If There Was Any Doubt Of Labour's Anti...
News5 mins ago
Now, Who's Fault Is All This?
49 Answers
https:/
1/ The young man resisting arrest?
2/ Overzealous police officers, trying to rescue a damsel in distress?
3/ An ungrateful damsel?
Or should the police officers have stood back and see how serious the argument got between a young man and his girlfriend.
1/ The young man resisting arrest?
2/ Overzealous police officers, trying to rescue a damsel in distress?
3/ An ungrateful damsel?
Or should the police officers have stood back and see how serious the argument got between a young man and his girlfriend.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Who knows, I wasn't there - you'd need to be there as a witness to be able to answer that question properly AOG.
It all looked survivable. At least this wasn't America where police will pin suspects to the ground and beat them up while shouting "stop resisting" sometimes resulting in gunshot from the police.
It all looked survivable. At least this wasn't America where police will pin suspects to the ground and beat them up while shouting "stop resisting" sometimes resulting in gunshot from the police.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
No it wasn't meant as either cheap, personal or insulting.
Let me pick what I said apart:
By "judge jury and executioner" that was in response to your comments:
"he is clearly a thoroughly unpleasant individual" and "His girlfriend is, unfortunately, a stereotypical gobby piece of work" when you don't know the full story. Everyone is capable of being obnoxious from time to time, we all lose it now and then.
What's to say this wasn't just a one-off moment for a pair who are usually perfectly pleasant people?
At that moment, restraint looked to me appropriate as well as the use of the spit-hood.
Let me pick what I said apart:
By "judge jury and executioner" that was in response to your comments:
"he is clearly a thoroughly unpleasant individual" and "His girlfriend is, unfortunately, a stereotypical gobby piece of work" when you don't know the full story. Everyone is capable of being obnoxious from time to time, we all lose it now and then.
What's to say this wasn't just a one-off moment for a pair who are usually perfectly pleasant people?
At that moment, restraint looked to me appropriate as well as the use of the spit-hood.
-- answer removed --
"If you are a morally decent person you will withdrawn the accusation and apologise".
If you are a balanced and rational person you will accept that you are not infallible and accept that you may just be wrong (just as I do).
Balanced and rational people don't continue debates with statements like:
"Yes, lets. That should be fun".
Ok let's take it apart further:
"Yes. He is. He spits at people". SPAT at people, by saying "spits" you assume this is something he does regularly.
"If you think that spitting at another person is acceptable, then please explain your reasoning". Why would you assume that about me? WHO would think that is acceptable? I don't, see the comment above.
"Correct. I do not know the “full story”. I was not there and neither were you. What I do know is that from the video she is screaming at the police, “He's done nothing wrong. He's done nothing wrong [0:55 – 0:59]”
Neither you nor I know what happened before that video was started. Perhaps before he had spat at the police he really hadn't done anything wrong, it happens.
AP - “... Everyone is capable of being obnoxious from time to time, we all lose it now and then...”
"Speak for yourself" ..get real, are you saying that you've never misbehaved ...ever?
"And I can see a pig flying past my window right now. Live in a fantasy world if you like. The rest of us shall continue to live the real world where unpleasant people get arrested and charged".
You are the one who is living in a "fantasy world" IMO if you assume someone is "unpleasant" based on one misdemeanor.
"Your accusation that I am somehow, “judge jury and executioner”, on this matter has no merit, as evidenced by my above response".
This is not "evidence", it's your opinion just as mine is mine.
If you are a balanced and rational person you will accept that you are not infallible and accept that you may just be wrong (just as I do).
Balanced and rational people don't continue debates with statements like:
"Yes, lets. That should be fun".
Ok let's take it apart further:
"Yes. He is. He spits at people". SPAT at people, by saying "spits" you assume this is something he does regularly.
"If you think that spitting at another person is acceptable, then please explain your reasoning". Why would you assume that about me? WHO would think that is acceptable? I don't, see the comment above.
"Correct. I do not know the “full story”. I was not there and neither were you. What I do know is that from the video she is screaming at the police, “He's done nothing wrong. He's done nothing wrong [0:55 – 0:59]”
Neither you nor I know what happened before that video was started. Perhaps before he had spat at the police he really hadn't done anything wrong, it happens.
AP - “... Everyone is capable of being obnoxious from time to time, we all lose it now and then...”
"Speak for yourself" ..get real, are you saying that you've never misbehaved ...ever?
"And I can see a pig flying past my window right now. Live in a fantasy world if you like. The rest of us shall continue to live the real world where unpleasant people get arrested and charged".
You are the one who is living in a "fantasy world" IMO if you assume someone is "unpleasant" based on one misdemeanor.
"Your accusation that I am somehow, “judge jury and executioner”, on this matter has no merit, as evidenced by my above response".
This is not "evidence", it's your opinion just as mine is mine.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
