief whips place I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either.
I didn't realise you were there and witnessed it all. I mean, nowhere on any other media site has there ever been a suggestion that the Officer was anything but civil. The problem with the moron of a cop at that time was he couldn't see this because he was a jobsworth who was too dumb to even work out why he was there in the first instance, so in the Chief whips place I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either.
What it does demonstrate is that you are definitely the same kind of person as Mitchell. A self serving, arrogant toss pot.
Now why don't you just start an ACAB thread and post in there. You might just be happy then.
No.
That is being at the very least truculent and by dint of that, uncivil.
I'll turn the tables on you... "I didn't realise you knew Mitchell and myself so well" yet you wish to post an opinion upon both of us as being in some way the same sort of toss pot, you might be right, but at least I can (may be Mitchell could too) spot somebody who can't string a line of logic together or resist attacking the person rather than the point they are making.
I don't know what an ACAB thread might be.
Ozzie Osmond said:
Which was the day after an officer was dismissed for gross misconduct after the beating and death of Ian Tomlinson, so lets not get too sanctimonious here.
If you'll permit a sanctimonious answer, I don't equate the two events at all.The Met copper has been sacked, granted I think he should have had a harsher punishment.
I really fail to see the link between that and the murder of two girls.
Would that be the gate that doesn't get opened unless diplomatic vehicles are passing through.
But no. It's not the fault of an arrogant individual who feels he is above everyone else. An individual who expects the serfs to doff their cap and bow before them. An individual who feels he is to important to use the side gate like everyone else. An individual who doesn't believe that the word 'no' applies to him.
No, in your world, it's the fault if the Police Officer doing his job.
You are typical of what's wrong in society today. Pathetic.
But no. It's not the fault of an arrogant individual who feels he is above everyone else. An individual who expects the serfs to doff their cap and bow before them. An individual who feels he is to important to use the side gate like everyone else. An individual who doesn't believe that the word 'no' applies to him.
No, in your world, it's the fault if the Police Officer doing his job.
You are typical of what's wrong in society today. Pathetic.
mattviatura said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
Which was the day after an officer was dismissed for gross misconduct after the beating and death of Ian Tomlinson, so lets not get too sanctimonious here.
If you'll permit a sanctimonious answer, I don't equate the two events at all.The Met copper has been sacked, granted I think he should have had a harsher punishment.
I really fail to see the link between that and the murder of two girls.
Elroy Blue said:
Would that be the gate that doesn't get opened unless diplomatic vehicles are passing through.
But no. It's not the fault of an arrogant individual who feels he is above everyone else. An individual who expects the serfs to doff their cap and bow before them. An individual who feels he is to important to use the side gate like everyone else. An individual who doesn't believe that the word 'no' applies to him.
No, in your world, it's the fault if the Police Officer doing his job.
You are typical of what's wrong in society today. Pathetic.
Really, 'diplomats only' eh!But no. It's not the fault of an arrogant individual who feels he is above everyone else. An individual who expects the serfs to doff their cap and bow before them. An individual who feels he is to important to use the side gate like everyone else. An individual who doesn't believe that the word 'no' applies to him.
No, in your world, it's the fault if the Police Officer doing his job.
You are typical of what's wrong in society today. Pathetic.
You are losing grip of reality old chap.
It's the street where he lives, if he wants to go through the gate then just open it and let the guy through, it really is that simple.
That is the second time you've written that I'm typical of everything that is wrong in society, if you keep repeating it, not only might you believe it's true, you might just convince me!
BTW, no crim record, no points, no fines, never arrested, never cautioned, nothing... is that really everything that is wrong with society?
You have a strange value-set if so.
Gene Vincent said:
Really, 'diplomats only' eh!
You are losing grip of reality old chap.
It's the street where he lives, if he wants to go through the gate then just open it and let the guy through, it really is that simple.
That is the second time you've written that I'm typical of everything that is wrong in society, if you keep repeating it, not only might you believe it's true, you might just convince me!
BTW, no crim record, no points, no fines, never arrested, never cautioned, nothing... is that really everything that is wrong with society?
You have a strange value-set if so.
'it's the street where he lives'. Give me strength. You are losing grip of reality old chap.
It's the street where he lives, if he wants to go through the gate then just open it and let the guy through, it really is that simple.
That is the second time you've written that I'm typical of everything that is wrong in society, if you keep repeating it, not only might you believe it's true, you might just convince me!
BTW, no crim record, no points, no fines, never arrested, never cautioned, nothing... is that really everything that is wrong with society?
You have a strange value-set if so.
You may not have a criminal record. It's the me, me, me attitude. Can't take being told 'no'. More important than everyone else. Contempt for those around you.
Now, far be it from me to suggest that Downing Street is not just an ordinary street, but you might want to consider why those gates are there and what they are for.
If he squatted down and st in the street would that be ok. I mean, as far as you're concerned, he lives there so can be as anti-social as he likes.
johnfm said:
BOR said:
The Nasty Party. Nasty, nasty, nasty arrogant toffs.
Strange - the article suggests it was just one guy.Were the whole party trying to cycle out of there at once?
If so, no wonder tempers were frayed.
Elroy Blue said:
Gene Vincent said:
Really, 'diplomats only' eh!
You are losing grip of reality old chap.
It's the street where he lives, if he wants to go through the gate then just open it and let the guy through, it really is that simple.
That is the second time you've written that I'm typical of everything that is wrong in society, if you keep repeating it, not only might you believe it's true, you might just convince me!
BTW, no crim record, no points, no fines, never arrested, never cautioned, nothing... is that really everything that is wrong with society?
You have a strange value-set if so.
'it's the street where he lives'. Give me strength. You are losing grip of reality old chap.
It's the street where he lives, if he wants to go through the gate then just open it and let the guy through, it really is that simple.
That is the second time you've written that I'm typical of everything that is wrong in society, if you keep repeating it, not only might you believe it's true, you might just convince me!
BTW, no crim record, no points, no fines, never arrested, never cautioned, nothing... is that really everything that is wrong with society?
You have a strange value-set if so.
You may not have a criminal record. It's the me, me, me attitude. Can't take being told 'no'. More important than everyone else. Contempt for those around you.
Now, far be it from me to suggest that Downing Street is not just an ordinary street, but you might want to consider why those gates are there and what they are for.
If he squatted down and st in the street would that be ok. I mean, as far as you're concerned, he lives there so can be as anti-social as he likes.
So, now I have a 'me, me, me' attitude... and how in the name of the almighty did you make that astounding conclusion?.. let me guess... the 'agenda' label didn't stick so you've thrown some more st at the door... am I right?
You can't seem to muster anything viable in the way of debate, so you are scrabbling around trying to attach anything you can to me, this is the domain of the 'abject failure' in any debate, which is a flowery way to tell you that you really should stop posting anything addressed to me unless it has some real contribution to the debate... because I'll just keep handing your arse back to you with a newly torn hole.
OK?
Now the Police Federation are calling for this Mitchell chaps resignation no less!!!
They are at risk of completely negating the goodwill and sympathy gained in the last few days by their carefully orchestrated media manipulation.
This 'Sympathy card' thing is getting noisome and counter-productive...
They are at risk of completely negating the goodwill and sympathy gained in the last few days by their carefully orchestrated media manipulation.
This 'Sympathy card' thing is getting noisome and counter-productive...
Gene Vincent said:
Now the Police Federation are calling for this Mitchell chaps resignation no less!!!
They are at risk of completely negating the goodwill and sympathy gained in the last few days by their carefully orchestrated media manipulation.
This 'Sympathy card' thing is getting noisome and counter-productive...
I think the Police have got this dictating stuff the wrong way round.They are at risk of completely negating the goodwill and sympathy gained in the last few days by their carefully orchestrated media manipulation.
This 'Sympathy card' thing is getting noisome and counter-productive...
Derek Smith said:
I found that one of the most irritating things in normal policing duties was those who needed to challenge something like a closed road or similar. I would be told to stand by a sign which said: Road Closed, with an arrow showing the diverstion route and cars would stop to say that they needed to go down the closed road. They would moan that they had been delayed seemingly completely oblivious of the fact that they wee holding up those behind for no reason.
Often the cause of the obstruction was obivious: fire engines, fires even, that sort of thing.
I could put up with such people as at least it broke the monotany of just standing there but worse, I found, was when trying to stop pedestrians going along a particular footway or road. I've had queues of people putting the same questions. Thee was no way they would not have heard the answer I gave to the person in front of them but they still needed to ask their version of the same question.
There was a story about a PC who had become frustrated at a similar incident and had put a piece of paper under the flap of his tunic pocket which he revealed at the relevant time. He'd written on it: I have no f**king idea where Laura Ashley's is.
This had been refined by a PC I was working with when part of the City was blocked off. He just writeen F**k off. This was received in the spirit that you would expect.
Perhaps as a sign guarder you could have ensured that the sign explained what the issue was in brief terms. But I am sure that would have left you less chances to think those you are expected to protect are stupid.Often the cause of the obstruction was obivious: fire engines, fires even, that sort of thing.
I could put up with such people as at least it broke the monotany of just standing there but worse, I found, was when trying to stop pedestrians going along a particular footway or road. I've had queues of people putting the same questions. Thee was no way they would not have heard the answer I gave to the person in front of them but they still needed to ask their version of the same question.
There was a story about a PC who had become frustrated at a similar incident and had put a piece of paper under the flap of his tunic pocket which he revealed at the relevant time. He'd written on it: I have no f**king idea where Laura Ashley's is.
This had been refined by a PC I was working with when part of the City was blocked off. He just writeen F**k off. This was received in the spirit that you would expect.
Gene Vincent said:
. . . the bloke lives in that street, at No12 in fact. So if he wants the gate opened into the road where he lives then he has every right to!
The problem with the moron of a cop at that time was he couldn't see this because he was a jobsworth who was too dumb to even work out why he was there in the first instance, so in the Chief whips place I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either.
The police officer, whose job it was to ensure that the government-supported instructions were adhered to, did not stop this bloke going to his place of work. To suggest that is plain silly. All he did was point out that he should use the dedicated entrance.The problem with the moron of a cop at that time was he couldn't see this because he was a jobsworth who was too dumb to even work out why he was there in the first instance, so in the Chief whips place I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either.
By what you said – I'd have called him some choice names too and I wouldn't apologise later either - you define yourself. My guess is that you would not and that this tirade, from the safety of you warm, comfortable home, is nothing more than willie waving.
Gene Vincent said:
Now the Police Federation are calling for this Mitchell chaps resignation no less!!!
They are at risk of completely negating the goodwill and sympathy gained in the last few days by their carefully orchestrated media manipulation.
The function of the Federation, strictly controlled by the government, is to take the part of its members. It is taking the part of its members. If they are subject to bullying, then they should do something.They are at risk of completely negating the goodwill and sympathy gained in the last few days by their carefully orchestrated media manipulation.
As for goodwill and sympathy: it was two young women who died. It wasn’t a PR stunt.
Not that I noticed much goodwill from you on these forums.
“Carefully orchestrated media manipulation”. D’you know, I think I’ve met you. A number of times, in a number of situations, in a number of locations. I bet Dibble has, as well as EB and other police officers, ex and serving.
rich1231 said:
Perhaps as a sign guarder you could have ensured that the sign explained what the issue was in brief terms. But I am sure that would have left you less chances to think those you are expected to protect are stupid.
So we want a sign for every type of incident that causes a road to be blocked? Not sure the financies could have coped with that in my day, let alone now. What can be clearer than Road Blocked No Entry? That contains every bit of information required. If circumstances permit, diverstions are often set up but this takes time.I didn't suggest people were stupid, just that their actions were irritating.
Further, the purpose isn't to guard the sign, although left on its own it would get run over, but to block the road and stop those who ignore the signs from obstructing the police and other emergency services.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff