Turn on thread page Beta

Major Brazilian hypocrisy watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Given the record of the British authoriies, who actually have a long record of shooting unarmed men, the same applies to them. Both the Brazilian and British authorities are touchy about foreigners killing their citizens. after all, if they wanted them killed they'd have killed them themselves.
    The British 'hall of shame' in this category is so much smaller than the Brazilian one it is nearly incomparable!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Something is either comparable or incomparable. there are no gradations.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Something is either comparable or incomparable. there are no gradations.
    To the point, before Brazil ever dares to lecture us about out shoot to kill policy, they ought to look at their shoot the child policy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The crux of the alleged 'cover up', that the Met waited 24 hours or so to admit to having f--ed up, seems like perfectly understandable pr management to me. They wouldn't want to announce anything until they knew what the situation was (not just that the guy didn't have a bomb on him, but who he was, his supposed connection to 7/7) and had decided what they wanted to say.

    This whole thing has looked to me hugely as if some enemy of Ian Blair, in politics, the met or the media might be kicking up a fuss about the whole thing in order to make him look bad. That is the way politics works, isn't it?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luke88)
    To the point, before Brazil ever dares to lecture us about out shoot to kill policy, they ought to look at their shoot the child policy.
    ...and before this country ever dares to lecture Brazil- or other countries- on its policies it ought to look at its own policies.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by avast!)
    The crux of the alleged 'cover up', that the Met waited 24 hours or so to admit to having f--ed up, seems like perfectly understandable pr management to me. They wouldn't want to announce anything until they knew what the situation was (not just that the guy didn't have a bomb on him, but who he was, his supposed connection to 7/7) and had decided what they wanted to say.

    This whole thing has looked to me hugely as if some enemy of Ian Blair, in politics, the met or the media might be kicking up a fuss about the whole thing in order to make him look bad. That is the way politics works, isn't it?
    They announced things before they knew what had happened anyway- agreed, if you off someone in public it's difficult to hide the fact you've done it. People are kicking up a fuss because they don't think it's a good thing to shoot unarmed men just on the off-chance they may be bombers. Blair- without public discussion or announcement- started a shoot-to-kill policy in unspecified circumstances which extended the previous often criticised rules, so it's reasonable thta he carries responsibility. His "enemies" may be using it, but he shouldn't have given them the chance to use it then.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Something is either comparable or incomparable. there are no gradations.
    You're right, I was half asleep when I wrote it, any other minor technical points???
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    ...and before this country ever dares to lecture Brazil- or other countries- on its policies it ought to look at its own policies.
    Err, no! Myself, Lord Waddell, Luke 88 and others have clearly set out the reasons for British superiority in the policy area of police and weapon handling!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound02)
    Regarding the 'pressure' (as weak as it is) being put upon Ian Blair to resign as head of the met. police by the Brazilian government and family of the man shot, my reaction is simply this: What right and moral superiority do the Brazilian police have to come to our country and try and lecture us on the rights and wrongs of gun usage given that Brazilian police habitually shoot dozens of innocent street children on a daily basis? Who the hell do they think they are? They want to sort out the immorality of their own remarkably 'liberal' use of guns before coming here and telling us we were wrong in ONE case! I suggest that we all point out to the Brazilian police just a few cases of the innocent children shot every day by them (who aren't even suspected of doing anything wrong, let alone being a terrorist) then they will have to shut up. If/ when they suffer a major terrorist incident like we have, then maybe they will begin to understand!

    Funny you say that, i say the same things about US and UK involvement in this 'war against terror'

    Please no point creating double standard, the police force made a big mistake, I guess the whole terrorism thing kinda blew in their faces. Everyone is in everyone elses business, ah the irony.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Blair- without public discussion or announcement- started a shoot-to-kill policy
    As far as I'm aware - the shoot to kill policy is not new, just the changing of the target from the chest to the head, in order to deal with any potential suicide bombers wearing bomb jackets which may be detonated by a bullet.

    Anyone else hear this?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound02)
    You're right, I was half asleep when I wrote it, any other minor technical points???
    Minor technical point?
    You accept that the policies of the Brazilian police and the Metropolitan police can be compared and you call it a minor technical point?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound02)
    Err, no! Myself, Lord Waddell, Luke 88 and others have clearly set out the reasons for British superiority in the policy area of police and weapon handling!
    You have made claims of absolute superiority. Shooting Menezes damaged those claims. Other incidents had damaged the claims for the Metropolitan Police's policy of when to shoot people before that. Certainly, they are better than the Brazilian police. You seem to think that this is enough to exonerate them of any fault. One reason the met is better is that we do not accept that a policy of shooting alleged criminals and a few other people is perfectly acceptable. Things obvously went very wrong leading to Menezes' death and to complain about who can or cannot say that things went wrong is not a good thing to do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by challis)
    As far as I'm aware - the shoot to kill policy is not new, just the changing of the target from the chest to the head, in order to deal with any potential suicide bombers wearing bomb jackets which may be detonated by a bullet.

    Anyone else hear this?
    I don't think a policy of shooting people who were being held down by another police officer existed before this actually.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Minor technical point?
    You accept that the policies of the Brazilian police and the Metropolitan police can be compared and you call it a minor technical point?
    They can be compared because both Brazilian and British police officers have an ethos of when it is and when it is not acceptable to shoot people. However, because British police are so vastly superior in this policy in terms of the vastly fewer number of people shot, I use the term 'incomparable' to suggest that they are so far away on the same scale that comparing them is almost pointless because of the lack of similarities.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    ...and before this country ever dares to lecture Brazil- or other countries- on its policies it ought to look at its own policies.
    I favour ours to Brazils.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Greyhound02)
    They can be compared because both Brazilian and British police officers have an ethos of when it is and when it is not acceptable to shoot people. However, because British police are so vastly superior in this policy in terms of the vastly fewer number of people shot, I use the term 'incomparable' to suggest that they are so far away on the same scale that comparing them is almost pointless because of the lack of similarities.
    Holding unarmed men down and shooting them in the head isn't a similarity?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luke88)
    I favour ours to Brazils.
    "Ours" before or after July 22nd?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    "Ours" before or after July 22nd?
    Our police force?

    Both. I fully support the Police.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    SO, you fully support a policy of holding people down and putting several bullets into their head on the off-chance they may be a muslim extremist who may have a bomb on them.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Holding unarmed men down and shooting them in the head isn't a similarity?
    Yes, but what's important is the fact that in Brazil they engage in this practice with frightening regularity, thankfully in Britain we do not.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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

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