Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    Fair point but:

    1. If they spread them out more (and seperated the majority from the violent trouble makers) there would be less need to "police" them anyway, which would save everyone (police included) a lot of energy and pain.

    2. If thats really the case, they should send more police to the protests in the first place: they should not have to resort to kettling (a very, very bad strategy).

    3. It is only at these middle-class relatively laid back protests that they use kettling. In other situations in the past where there really have been extremely hardcore and violent, racist skinheads they have definitely not resorted to kettling. I think this in itself goes to show that the only reason they use kettling is to make the protestors look bad (by invoking violence), which in turn helps the state to justify its actions raising tuition fees and what not.
    Separating the majority from the violent is a touch difficult don't you think? Seeing as the two groups were so integrated it would've taken a monumental effort to root out every single violent one and separate them.

    More police? They've just raised tuition fees by 300%, where on earth are they going to get the money for all these extra police officers?

    It's not a case of resorting to kettling, it's an effective tactic that stops a lot of police officers getting hurt. 12 were injured today. If you'd dispersed those 12 officers in amongst the crowd you can be sure as hell they'd've been killed.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rooster523)
    Separating the majority from the violent is a touch difficult don't you think? Seeing as the two groups were so integrated it would've taken a monumental effort to root out every single violent one and separate them.

    More police? They've just raised tuition fees by 300%, where on earth are they going to get the money for all these extra police officers?

    It's not a case of resorting to kettling, it's an effective tactic that stops a lot of police officers getting hurt. 12 were injured today. If you'd dispersed those 12 officers in amongst the crowd you can be sure as hell they'd've been killed.
    I think you have a point but I also think that the strategy of kettling goes too far when its not necessary. Certainly some of the videos I saw of it just looked way too unnecessary. As for costs, well if the crowds are less violent (for the sake of argument), it will cost the government less in repairs - fixing damaged police vans, etc.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    What happened was a minority went to the protest with the intention of causing violence.
    In doing so this caused the police to adopt an entirely different crowd control tactic.
    The blame rests on this minority of violent protesters.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    I think you have a point but I also think that the strategy of kettling goes too far when its not necessary. Certainly some of the videos I saw of it just looked way too unnecessary. As for costs, well if the crowds are less violent (for the sake of argument), it will cost the government less in repairs - fixing damaged police vans, etc.
    As soon as the students decided to deviate from their pre-planned route they should've known they would have been kettled. Peaceful protests don't deviate from their routes
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    I think you have a point but I also think that the strategy of kettling goes too far when its not necessary. Certainly some of the videos I saw of it just looked way too unnecessary. As for costs, well if the crowds are less violent (for the sake of argument), it will cost the government less in repairs - fixing damaged police vans, etc.
    Are you totally detached from reality? With a name like yours probably.

    I doubt hiring however many officers you are suggesting is going to be cheaper than repairing the damage you do.

    The cheapest option would be the violent protesters growing up and acting like adults. That way we don't need more police OR to repair any damage.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rooster523)
    As soon as the students decided to deviate from their pre-planned route they should've known they would have been kettled. Peaceful protests don't deviate from their routes
    The original plan was to go to Parliament Square, which we did. They then kettled us, makng us unable to leave. The protest was relatively peaceful until they kettled us and started battering people and antagonising protesters, not remotely surprising it kicked off like it did. Kettling is such a moronic tactic.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeniedExistence)
    The original plan was to go to Parliament Square, which we did. They then kettled us, makng us unable to leave. The protest was relatively peaceful until they kettled us and started battering people and antagonising protesters, not remotely surprising it kicked off like it did. Kettling is such a moronic tactic.
    After what happened in the first protest, if you didn't expect to be kettled you were all rather naive. You mean it was peaceful until students decided to start ripping down fences at Parliament Square; the police stepped in and you're blaming them for starting the violence? pffft
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    Fair point but:

    1. If they spread them out more (and seperated the majority from the violent trouble makers) there would be less need to "police" them anyway, which would save everyone (police included) a lot of energy and pain.

    2. If thats really the case, they should send more police to the protests in the first place: they should not have to resort to kettling (a very, very bad strategy).

    3. It is only at these middle-class relatively laid back protests that they use kettling. In other situations in the past where there really have been extremely hardcore and violent, racist skinheads they have definitely not resorted to kettling. I think this in itself goes to show that the only reason they use kettling is to make the protestors look bad (by invoking violence), which in turn helps the state to justify its actions raising tuition fees and what not.
    Right. So when we look at protests by groups such as the EDL, the people your sort call racists, what tactics do the police employ? Ahh, that's right, kettling. And what I find funny is you then call them violent thugs, when your lefty lot act exactly the same. But that's by the by.

    Kettling is a legitimate strategy. Allowing protesters to just do their own thing leaves you open to far worse acts of vandalism and violence. If you want to avoid agressive police tactics then hold a static demo with your own stewards, otherwis the police will treat you as they do any other protesters.

    Just because you get jostled a bit is no reason to turn violent. Frnkly, if you use this as an exuse for the 'students' antics then you come off as a rather childish person.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Right. So when we look at protests by groups such as the EDL, the people your sort call racists, what tactics do the police employ? Ahh, that's right, kettling. And what I find funny is you then call them violent thugs, when your lefty lot act exactly the same. But that's by the by.

    Kettling is a legitimate strategy. Allowing protesters to just do their own thing leaves you open to far worse acts of vandalism and violence. If you want to avoid agressive police tactics then hold a static demo with your own stewards, otherwis the police will treat you as they do any other protesters.

    Just because you get jostled a bit is no reason to turn violent. Frnkly, if you use this as an exuse for the 'students' antics then you come off as a rather childish person.
    My lefty lot? You think right wingers are not actively involved in protests? Have I endorsed violence at any point in this thread? No. I am merely illustrating that sometimes the media would have us believe it is all the protestors in an attempt to convert the public to their twisted ideologies: the police are nothing but altruistic angels. Again, state endorsed violence is absolutely acceptable (as we can see, this is general opinion provided by the content of your post and others like you) but resistance to police brutality is "terrorism", "anarchism" (though a large proportion of anarchists actually oppose violence but that is conveniently ignored), etc.

    Kettling makes violent thugs more violent. I have seen many programmes where police do not use kettling against particularly hardcore and obnoxious football fans. One method is to form a circle around the crowd (without pressing them in), giving them personal space and not actually having the police "spread thinly" accross the crowd. There are many alternatives to kettling: they don't use them because they want to make the protestors look bad. In any case, I am not using it as a way of justifying violence as a retaliation to kettling, merely stating that kettling is more likely to invoke violence.

    You are just blindly accepting all forms of authority, good or bad for the sake of showing your blind enthusiasm for the state.

    (Original post by obins)
    Are you totally detached from reality? With a name like yours probably.
    If I am detached from reality then where do I live? Planet Zedong?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    My lefty lot? You think right wingers are not actively involved in protests? Have I endorsed violence at any point in this thread? No. I am merely illustrating that sometimes the media would have us believe it is all the protestors in an attempt to convert the public to their twisted ideologies: the police are nothing but altruistic angels. Again, state endorsed violence is absolutely acceptable (as we can see, this is general opinion provided by the content of your post and others like you) but resistance to police brutality is "terrorism", "anarchism" (though a large proportion of anarchists actually oppose violence but that is conveniently ignored), etc.

    Kettling makes violent thugs more violent. I have seen many programmes where police do not use kettling against particularly hardcore and obnoxious football fans. One method is to form a circle around the crowd (without pressing them in), giving them personal space and not actually having the police "spread thinly" accross the crowd. There are many alternatives to kettling: they don't use them because they want to make the protestors look bad. In any case, I am not using it as a way of justifying violence as a retaliation to kettling, merely stating that kettling is more likely to invoke violence.

    You are just blindly accepting all forms of authority, good or bad for the sake of showing your blind enthusiasm for the state.


    You might not have noticed this, but protesters arn't the only people around. There are people who want to get on with their daily lives, and to just let the protesters go wherever they want is a detriment to them.

    If you watch the footage, many times the students are given chances to move back and whatnot. But what seems to be a consitant theme is that the students try to aggrevate the police, commit acts of violence and thuggery, and then blame the rage that boils from kettling. There were criminal acts perpetrated before the kettling began and that is undeniable.

    I agree, there may be mny not invloved in the criminal acts, it might be the majority, but when the two groups are mixed together, you will all be treated the same. And you should expect nothing less. If you're so woried about these violent protestors then take it upon yourselves to register your members or help police yourselves.

    I'm no blind supporter of the State, but at the same time, I don't believe in anarchy, or any of these odd notions the left have. I belive in self worth and responsibility. If you commit a crime, that crime is yours, it doesn't matter if someone jostled you first.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I'm no blind supporter of the State, but at the same time, I don't believe in anarchy, or any of these odd notions the left have. I belive in self worth and responsibility. If you commit a crime, that crime is yours, it doesn't matter if someone jostled you first.
    You don't even know what anarchy is so quit the melodrama. http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/index.html
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    You don't even know what anarchy is so quit the melodrama. http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/index.html
    I know quite well what Anarchy is, and quite frankly, it is a ridiculous notion. Just as most far left ideals are.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If the Met police were not so utterly bad at this sort of thing then they wouldn't be embarrassed so often.

    You can tell by the rehtoric of the Met hierachy that their performance had been so flaccid and heavy handed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    I know quite well what Anarchy is, and quite frankly, it is a ridiculous notion. Just as most far left ideals are.
    I would put rather a lot of money on the fact that you do not have the slightest idea what anarchy is. No doubt you subscribe to some narrow, fatuous idea that utterly disregards the immense base of historical and philosophical concepts.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So it was the police's fault that windows were smashed and people were climbing on war memorials? Yeah right...

    I do think the police were quite heavy on some of the people there but it's disgusting how a minority of students acted. It overshadows the actual point of the protest tbh, what a shame.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    I would put rather a lot of money on the fact that you do not have the slightest idea what anarchy is. No doubt you subscribe to some narrow, fatuous idea that utterly disregards the immense base of historical and philosophical concepts.
    Anarchy, a lack of governemnt.

    Depending on the brand of anarchy you would then go on to privatise traditionally national services, such as the police and health services. Then often go on to form small communes, self regulating communities.

    You anarchists consider the very mechanism of state and government unessecary, even undesirable. You would say authority is unsecassary.

    Although, of course, as with all politicl ideologies here are many differing brands of Anarchism, a few less ridiculous than the others, but all somewhat lacking in sense.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Anarchy, a lack of governemnt.

    Depending on the brand of anarchy you would then go on to privatise traditionally national services, such as the police and health services. Then often go on to form small communes, self regulating communities.

    You anarchists consider the very mechanism of state and government unessecary, even undesirable. You would say authority is unsecassary.

    Although, of course, as with all politicl ideologies here are many differing brands of Anarchism, a few less ridiculous than the others, but all somewhat lacking in sense.


    I am not an anarchist and I rest my case. You have summarised your narrow and fatuous idea of anarchy in a couple of sentences and written off the rest (an immense base of literature) with a flaccid "There are many different kinds of course." and then dismissed them in kind.

    Just what I thought.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When an elected official refuses to live up to the commitments they pledged in their manifesto, their authority becomes illegitimate and it is up to the citizen to reclaim it.

    When governments fear the people, there is liberty-Thomas Jefferson.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diaz89)
    When an elected official refuses to live up to the commitments they pledged in their manifesto, their authority becomes illegitimate and it is up to the citizen to reclaim it.

    When governments fear the people, there is liberty-Thomas Jefferson.

    This is rather surprising coming from you. D:

    What if the Government is endorsed by heaven? :holmes:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    I am not an anarchist and I rest my case. You have summarised your narrow and fatuous idea of anarchy in a couple of sentences and written off the rest (an immense base of literature) with a flaccid "There are many different kinds of course." and then dismissed them in kind.

    Just what I thought.
    Forgive me for not writing an essay to an unknown on an internet forum. Of course, I would like to take the time to write 5000 words on the subject for you, but in reality I have far better things to do. I summed up what anarchism stands for.

    A view that Authority and Government are unescessary and undesierable. This is the main tennant of Anarchism is it not?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 12, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.