University student stabbed

[Kevin Arnott's right boot]

You're talking about high level corruption there or racism, not a police officer handcuffing someone then performing CPR minutes later.

If the police are called to my house by my wife if she's accusing me of assaulting her with a hammer, they would likely handcuff me it wouldn't mean I'd done anything but they'd still handcuff me initially

Isn't racism exactly what is being alleged in this case, though?

As a more general point, no, my comment wasn't only about high level corruption or racism. It was about officers at all levels, having pre-conceptions about individuals, or groups, and acting based on those pre-conceptions rather than the evidence.

 

[Super Mario]

Isn't racism exactly what is being alleged in this case, though?

As a more general point, no, my comment wasn't only about high level corruption or racism. It was about officers at all levels, having pre-conceptions about individuals, or groups, and acting based on those pre-conceptions rather than the evidence.

You're suggesting that a police officer must make a perfectly informed decision in the minutes and seconds that they arrive to assess what's going on, in this instance you have both people shouting they are the victims and they made a snap decision, and yes you are talking about high level corruption in the post I replied to.

The lies told by police after the fact at Hillsborough etc is corruption and protectionism what's happened here is just a snap decision that was the wrong one but that was made in good faith at the time, isn't being hidden or brushed under the carpet and I'm sure will lead to some lessons being learned.

That’s a weapon being used,the hammer,if your on the floor and she is standing over you I am certain they wouldn’t cuff you straight away then assess the situation?

They would if she shouted he's got a weapon and I was conscious screaming at her, either way this nonsense nit picking is just a desperate.

This victimhood mentality is what holds women and ethnic minorities back in our society and now it seems the white men want a bit as well.

 

[Kevin Arnott's right boot]

You're suggesting that a police officer must make a perfectly informed decision in the minutes and seconds that they arrive to assess what's going on,

No I'm not. I'm arguing the exact opposite - that officers make bad decisions, often based on nothing more than pre-conceptions, and it's not, as you suggested, a stretch to imagine that they would.

and yes you are talking about high level corruption in the post I replied to.

No, my comment wasn't only about high level corruption or racism. It was about officers at all levels, having pre-conceptions about individuals, or groups, and acting based on those pre-conceptions rather than the evidence.

I've stressed the word "only" for you.

Officers sometimes make bad decisions. Sometimes those bad decisions are covered up, whether by the officers themselves, their colleagues or their superiors.

Sometimes those bad decisions become orders that junior officers then feel obliged to support and carry out.
Sometimes, it's just because, in the heat of the moment, they weren't thinking as calmly and rationally as they might have been had they had more time to think about their best course of action.

 

[Super Mario]

No I'm not. I'm arguing the exact opposite - that officers make bad decisions, often based on nothing more than pre-conceptions, and it's not, as you suggested, a stretch to imagine that they would.




I've stressed the word "only" for you.

Officers sometimes make bad decisions. Sometimes those bad decisions are covered up, whether by the officers themselves, their colleagues or their superiors.

Sometimes those bad decisions become orders that junior officers then feel obliged to support and carry out.
Sometimes, it's just because, in the heat of the moment, they weren't thinking as calmly and rationally as they might have been had they had more time to think about their best course of action.

Ok so I'm light of your clarification, the officers made the incorrect decision in this instance based on a snap judgement which was done with the best of intentions by the individual officers and wasn't in fact a part of a national conspiracy or any structural bias against white men?

 

[Chatty83]

Ok so I'm light of your clarification, the officers made the incorrect decision in this instance based on a snap judgement which was done with the best of intentions by the individual officers and wasn't in fact a part of a national conspiracy or any structural bias against white men?

If it was the other way round people would be saying it's bias based on constitutional racism and they would be right.

I don't think the officers will be racists but they've made their decisions based on constitutional racism that has been filtered in the last decade or so.

Unfortunate for them but if you make a mistake that big then suddenly eyes roll on you.

 

[BrumBlue]

Ok so I'm light of your clarification, the officers made the incorrect decision in this instance based on a snap judgement which was done with the best of intentions by the individual officers and wasn't in fact a part of a national conspiracy or any structural bias against white men?

They believed a brown man and did not believe a white man despite the white man saying he can't breathe and he has been stabbed. They believed that the racism claim was more serious and believable than a white man being stabbed.

In what way is that not racist because if it was the other way round it would be. Police aren't taught in training to scoff at claims that people have been stabbed.

 

[brains]

They believed a brown man and did not believe a white man despite the white man saying he can't breathe and he has been stabbed. They believed that the racism claim was more serious and believable than a white man being stabbed.

In what way is that not racist because if it was the other way round it would be. Police aren't taught in training to scoff at claims that people have been stabbed.

It doesn't have to be racist...it could be a simple error of judgement when they have turned up to the situation.

I would have thought that they should arrest them both at the scene, especially with there been no witnesses and get medical help ASAP for the lad if it's clearly visible that he has a stab wound.

Only the officers themselves will know if they have a prejudice against certain people and whether they have acted based on that prejudice.

 

[Super Mario]

They believed a brown man and did not believe a white man despite the white man saying he can't breathe and he has been stabbed. They believed that the racism claim was more serious and believable than a white man being stabbed.

In what way is that not racist because if it was the other way round it would be. Police aren't taught in training to scoff at claims that people have been stabbed.

You can read minds now then?

If it was the other way round people would be saying it's bias based on constitutional racism and they would be right.

I don't think the officers will be racists but they've made their decisions based on constitutional racism that has been filtered in the last decade or so.

Unfortunate for them but if you make a mistake that big then suddenly eyes roll on you.

They might be yeah but what does that prove? That lad that God shot through the car everyone was talking like he was the second coming of Jesus but it turns out he was ramming the police with his car when he was shot and the facts didn't fit the racist narrative because the officers had grounds to shoot him.

in this case it was a bad decision but in what way would we be saying it was clearly because the police were institutionally racist against white people, or is it more sensible to suggest they got there made an arrest when they saw he was bleeding started trying to save his life? Which if those seems more likely?

 

[Chatty83]

You can read minds now then?

They might be yeah but what does that prove? That lad that God shot through the car everyone was talking like he was the second coming of Jesus but it turns out he was ramming the police with his car when he was shot and the facts didn't fit the racist narrative because the officers had grounds to shoot him.

in this case it was a bad decision but in what way would we be saying it was clearly because the police were institutionally racist against white people, or is it more sensible to suggest they got there made an arrest when they saw he was bleeding started trying to save his life? Which if those seems more likely?

It does .ake a difference.

Firstly, you then need to question if these particular officers are fit to do their job.

You then need to ask about what training they are given for them to make what's seems like such a ridiculous error.

We'll see if they release the footage cause that could help or hinder their argument but it seems like a massive failure of the way their currently operate that it needs to be seriously addressed with changes made.

Then you get onto religious exemptions and that needs looking into again. I doubt you'll get many instances of Sikhs stabbing someone with a Kirpan again but we changed gun laws after Dunblane. I think it's worthy of investigation after this incident as well.

 

[Super Mario]

It does .ake a difference.

Firstly, you then need to question if these particular officers are fit to do their job.

You then need to ask about what training they are given for them to make what's seems like such a ridiculous error.

We'll see if they release the footage cause that could help or hinder their argument but it seems like a massive failure of the way their currently operate that it needs to be seriously addressed with changes made.

Then you get onto religious exemptions and that needs looking into again. I doubt you'll get many instances of Sikhs stabbing someone with a Kirpan again but we changed gun laws after Dunblane. I think it's worthy of investigation after this incident as well.

I agree on the issue around carrying a knife that's perfectly reasonable, but not in my opinion to question the fitness and of the police officers unless the cam footage shows something of course, it just seems like lots of people in this thread are ironically making very biased assumptions and then drawing conclusions based on them, which is exactly what they're also accusing the police of doing.

 

[brains]

It does .ake a difference.

Firstly, you then need to question if these particular officers are fit to do their job.

You then need to ask about what training they are given for them to make what's seems like such a ridiculous error.

We'll see if they release the footage cause that could help or hinder their argument but it seems like a massive failure of the way their currently operate that it needs to be seriously addressed with changes made.

Then you get onto religious exemptions and that needs looking into again. I doubt you'll get many instances of Sikhs stabbing someone with a Kirpan again but we changed gun laws after Dunblane. I think it's worthy of investigation after this incident as well.

The only person that should be allowed to carry a blade is someone commuting to their place of work. Or people going home from shops etc.

It seems barmy to me that people are allowed to carry a potentially lethal weapon just for a religious exemption. Even if 99% of the time, nothing happens it's the one off maniac like this that has resulted in a young man losing his life...

They could just as easily carry a plastic replica...with a lot less risk to the general public.

 

[Chatty83]

I agree on the issue around carrying a knife that's perfectly reasonable, but not in my opinion to question the fitness and of the police officers unless the cam footage shows something of course, it just seems like lots of people in this thread are ironically making very biased assumptions and then drawing conclusions based on them, which is exactly what they're also accusing the police of doing.

But its always the same when they dont show the evidence. The police have all but admitted they cocked up and we'll find out how much when the investigation goes ahead.

It's fair to question them though. The police should always be forward to be questioned to make sure things are being done correctly.

I highly doubt anyone (other than the perpetrator) got to the scene and wanted this to happen but it has and if they cocked up then they have to be accountable. It's a tough job but they know the risks of that before they take the job up.

 

[Super Mario]

But its always the same when they dont show the evidence. The police have all but admitted they cocked up and we'll find out how much when the investigation goes ahead.

It's fair to question them though. The police should always be forward to be questioned to make sure things are being done correctly.

I highly doubt anyone (other than the perpetrator) got to the scene and wanted this to happen but it has and if they cocked up then they have to be accountable. It's a tough job but they know the risks of that before they take the job up.

Accountable in what sense? Being accountable doesn't mean having every decision picked over like vultures looking for a dead body, accountability doesn't mean we get to second guess everything they did, suggesting they know the risks is a bit disingenuous given the coroner has already said it didn't contribute to his death.

It would be fair to question them however that certainly isn't what's happening on this thread, people are using bias to draw conclusions to fit what they believe happened because deep down they want to be a victim it's poison for the mind yet I see it on every form of social media we all use.

 

[c032745y]

It does .ake a difference.

Firstly, you then need to question if these particular officers are fit to do their job.

You then need to ask about what training they are given for them to make what's seems like such a ridiculous error.

We'll see if they release the footage cause that could help or hinder their argument but it seems like a massive failure of the way their currently operate that it needs to be seriously addressed with changes made.

Then you get onto religious exemptions and that needs looking into again. I doubt you'll get many instances of Sikhs stabbing someone with a Kirpan again but we changed gun laws after Dunblane. I think it's worthy of investigation after this incident as well.

They can't release the footage, a boy died...

 

[Chatty83]

Accountable in what sense? Being accountable doesn't mean having every decision picked over like vultures looking for a dead body, accountability doesn't mean we get to second guess everything they did, suggesting they know the risks is a bit disingenuous given the coroner has already said it didn't contribute to his death.

It would be fair to question them however that certainly isn't what's happening on this thread, people are using bias to draw conclusions to fit what they believe happened because deep down they want to be a victim it's poison for the mind yet I see it on every form of social media we all use.

Accountable in that if their actions were in any way contributory to the lads demise then they need to be assessed on whether they are capable at their jobs.

And that's exactly what does happen. If I cock up at work then they'll go over my mistake with a fine comb, see how it's happened and what can be done about it. It's no different for these, just the stakes are higher.

That is social media, it's literally the point of it really. People talk shite and discuss things.

They can't release the footage, a boy died...

Sure they can, but I think they need permission from the next of kin. They've released plenty prior.

 

[Super Mario]

Accountable in that if their actions were in any way contributory to the lads demise then they need to be assessed on whether they are capable at their jobs.

And that's exactly what does happen. If I cock up at work then they'll go over my mistake with a fine comb, see how it's happened and what can be done about it. It's no different for these, just the stakes are higher.

That is social media, it's literally the point of it really. People talk shite and discuss things.

Sure they can, but I think they need permission from the next of kin. They've released plenty prior.

Presumably then you understand mistakes happen regardless as perfection isn't possible for anyone and don't mean you're committing deliberate and wilful errors due to racism.

 

[Grimes]

Some extraordinary views on this thread...

Reading the thread it seems a pretty unanimous view that the coppers fucked up, unless you disagree with that?

 

[SAFCOldie]

Ok so I'm light of your clarification, the officers made the incorrect decision in this instance based on a snap judgement which was done with the best of intentions by the individual officers and wasn't in fact a part of a national conspiracy or any structural bias against white men?

We will need to wait and see but a downed lad poses little threat. I am now wondering if it was female officers that turned up

 

[c032745y]

Reading the thread it seems a pretty unanimous view that the coppers fucked up, unless you disagree with that?

I don't know the facts...

 

[Chatty83]

Presumably then you understand mistakes happen regardless as perfection isn't possible for anyone and don't mean you're committing deliberate and wilful errors due to racism.

I do but that doesn't mean you always keep you're job. People make honest mistakes and get fired everyday.

Not saying they should get fired btw but it shouldn't be off the table if they've completely ballsed up.

Also it doesn't need to be a conspiracy or deliberate to be racist. If they've made a call based on racial perception it's still racist matterless of the intentions.