Impersonating a police officer

Impersonating a police officer

Author
Discussion

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

128 months

Monday 18th August 2014
quotequote all
Rovinghawk said:
Anything like hours........................?
Not really sure how that crept in there.

Randomthoughts

917 posts

133 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
The guy with the camera comes across as a prize tt. At that point I'd even let the police take him outside and knock fk out of him.

I don't much approve of camera vans, especially abandoned in the street blocking the road or hidden away like the Welsh seem fond of, but the sooner these knuckle draggers put their camera phones away and stop pretending that they're anything other than scum of the earth themselves, the better.

johnvthe2nd

1,285 posts

197 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
Randomthoughts said:
The guy with the camera comes across as a prize tt. At that point I'd even let the police take him outside and knock fk out of him.

I don't much approve of camera vans, especially abandoned in the street blocking the road or hidden away like the Welsh seem fond of, but the sooner these knuckle draggers put their camera phones away and stop pretending that they're anything other than scum of the earth themselves, the better.
yeah, best we all just bend over and let it all happen rolleyes .. at least he's making a stand, even if you don't approve of his methods

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

128 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
johnvthe2nd said:
yeah, best we all just bend over and let it all happen rolleyes .. at least he's making a stand, even if you don't approve of his methods
Making a stand against what??

Randomthoughts

917 posts

133 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
Mk3Spitfire said:
Making a stand against what??
This. ^^

I'm not talking about bending over, I'm not talking about martial law, I'm not talking about handing over our right to do anything more than breathe without police approval.

I'm talking about not being a weapons-grade cock to people trying to do their job. Whether you like it or not, that poor sod in the van can't sit there and play on his Game Boy all day in protest to the fact that he's got to sit and nab people for speeding. He has to do it, so he can get paid. You might have the Bank of Mummy and Daddy to run to when you refuse to work because all you can do is point a hairdryer at people and ruin their day for something you deem to be unnecessary, but this guy probably doesn't. He has to work, and he has to be seen to be doing so in order to continue working. Simple, really.

johnvthe2nd

1,285 posts

197 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
Randomthoughts said:
I'm not talking about bending over, I'm not talking about martial law, I'm not talking about handing over our right to do anything more than breathe without police approval.


I was. Simple, really.

Randomthoughts

917 posts

133 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
johnvthe2nd said:
I was. Simple, really.
Some might argue that your inability to construct a helpful or even descriptive reply would suggest that you still are simple.

johnvthe2nd

1,285 posts

197 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
you saw it as a man making a rather clumsy personal attack on another man simply doing his job, and a subsequent visit by the police, who would have been completely justified in dragging him outside and "knock(ing) fk out of him." because of this.

I saw it as someone who subscribed to this, in your words

"I'm not talking about bending over, I'm not talking about martial law, I'm not talking about handing over our right to do anything more than breathe without police approval."

It wasn't meant as a personal attack on the man in the van, more the principal. Does that clear it up for you? I thought you may have been able to deduce that from my reply though.

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

128 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
Your posts are very disjointed and hard to follow. I think that's what random was on about.

Mr Taxpayer

438 posts

120 months

Tuesday 19th August 2014
quotequote all
It's a video of two halves.

Agreed that his filming style was intimidatory. However he was in a Public place and there is no law against filming in a public place (other than undder the Terrorism or Official Secrets Acts). The Scamera operator was incorrect to say the it was illegal to film him and hiding uder his coat only adds to his implied wrongdoing.

On the WPC foot in the door; had she stepped back a pace she could have de-escalated the situation quite quickly. She certainly seemed to be angling for him to push her out, which would escalate the situation, enable her to make an arrest and help add to the clear-up rate for SWP. Do all SWP officers behave like this towards MoP?

Not sure what I'd have done. Called 999 and reported an armed intruder maybe.

wildcat45

8,072 posts

189 months

Wednesday 20th August 2014
quotequote all
Mk3Spitfire said:
Except the male officer, I would argue.
The male officer was worse if anything. A situation had gone bad though the actions of the woman cop. It was however over. His unjustified objection to filming sought to achieve what? More confrontation with an agitated man. He may have been polite, but he was still very stupid.

The thing is, neither had seen the video, unless the camera van recorded it somehow. Not justification, but had the woman seen the video, it might explain - not excuse - her stance and bad behaviour.

Bigends

5,418 posts

128 months

Wednesday 20th August 2014
quotequote all
wildcat45 said:
Mk3Spitfire said:
Except the male officer, I would argue.
The male officer was worse if anything. A situation had gone bad though the actions of the woman cop. It was however over. His unjustified objection to filming sought to achieve what? More confrontation with an agitated man. He may have been polite, but he was still very stupid.

The thing is, neither had seen the video, unless the camera van recorded it somehow. Not justification, but had the woman seen the video, it might explain - not excuse - her stance and bad behaviour.
Cant see that they would have gone round without having spoken to the cameraman to find out exactly what had happened - I certainly wouldnt have - would have needed to know whether or not he was nickable for any offences