I doubt it. I think more likely they'll expand the types of acceptable photo ID so they're far less skewed towards older folk. And I expect they'll properly fund and run publicity campaigns to make people aware of their right to obtain free voter ID cards. That sort of approach would fit the 'sensible mature politics' mantra they've started off in government telling everyone about.
All the while, Reform's total absence of infrastructure and policies (and the unworkable nature of the things they put in their 'contract' with the British people) goes unscrutinised. The mainstream media will be awash with Farage and Tice and their aims are solely to deflect, divert, chuck fuel on flames and jeer from the sidelines despite the fact they are now elected MPs and have constituents to represent. If we're going to have the debate about proportional representation that should extend to media coverage given to the Lib Dems and Greens too.
I sort of gave the why with my last sentence. It's only guesswork, though it wasn't part of the manifesto either. Either way it'd need legislation so if they do go for it I suppose it'll be alongside lowering the voting age.
Ben Habib just the latest to find out the cold hard truth of life with the Farageosphere as he is dumped as deputy leader of the Party in favour of Richard (it’s my trainset) Tice. Anyone have access to a very tiny violin?
Up until about 10 years ago the Red Lion & St Stephens tavern, before it closed and re-opened, both use to have the 10 minute voting bell ring so that MPs had time to run back and get through the lobbies
I wonder if one of the forum's Reform voters would care to say if they support booting incapacitated prisoners in the face with size 12 safety boots and then stamping on their head? Or whether it would be contingent on other factors like, say, skin colour?
They were bleating away about Police brutality when they marched on the Cenotaph for Suella, so almost certainly so.
Oh I don't know I am of a certain vintage and police brutality songs were 10 a penny in the 70s So to re cap . It's nothing new . Race card declined in this instance
A point has been made that this incident had drawn all of the armed response team to the one area, leaving the Airport vulnerable to other attack. That may be a reason for escalating quickly, but I cannot figure out how kicking a man in the head, who is lying still on the ground, albeit uncooperatively, is going to resolve that issue. I also appreciate that one of the officer's colleagues had her nose broken in the affray that led to the scene, allegedly by one of the men arrested. Again, that doesn't justify what is seen in the video, though more may be learned about the circumstances that explain the motivation better. I don't see any immediate link to race. Although there may be a cultural element, even a criminal element, behind the reason why search was denied. But at an airport, resisting efforts to be searched by police, seems both suspicious and unwise. I wouldn't have denied it, and I don't think cultural reasons are enough to deny it. Do we know yet if anything was found, or what the reason for the search was? I can understand a use of aggression by the officers, particularly if the men arrested were violently resisting arrest. But a kick and a stamp on the head does appear to excessive force that would be difficult to justify. But the guy should get the chance to do so. Neither can I percieve that a man breaking the nose of a police woman in the pursuite of her duties is justified. I see no reason why it should be seen as an act motivated by racism, but it may be fair to infer that the act that led to it demonstrated contempt for the police, and a belief that it is OK to be agressive with them, which is often, but not always, an indication that a crime has been committed.
Absolutely not a Reform voter. I wouldn't say it was racist. Having seen the video leading up to it, it looks as if the civilians started it (they certainly resorted to violence first) and things escalated from there. Tensions were absolutely running high and I can sorta get why the officer would want to make sure they're absolutely subdued after what had happened beforehand, however it was still a disproportionate and unnecessary response. But racially motivated is a big ol stretch
I agree. The violence shown towards the police should be severely punished with prison sentences. But the police officer had absolutely no justification in kicking a man in the head when he had already been tasered and was prone on the ground. As often seems the case, the Reform leaders, such as Tice, and many of their followers, seem incapable of seeing things as anything other than black and white. Twitter is littered with their posts saying that the yobs were in the wrong so the police brutality was therefore justified. As you say, I don't think the action of the police officers were racist. But I'm not so sure that the Reform supporter's responses aren't. If it were a black copper kicking a white man in the head I strongly suspect the Reform supporters allegiances would be reversed!
I don't think GOBE's comments were aimed at the events themselves, but how certain individuals view/speak to the outcome.... i.e. they don't support police brutality, unless the victims are black in which case they probably did something to deserve it. I'm too far removed from the UK to speak on the existence or not of that kind of element nowadays, but I can say with 100% confidence it's a thing over here. There is no shortage of people who are supremely anti-government and distrust the Feds/authorities immensely and vocally to the point of speaking violently about them, but whenever a black civilian encounters a Derek Chauvin type those same people will bleat about how the force is justified: "if you have nothing to hide you have no need to run/resist", "back the blue", it's the injured/deceased party's own fault, etc. etc. etc. Contrast it with how they view the Jan 6ers. It isn't pretty viewing.
I am not jumping on you here, I am simply trying to provide some balance. I am not hearing anyone in the UK or the US say that police cannot deal aggresively with anyone, whatever their skin colour or religion, if it is called for by their behaviour. Rather, majority people are looking on at situations where groups of minority protesters are acting in a way that would be more harshly dealt with if those protesters were more 'traditional' in their nature. On the surface, there seems to be something in this. Imagine if countryside activists had torn down a statue in the middle of a British city or town and threw it in the river. There would, you can be sure, have been far less tolerance of the protest in that sort of scenario. Virtually any type of protest against government policy or behaviour on immigration will be labelled far right, whatever the make up of the protesters. If you don't agree, I would ask you to take a look at Ireland right now. Part of the issues over there at the moment are because of the percieved soft handling of minority groups or individuals, which in at least one case led to a serious assault on school children and their teacher. If people percieve it as two tier, and they certainly have an argument to put, then they have a right to protest. If you start to feel, whether you are Irish, English or American, that the police are no longer acting in societies interest, then you are bound to have concerns. Trump and MAGA supporters have said that the people who acted violently on J6 deserve to be prosecuted for their actions. Donald Trump, and MAGA, have then defended the behaviour of the vast majority of people involved on J6, comparing it, using video footage of them walking around behind the tourist rope lines in the Capitol, to say they were there to protest and not be violent. That is fair enough.They have then compared the behaviour of the J6 protesters, some of whom were rioting, with the summer of love protestors (in support of a Democrat cause). I am afraid that in my opinion, there is virtually no comparison, yet the number of prosecutions for a nation wide protest that did billions of dollars of damage and caused the deaths of around 25 people, and the destruction of untold minority livlihoods, compared to the money and time spent on prosecuting j6ers (hundreds of thousands of damage, and only one of their own dead), the vast majority of whom were the most gentle and peaceful protesters (see the videos of them walking past disinterested security whilst being in the Capitol itself) demonstrates a clear bias in how the governement is dealling with things. And what you describe above appears a self deluding act of denial by the press on behalf of Democrats. IMHO. To mention the one off J6 protest that was allowed to get out of hand, by deliberately under-manning security (Dems admit there were short falls, but neglect to say that they were in charge of security), and ignore the Summer of Love riots, which saw the destruction of Government buildings, violent attacks on police, and the take over (to the detriment of local people) of whole sections of major cities (insurrection on any other planet), is a little unfair, I think.
A disproportionate number of police, in America, are attacked by perpetrators. The number of unarmed black Americans killed by police each year, at the time of Floyd's murder, averaged less than 20, yet if you stopped and asked an American how many black people lost their lives to police on a yearly basis, the lowest figures they gave were in the thousands. Statistically, a law abiding black American is far safer in a street full of white police men than they would be in a street full of black Americans. They would be most at risk, many hundred of times more so, in a street full of young black American men. I don't believe it is racist to say that, and it is certainly less racist than suggesting that all policemen hate black people, which was a very definate dog whislte put out by Democrats, BLM and fa. Chavin was acompanied by at least two 'minority' officers, who, I belive, thought his actions reflected police procedure. I am not saying they were right, just that it was, I belive, their opinion. There are very few officers like Chauvin in the US, if the statistics are to be trusted. Yet people get upset when someone mentions that 50% of Americas homicides are committed by only 8% of the population (young black men). Statistics are not racist. To pretend they are, and to ignore reality, in favour of ideological fantasies, is to help it persist and grow. IMHO.
Every week there is something new posted on sochal meeja regarding someone kicking off on a plane . Generally they are white . When they are frog marched off by the old bill no one intervenes and says " go easy on them officer" . Quite the opposite . 99% of people would hope that they get what they deserve . Also the race baiters are struggling to square the white privilege circle over the white Dutch Olympian who is getting pelters about child abuse , and quite rightly . Back to the incident at Manchester if no one videod the incident or posted online and if no dodgy lawyer got involved then it would have been resolved with a slap on the wrist or maybe a fine . But thanks to the vultures and the race card players those 2 lads are probably looking at a stretch inside . Only the blindest blind man from blind land would think that the 2 lads were hard done by and given the full story I would expect that lawyer to make himself unavailable as there actions are indefensible whereas Plods legal team could put up a robust defence .
Two different issues though, what those detained did and how they were treated. The Police have to deal with a lot of provocation. Everyone can acknowledge that. There’s a temptation for all of us to condone a bit of rough treatment but it’s a slippery slope. It’s fundamental that the police aren’t above the law. Not only would it be wrong and highly detrimental to civil liberties but it’s also wrong in practice. Low level situations could become all out riots if treatment is too harsh. And the personal impact of mistakes could be very high. It’s all very well egging the police on to be that rough but what if a kick in the head causes brain damage or death? The officer will face jail and possibly a lifetime of remorse. Those are very high stakes and anyone encouraging the police to be that violent isn’t really on their side. The law should now deal fairly with those detained and the officer who overstepped.
I don't believe the police are being encouraged to act more violently. I think that misses the point that most people are making, though there will be nutters on both sides that think perpetrators/police should be more aggressive with the other. The clear point being made in Ireland at the moment, and the very essence of the two tier complaint, is that the police simply are not dealing with certain situations the way they are with other situations. If it is the case that the observation is true, then there is a point to be taken, that if ignored, is bound to lead to situations like in Ireland. Interesting to note, the people rioting and demonstrating are not the people making the complaints of two tier policing. It is fair to say that the people with such a view are a more peaceful majority than the minorities, and political activists, that are responsible for most of the unrest we see at the moment. Problem is, when the majority is ignored, and problematic behaviour is being played out in front of them, there is a risk that they will be drawn in. I hope they resist, because it is an age old political method to wind up the populace to bring about otherwise unjustifiable change. Your final sentence I agree with whole heartedly, and have liked your post for that.
Please join me in the Common Sense Party. We're gonna stand as many candidates as we can in 2029. We will get matron back onto the ward. End wokeness. Stop illegal immigration. Put an end to poverty for hard working Brits etc. We won't ever be in power so none of it matters, but we can milk the donors for a bit.
