The Student Room Group

Will there be more summer riots...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Original post by KasanDude
Yes, you are correct. It is ok to beat someone to a pulp, steal his wallet and leave him bleeding to die on the street so long as it is not your intent for him to completely die. All he did that day was try to put out a fire. I'm sure that he somehow opressed the guys who beat him up. He probably stole all their money and caused the riot, right?

Get real.

I mean the guy was 68. What kind of piece of an immoral person can justify that?


leave him bleeding to die on the street is still killing sum1.
you mention below that someone who explicitly signs up and joins a well organised company that has a clear policies should be spared moral judgement as they are not one of the decision makers at the top. (which i disagree with by the way but i'll deal with that in a bit) so why do you think its ok to smear the entire group of rioters when a tiny group of them attacked some guy? they had no clear policies or organised agenda. so your just going to smear all the rioters as murderers now?

nice. but then again thats why the riots started in the first place. but you wouldnt no a thing about that.

i mean lets face it people like you would probably not bat an eyelid if they started rounding up all the chavs and gas them in concentration camps. nobody cared that the police went and killed a man out in the middle of the street. nobody cared because deep down they no that they are not a working-class commoner or should i say "a chav". as long as you are not a chav your pretty much safe to walk the streets without A. collective disdain and oppression from the society around you and B. harassment from the police.

also

IT WAS A RIOT

what were you expecting? everyone running around giving to charity and oiling each other down for a nice shiatsu?

you seem to have your head locked in this fantasy the media painted that the uk was in anarchy and had gangs of hoods running around setting fire to innocent hard workers shops, peoples homes and beating old men to death.

the truth is quite the opposite. and whether your just easily manipulated by the media or just feel the same sentiment so leapt to what they were selling you without rational thinking is something i cannot yet tell.

but yes lets look at riots. REAL RIOTS. the in riots people usually get killed. theres anarchy theres violence. in the LA riots over 50 people were killed.
what i find funny is academics look at the LA riots like "ah well really it was just conditions of the community and oppression and stuff"

fact is the government in this country knows exactly why there was riots because they set about causing them. it was obvious they were going to cause them. thats why there was no official inquest. any rational and decent government that wishes the best for all its people would not intend to have a riot. and if there was one they would be shocked and want to find out why and therefore start an inquest. however, it was the guardian news paper in a association with 2 other not very famous groups that conducted an independent inquest. finding out quite the opposite to what many of the media stations said.

the media stations had people who were not rioters. who were not actually involved in the riots. giving their opinions on what they were looking at on the tv and saying that it was opportunistic. however the guardian inquest found quite the opposite that many had clear issues and reasons why they were rioting.

i can tell you i was present during the riots. and i don't mean just in my house. i mean i was outside looking at it all. stood amongst it. that only in britain could you get polite riots.

i mean guys were helping old women across the road and in the distance there was burning cars.

there were people out with their kids. shops were still open. this wasn't a REAL RIOT. simply because it was far too "polite"


Original post by KasanDude

Whatever you think of companies like sony or argos footlocker, you can't even begin to seriously say that just because a guy works there he's automatically the guy pointing a gun to some kid's face in a sweatshop. That's unfair. So if I desperately need money and the only job I can quickly find is cleaning rooms at a hotel chain, I'm automatically like that multi-billionaire Hilton guy, right?

I mean, that's what youre saying.


so if i desperately need money and sell drugs thats ok? i mean its the smack head that goes out committing burglaries, not me? or is it morally wrong that i am selling something to sum1 that harms them?

oh wait then shouldn't i feel bad about being a shop keeper and selling cigarettes and alcohol?

or even a fast food proprietor selling people food that i know has been proven to cause diabetes and heart problems.

the fact is this. you know what your getting into. and in this society we think its ok to commit evil immoral acts as long as we do it in a suit instead of a tracksuit.

you know that footlocker sells shoes made by sweatshops. if you think thats morally wrong then you shouldn't work there.

just like if you think selling your body is wrong then you shouldn't be a prostitute.

Original post by KasanDude

And robbing the shops of an immigrant who came to england to try and better provide for his family just because you THINK the government steals from you is somehow alright?


what does it matter if they're an immigrant? are you saying its ok to rob shops of people who live here?

are you trying to paint some cliche mental picture of some sweet italian immigrant in new york setting up a pizza shop to send money back home to "mama"

please.

i don't care if ur an immigrant or not.

Original post by KasanDude

The fact is that all the rioters were cowards. If they really had an agenda, one that was actually thought-out and meaningful, they would have done things differently. They would have protested infront of parliament or the houses of the politicians.


i don't understand how not having a clearly thought out agenda makes you a coward?

it certainly makes you disorganised. but a coward?

why would they protested? whats the point. when has the government listened to any of the protests that have been done in the past 12 years? none.

your quite clearly someone who is middle class and handicapped in their ability to see the two sides of the coin because you've been heavily conditioned in to protecting the environment that keeps you fat rich and nice. so naturally these reactions and thoughts are not ur own. theyve been rammed in ur head by the media and ur probably arguing simply because ur going a long with the "trend" and also to save ur own e-ego probably.

but if you had any idea about how things were on "the other side" (and by that i mean those living in poverty in this country) not only have these people been ignored. their youth workers and academic people representing them have not only been ignored. but when they have asked for support in such as such an area theyve actually not only not been given the help but actually had funding taken away and going in the opposite direction.

these people have been patiently knocking on the door for such a long time and now they just don't give a ****.

there protests would be ignored.

you know how i know that? because their riots were ignored too. despite the droves of people coming forward stating the reasons why they rioted all pointing at the same things. the governments conclusions still flu int he face of everything found in the guardians report. and im sure you will join them in that.

i mean whats happened in this country isnt new. its directly comparable to other riots before which have been analysed and explained. but hey this country is becoming more and more stupid by the day. its impressive how many educated people have just decided to metaphorically throw years of academic research in the bin in favour of their own warped middle class bigotry.

Original post by KasanDude

But no, they CHOSE to attack and hurt people who were even more defenseless than they were. They CHOSE to kill and set people's cars on fire.


so despite admiting they didnt intend to kill the guy youve gone and reverted back to your original state of thinking? interesting. so you cannot mentally progress through the argument, you just... reset.

but yea glad a few people got to experience the violence and disorder that exists in many housing estates and just generally poor areas in the uk.

i mean your not intelligent enough to acknowledge the suffering. nor to do anything about it. so its nice for you to get a taste. its a shame because if you weren't so stupid you could use the experience to learn. but you aren't so u just go back to the old ways of thinking. dyslexics are just stupid, the poor are just lazy yada yada.

Original post by KasanDude

Did they identify the people they attacked? Did they see who the car they were setting on fire belonged to? No, it was random. It was done on a whim. There was no agenda, nothing. Just violence finally let out.


lashing out is an agenda. destroying the community that rejects you is an agenda. its simple. constructive attempts of engagement have been given up on.
destructive engagements have taken their place.

whats sad is the government has put more effort into catching the rioters than persecuting the bankers that sent this country into the worst financial state since the 1920's and also for the first time giving birth to a generation who will be worse off than them. while we have remained worse off the upper classes have continued to climb the ladder of success and growth.

but what i find odd is the logic of you people.

you blame 1000's of rioters for the actions of 5 men killing an old man. and for this you believe the army should come in and murder them all?

u people amaze me.


Original post by KasanDude

And how were banks capitalising over them? I still dont get that. I think that establishments with money were used as scapegoats. I mean, how has the Bank of Scotland specifically affected the rioters? Seriously, did they come around to their house and steal their wallet? Did they beat them up? The answer is no.


how were the banks capitalising over them? my god. you know what. i don't even no where to begin on this one.

have you been living under a rock?

you know the banks caused the recession? the banks collapsed and put themselves in debt. the government had to bail them out with our money. they've been GIVEN money. our money. they don't have to pay it back. they are filthily rich to begin with. by giving money to the banks we as a country have put our selves in debt and we have to figure out how to get out of it. the government has come up with the austerity measures. which means basically that the working class have to foot the majority of the bill. with the higher income brackets contributing less and less as they get up the chain. in fact those at the top of the chain, the bankers. actually gained profit.

so let me explain what capitalising is. capitalising is making money for your self no matter what and screw everyone else. so i've sold my children to pedophiles i've just made capital off of them.

to capitalise on a situation is to "take advantage" and be "opportunistic"

how can you be so AMAZINGLY RETARDED as to think the banks have not effected the rioters or indeed EVERYONE IN THIS COUNTRY.

the banks were scapegoated? jesus christ... no wander this countries going to the dogs.

as for the. did they go into peoples homes and rob them? personally? no.
but then again hitler never personally round up and killed any jews. he "just" gave the orders.


Original post by KasanDude

And the rioters dont own the streets. The streets technically belong to all taxpayers collectively. And people who pay their taxes dont have to go out at night and steal a TV.


thanks captain obvious.
i said they "owned" the streets for 3 nights.
not they "own" the streets.
read properly before you make a point.

Original post by KasanDude

Also, why should anyone listen to the rioters more than other law-abiding citizens. Theres like 8 billion people on the planet, each with their own problems... did the rioters somehow think that they are better or more important than the rest of us?


why should anyone listen to anyone?

why should the rioters listen to us when tell them to stop?

why should i listen to a politician a police officer a bailiff or a teacher

why should i listen to my parents

why should i listen to you?

guess what. the governments suppose to LISTEN to us. or at least in a democracy they are.

and its because they haven't been listened to that they've reacted like this.

and i know i'm repeating myself but... MY GOD ITS AMAZING how you still have learned nothing.

so rest assured it WILL happen again.

its just a matter of when.

and the gov knows it.
Reply 41
Original post by Mick.w
why should anyone listen to anyone?

why should the rioters listen to us when tell them to stop?

why should i listen to a politician a police officer a bailiff or a teacher

why should i listen to my parents

why should i listen to you?

guess what. the governments suppose to LISTEN to us. or at least in a democracy they are.

and its because they haven't been listened to that they've reacted like this.

and i know i'm repeating myself but... MY GOD ITS AMAZING how you still have learned nothing.

so rest assured it WILL happen again.

its just a matter of when.

and the gov knows it.


I find it amazing that you can still think that the rioting was in any way political. It was just people having an excuse to go mad.

But fine, I'll do my best to try to rationally argue with you.

First, I WOULD give a damn if people started "roudning up the chavs and gassing them up" because there is no reason for that, which is precisely why I'm opposed to the riots, as it was just mindless damage and destruction for no real reason. Unjustified.

And what do I expect of a riot? Nothing, because sane rational people do not riot. Sane rational people take a stand against what they believe in. They don't take out their personal issues on others.

TRY to think logically. If you really disagree with the way a company or a person or a government conducts itself, why not attack them in particular? Why not target them specifically? Why randomly cause havok in a whole city. I mean even if you say that the damage in the riot was casulty of war or whatever, or that those were just rioters "without an agenda," how come no real damage was done to the entities the "real rioters" were targeting. The house of parliaments was left standing. No politician was harmed. Nada.

I mean, fair enough, if something bothers you, by all means act on it. But act on IT, not on something totally unrelated, like a random car parked in the street. PLEASE tell me how the riot really went against those who are trully responsible for the things that displease you.

You can't even begin to compare working at the gap store to dealing heroin. Grow up.

As for the cigarettes, alcohol and fast food, the people who consume these things do so willingly. Mcdonalds does not stuff the food down your throat at gunpoint. If you drink, smoke or eat junk food, YOU are responsible for what happens. Saying otherwise means you are simply unable to own up to the consequences of your own actions.

I'm not saying that the lack of an agenda makes you cowardly. Read carefully. I'm saying that if you have a problem with the government or banks but you take it out on people not even remotely connected to that, people who haven't done anything to you, you ARE a coward. This is because you aren't facing the very thing making you angry.

As for the banks, I'll tell you what. Write down SPECIFICALLY how the banks have wronged you. I mean actual events, not idealism. Did they deny you a loan? Did they forclose your mortgage? I'm not trying to insult, I'm asking because I would like to know.

Since you keep going back to the guy beaten to death, I'll explain myself. The first paragraf I wrote before was sarcastic. From what you said, it sounded like you were saying it was acceptable for the guys to beat the man up, so long as killing wasn't their intent. I felt that this was going too far, as in my eyes, it is ALWAYS unacceptable to hurt women, children and the elderly, yet you were saying it was OK for them to do it because they didn't inted to kill him.

"why should anyone listen to anyone?"

they shouldn't

"why should the rioters listen to us when tell them to stop?"

because they have no right to damage our property

"why should i listen to a politician a police officer a bailiff or a teacher"

listening doesn't mean agreeing. you SHOULD hear what they have to say BEFORE you decide they're evil.

"why should i listen to my parents"

they brought you into this world, fed you, gave you clothes, shelter and educated you. you damn well should listen to your parents.

"why should i listen to you?"

well if you want to have a discussion, you should hear what I have to say so that you can respond to it.

"guess what. the governments suppose to LISTEN to us. or at least in a democracy they are. "

very right. although its hard to listen to someone who is rioting.

"and its because they haven't been listened to that they've reacted like this. "

I completely agree, yet my issue is with the rioters not reacting to the government.

"and i know i'm repeating myself but... MY GOD ITS AMAZING how you still have learned nothing. "

its hard to take what you say seriously when you call me "amazingly retarded"

"so rest assured it WILL happen again."

I'm sure it will. And when it does I will continue to be baffled at why the riots will have completely ignored the government and politicians and instead taken it out on other people.
Last year the area in London most hit by the riots was places like Croydon, and Hackney. These places are also in East London where the Olympics will be, so I'm pretty sure anyone who is looking suspicious will be searched throughly.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Reply 43
Original post by KasanDude
I find it amazing that you can still think that the rioting was in any way political. It was just people having an excuse to go mad.


I wouldn't say the rioters had any kind of political motive, however that doesn't mean politics does not come into play.

If all those people had steady jobs to go to, or some sort of training / future prospects, they wouldn't have done it.

Yes I know there will be the odd one or two middle class people who had jobs, etc. But they are the exception to the rule.
With the spectacular way the country is being run what with a nose-diving economy and austerity and assaults on all services and segments of society (especially the young) I wouldn't entirely rule out some sort of civil unrest.

British reserve is one thing but **** on the public enough and something will click.
Reply 45
Original post by noobynoo
...because I could do with a new plasma TV. :biggrin: Just kidding. Do you think there will be more riots this year? I think last year it was triggered by the heatwave. (And the heatwave the year before that made people crazy and there were two rampaging serial killers). Or do you think the rioters will be scared off because a lot of them were captured on CCTV.


personally i think that might just teach them to either smash the cctv cameras first or cover their faces, like a smart person would do, if they were to riot again :rolleyes:
Reply 46
Original post by Empire08
I wouldn't say the rioters had any kind of political motive, however that doesn't mean politics does not come into play.

If all those people had steady jobs to go to, or some sort of training / future prospects, they wouldn't have done it.

Yes I know there will be the odd one or two middle class people who had jobs, etc. But they are the exception to the rule.


True, the rioting was basically a "comment" on the social situation in britain.

And I do honestly think that its not so much the economy causing a lack of jobs as opposed to the government not being able to deal with it. Surely the government could have handled it better.
Reply 47
The riots were the best thing to happen in this country for years. This summer is rapidly becoming completely London dominated, (that whole royal boat thing was nauseating) the opportunity to use the olympics to benefit the nation at large doesnt seem to have materialised, and as a result I expect to see more violence and disorder this year also.
Reply 48
Very good post the government couldn't be bothered to address the underlying problems but instead said send them all to jail

What most ppl on tsr fail to realize not all kids live like they do.some kids can't go on holidays there's no one there to guide them with problems they have no money in their pockets even if they did try society would shun them

Imagine for a minute your a kid living in a hackney estate seeing all these rich people living across the road yet its like your both living in different worlds

The riots were bad but if trouble should arise it could easily start again after all what do these children REALLY have to lose
Reply 49
Maybe there will be, if the iPhone 5 comes out


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
There is definitely something in the current cultural and conversational zeitgeist to speculate about whether last summer will be repeated this summer. When I posted a thread about this 2 months ago on this forum on this subject there wasn’t much interest, but I’ve noticed not only 2 threads of the subject since then, but that in ordinary conversation it comes up frequently.

As a general observed rule, the younger and more working class you are, the more likely to believe that the riots could happen again, whereas the older and middle class believe it was a one off. Most of my working class friends are more pessimistic about the current state of things than my middle class friends, and my parents generation seem to believe that it will never happen again more than my own. There is a lot of anger in London about the Olympics, and in Birmingham about the Winson Green trial from the last riots. I can certianly see the possibility that something could happen.

Riots usually are spontaneous. There would have been no disorder on those days last August, if the Mark Duggan case hadn’t had happened. The received wisdom was these things can’t be planned. I think the general wisdom is wrong. The Arab Spring proved that one caused plan and orchestrate civil unrest via social networks, and the EDL have been doing the same thing in the UK for nearly three years.

The scary thing is it could take just one person to start this. One person to get hold of a Blackberry that can’t be traced back to them, manually put in their address book, send one of those horrid messages about planning the riots that were sent last August and just dump the phone and wait to see the whole thing snowball.

Make no mistakes the riots solved nothing and caused a lot of pain. I watched the BBC3 documentary The Riots:The Aftershock. Of the two victims featured, one was a musician who’s her career was threatened when most of her musical instruments were destroyed in the riots, and a young man who spent ten years saving up to buy a cafe, had it fitted out, and then had it destroyed in the riots, leaving his staff homeless and him homeless living in his car trying to sort out wrangles over the insurance and rebuilding 9 months on. When you loot a store or set fire to a building, you ruin the life of someone who has never harmed you at all.

Quite a lot of the pro-riot people claim that it was a protest against police brutality. I don’t know the realities for a young person on the streets of Urban Britain so I can’t say if police brutality is a way of life in North London and Salford and elsewhere, but I am totally sure that the riot did nothing to solve that problem if it did exist. Attacking the police only reinforces what attitudes they may already hold and makes the government and public more likely to want more “hands-on” policing as it were. If you want to make a stand, then don’t break the law, instead whenever a policeman approaches you put your phones microphone function on and record the encounter discreetly and then post it online.


Sadly I think a repeat of last summer is certainly a possibility, one that should be avoided at all costs for the good of the nation.
it won't happen again. but if it does... i need new shoes :smile:



naa, im joking. but seriously, i need some new kicks.
Reply 52
Original post by kidomo
I'm pretty sure rioting is illegal. Peaceful protesting on the other hand...


Breaking the law is essential to the progression of democracy.
Fear of the law is essential to tyranny.
It is highly doubtful.
Well today we've had two possible triggers for unrest with not guilty verdicts being handed down in the Ian Tomlinson and the Birmingham riots triple deaths cases. I think the Birmingham one is more dangerous for that than the Tomlinson one due to the community feeling in Birmingham. I hope nothing happens and on the positive side, if the nation manages to get to Monday morning without anything serious kicking off, I think we will probably be unlikely for trouble for the rest of the year.
Reply 55
my bad for the late reply i had been doing work and didnt have the time to do a reply to such a large post. especially when talking to someone who needs as much explaining to as yourself.

Original post by KasanDude
I find it amazing that you can still think that the rioting was in any way political. It was just people having an excuse to go mad.

But fine, I'll do my best to try to rationally argue with you.

First, I WOULD give a damn if people started "roudning up the chavs and gassing them up" because there is no reason for that,


well the riots for one thing... thats a reason to round up and gass the chavs. because it was the chavs rioting...

and just incase u wanna say that it wasn't just chavs rioting... certainly everyone else seems to think it was.

the slur chav is associated with someone who is living off state benefits. the government wanted to punish people who were sentenced as a result of the riot by taking away their state provided home and cutting off their JSA. so the entire government had seemingly decided that the rioters were chavs.

david starkey also seemed to have a point that the rioters were chavs by claiming the white rioters spoke in patois. the slang he referred to would be heavily associated with chav culture.

Original post by KasanDude

which is precisely why I'm opposed to the riots, as it was just mindless damage and destruction for no real reason. Unjustified.


i gave you a catalogue of reasons in previous replies. ur just being ignorant here.

Original post by KasanDude

And what do I expect of a riot? Nothing, because sane rational people do not riot.


*sigh* right... i can tell quite clearly that your from a position of privilege and must be quite far removed from poverty and being treated negatively by society, the government, the police and the state in general.

Original post by KasanDude

Sane rational people take a stand against what they believe in.

and how do you suppose they do that? put up posters? change their face book picture? sign a petition? or other things that will get ignored?

or let me guess do a peaceful protest?

well what do you do when u protest and they start beating a 16 year old girl in front of you?

oh yes... stand by and do nothing. protest louder? record it and put it on youtube? so that the news ignores it. no one gave a **** about mark duggan getting shot. thats why there was the peaceful protest outside the police HQ in the first place.

people with a spine didnt have it. and intervened.

and this is what im talking about.

people are tired with the aggression that they are faced with.

i know you think we deserve the aggression we get because the media portrays us as the aggressors... but we are no the ones with the power. nor do we have the power decide on how we are portrayed in the media.

people riot when reasonable efforts have been met with aggression and ignorance and zero change.

what are your suggestions? terrorism? or just carrying on getting **** fed to you as you politely conform and don't cause a scene?

Original post by KasanDude

They don't take out their personal issues on others.


so if someone punched your mum in the face. i assume you would take issue with that, and i'm sure u'd take it pretty personal too. so you would not take out anything towards the guy who punched her? cool.

basically calling people who take out their personal issues on others insane is stupid. because there is nothing "insane" about taking out your personal issue on the other person who is responsible for causing the issue that effected you personally.

but by your logic every single revolutionary or political activist in history is insane.

Original post by KasanDude

TRY to think logically. If you really disagree with the way a company or a person or a government conducts itself, why not attack them in particular? Why not target them specifically? Why randomly cause havok in a whole city. I mean even if you say that the damage in the riot was casulty of war or whatever, or that those were just rioters "without an agenda," how come no real damage was done to the entities the "real rioters" were targeting. The house of parliaments was left standing. No politician was harmed. Nada.

I mean, fair enough, if something bothers you, by all means act on it. But act on IT, not on something totally unrelated, like a random car parked in the street. PLEASE tell me how the riot really went against those who are trully responsible for the things that displease you.


right. theres a few things to cover here. first of all people did attack things that effected them personally. police stations were attacked and one was even burnt down beyond repair. some people attacked the same faceless companies that are very happy to take money from their local community but weren't willing to hire from their community.

a lot of people are angry at the society that oppresses them.

there is a massive amount of hate and bigotry directed towards the working class. often as young poor men when walking around their area they are treated quite badly by those who are above them in the income bracket and by those in authority. the two are one in the same. i saw videos on youtube of middle class rah girls driving around the riots like some kind of wildlife safari. it would be very difficult for you to comprehend the feeling of constant repression as soon as you step outside your door. as soon as you stray out your sub-community you are looked at like **** from the middle classes and sometimes even harassed by them.

so yea it was great that for a while you were the ones who felt scared to go outside. since you were the ones who directly contributed to the oppression we face.

you lot are responsible for the socially antagonistic hegemony we face. now any sociologist will tell you that stuff right there is very powerful. in fact more powerful than repression directly from the state. repression from a social elite causes much more problems. we see this in examples such extreme examples as rwanda. the hutus attacked the tutsi elite. this was social caste. not so much politics(of course the two were intertwined)

some of it was due to lack of education. pretty much everyone agrees that the education system was royally screwed under labour and is now being finished off by the conservatives. just because you are not educated in how to attack the system does not mean you are stupid or insane. it means your attempts at attacking a system that you cannot see or feel or touch is very difficult. so indeed attacking your physical surroundings and representations of the every day buzzing around you money churning system is what you will first smash.

money making has been prioritised over everything. the government has certainly not set any moral examples. it does not surprise me that for once people wanted to take from the places they give so much money to their during their ENTIRE LIVES. when you look at all the places attacked during the riots it was basically a list of argos, jd sports, sports direct, footlocker. all these things.

another part of it is neglect and ignorance.
neglect and ignorance from society in general and discerning neighbours.
and neglect and ignorance from the government.

people feel ignored and neglected. for years i have seen people trying time and time again to improve their troubled community. and time and time again i have seen the government not only neglect to help them but go the opposite way.

reintroducing the sus laws that cause the 1981 riots all around the country in exactly the same way they came about in 2011 is a purposeful act. and it does not surprise me why people have conspiracy theories relate to this.

in fact many people in the uk believe there is no such thing as poverty in the uk.

now that type ignorance proves just how far the british poor are shoved out of public sight and mind.

it is difficult to ignore someone's existence and their feelings of anger when they set fire a car or building.

apart of it is also enjoying the freedom of not feeling owned and unwanted. taking the streets for your selves. not feeling like an outcast and an unwanted trouble maker who would do better to be locked up. it s liberating feeling.

when you treat people like criminals some times they give in and act out their self fulfilling prophecy.

if you treat someone like an animal don't be surprised when they act like one.

Original post by KasanDude

You can't even begin to compare working at the gap store to dealing heroin. Grow up.

why not? their providing a commodity. not all heroin dealers are skinny looking zombie types in hood scurrying around in the dark with knives looking to pray on the weak and innocent. many are in high up places. in fact many heroin addicts begin rich but just have a greedy habit and end up being black listed by their original dealers so they end up with the more shady types. after all its the rich who are more privy to affording such luxuries as recreational drugs.

so as i said selling heroin to someone is providing someone with a commodity.

my friends wallet fell out in his car not to long ago and someone broke into his car and took it. do you know what that person did with it? they went out and bought clothes from jd sports and footlocker.

its not just drug addicts who commit crime to feed their habit... whether their habit be clothes or drugs. after all people can get addicted to a lot of legally available things such as painkillers or gambling.

so the argument that a heroin dealer is bad for providing sum1 with a drug that they will commit crime to fund is out the window.

i think a man who sells a drug to another man that a man will go and get high with is not as bad as a man who works for a company that engages, funds and supports child abuse and child slavery in exploited 3rd world countries.

in fact this war in afghanistan where they are destroying all the heroin fields is destroying peasants livelihoods. people who have traditionally grown opium for centuries are now starving to death due to a NATO crusade.

and it hasn't solved the problem of drug addicts. the turkish and pakistani's have taken over most of the smuggling of heroin since the war in afghanistan and the russian mafia hasn't been able to provide russia with a sufficient supply of heroin as before. so in russia this whole war on drugs or at least the war on heroin actually worked. but addict's haven't stopped. instead they've discovered a way to make a new drug out of products available to the public called krokodil. i suggest u search it up.

in my opinion the war on drugs is a war on peoples personal freedoms to decide on what they put in their body.

Original post by KasanDude

As for the cigarettes, alcohol and fast food, the people who consume these things do so willingly. Mcdonalds does not stuff the food down your throat at gunpoint. If you drink, smoke or eat junk food, YOU are responsible for what happens. Saying otherwise means you are simply unable to own up to the consequences of your own actions.

not exactly with fast food. a lot of people have very little choice but to eat ****ty food. they don't have the time to shop around due to long working hours and or geographic restrictions. many people also just don't have the time after doing 12 hour shifts then come home and cook up a pizza from scratch. but yea people consuming bad products willingly. its their choice. just its your choice on wether you want to work in footlocker.

Original post by KasanDude

I'm not saying that the lack of an agenda makes you cowardly. Read carefully. I'm saying that if you have a problem with the government or banks but you take it out on people not even remotely connected to that, people who haven't done anything to you, you ARE a coward. This is because you aren't facing the very thing making you angry.


i replied to this same statement in an above reply.


Original post by KasanDude

As for the banks, I'll tell you what. Write down SPECIFICALLY how the banks have wronged you. I mean actual events, not idealism. Did they deny you a loan? Did they forclose your mortgage? I'm not trying to insult, I'm asking because I would like to know.


wow... really?

so ideals, the thing that makes an entire culture and society... doesn't effect me? ...right...

i don't even really no where to begin with this one. so i'll just pick one obvious thing and run with that because the amount of stuff i could write on this is overwhelming.

the banks got us into debt and f'd up are economy. they are the reason why our entire country is in debt. that is the reason why now. the government to recuperate the economy that the banks damaged is putting more straining taxes on the young and the poor. making us work longer for less and getting a smaller pension for working a longer working lifetime. they are responsible for all our employers sacking us and/or trying to sack us. they are responsible for all the cuts on public health care, education, police and social services. the government wants to make everything private which means if you cant afford the good education, healthcare, police and social services then thats your own problem...

fair enough the conservatives are completely ruthless scum of the earth. but no matter who got in charge we would of had to deal with a big pile of ****. just the conservatives do it in a way so that the poor suffer most so that the rich get through it without sweating.

if it was up to me i'd of arrested them all on a charge of econocide (which is a law people area actually in the process of trying to get passed as a law) either that or they could stay out of prison by having their entire income taxed and living in a council flat off of JSA wage.

as for me personally my parent has lost their job. this means i cannot find a place to stay as they are not a suitable guarantor when finding accommodation at uni. i am in debt from last year and i don't just mean my loan i mean on top of that. due to changes in my banks policy which it seems they are legally allowed to change willy nilly. the government has risen the price of everything making standard living and basic things like feeding my self a challenge. they've caused my phone company to change my phone contract which is draining my non existent income even more. they've ruined the job market too making me getting a job incredibly difficult. go to london? go get a job for the olympics? no. first of all its a temp job after the olympics ill be sacked and it would cost me more to go down to london and try and find accommodation. also my cousin who has had to move back home had that idea. he had security badges and all sorts of construction skills. yet they didnt have any jobs for him. its weird how the news and government and misinformed assuming public thinks theres loads of jobs when everyone i know can't seem to get one?

so yea plenty the banks are responsible for causing.


Original post by KasanDude

Since you keep going back to the guy beaten to death, I'll explain myself. The first paragraf I wrote before was sarcastic. From what you said, it sounded like you were saying it was acceptable for the guys to beat the man up, so long as killing wasn't their intent. I felt that this was going too far, as in my eyes, it is ALWAYS unacceptable to hurt women, children and the elderly, yet you were saying it was OK for them to do it because they didn't inted to kill him.


no i was saying they didnt intend to kill him so it was unlawful death or manslaughter not murder. just like the difference between Ian Tomlinson, Jean Charles de Menezes.



Original post by KasanDude

"why should anyone listen to anyone?"

they shouldn't


so right here when asked "why should anyone listen to anyone else" you say that "they shouldn't..." then you proceed to contradict urself immediately and give a whole load of reasons why you SHOULD listen to people.

Original post by KasanDude

"why should the rioters listen to us when tell them to stop?"

because they have no right to damage our property

"why should i listen to a politician a police officer a bailiff or a teacher"

listening doesn't mean agreeing. you SHOULD hear what they have to say BEFORE you decide they're evil.

"why should i listen to my parents"

they brought you into this world, fed you, gave you clothes, shelter and educated you. you damn well should listen to your parents.

"why should i listen to you?"

well if you want to have a discussion, you should hear what I have to say so that you can respond to it.

"guess what. the governments suppose to LISTEN to us. or at least in a democracy they are. "

very right. although its hard to listen to someone who is rioting.

"and its because they haven't been listened to that they've reacted like this. "

I completely agree, yet my issue is with the rioters not reacting to the government.

"and i know i'm repeating myself but... MY GOD ITS AMAZING how you still have learned nothing. "

its hard to take what you say seriously when you call me "amazingly retarded"

"so rest assured it WILL happen again."

I'm sure it will. And when it does I will continue to be baffled at why the riots will have completely ignored the government and politicians and instead taken it out on other people.


well maybe you should study public disorder so that ur not so "baffled"
The Police will be ready for it, no doubt whatsoever.

They were caught with their pants down last year, and the whole country slated them. They won't make the same mistake twice. There will probably be a few people who try and get the riot bandwagon rolling, they won't get far.

Don't forget it's the Olympics as well, so any violence will be put down fiercely and swiftly.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 57
Original post by Mick.w
....


Best posts I have seen on this forum in a long time. I agree with them completely.
Reply 58
Just because there's been 3/4 nice days doesn't mean it's going to be a heatwave this summer...
Reply 59
Original post by Cannotbelieveit
The Police will be ready for it, no doubt whatsoever.

They were caught with their pants down last year, and the whole country slated them. They won't make the same mistake twice. There will probably be a few people who try and get the riot bandwagon rolling, they won't get far.

Don't forget it's the Olympics as well, so any violence will be put down fiercely and swiftly.


lol they really won't.

i know people in the police and they all say how if people new how few police were about and how lacking in resources and time they are there would probably be anarchy.

Quick Reply