BIB - Where did I say this?

Again, you're arguing a point nobody made.

Wanting police officers to not be vigilantes that do as they please and actually operate within lawful guidelines protects everyone, including themselves.

The police sign up to serve, protect and uphold the law, it’s literally their job to be lawful, so them breaking the law is a tad bit different to your average person breaking the law

Erm, LET them twat Jason from down the street, it doesn't affect me.

OH and he COULD MURDER YOUR ENTIRELY FAMILY. What would you do then, eh?

when a large guy comes at you with a 9" knife. what are the lawful guidelines?

:think:

we would all love to know

:joker:

If a man with a 9" knife was hacking away at people it wouldn't be these two officers on the scene. But you knew that.

wasn't it a lone policeman who rugby tackled the Reading knife attacker as he was fleeing?

One policeman called to the scene? No.

GAHHHHHA SHJDHD :skull: :joker:

I feel like this thread needed something like this

Do you actually think that any police at the scene have a chance against a knife?

Clearly you have no experience, which was needless to say from the beginning of your replies anyway

Stop trying to call people racists who don't agree with a man carrying a knife.

Literally so strange :conf2:

Oh are we pretending the officer had a knife in his face and didn't have the man on the ground and cuffed?

Ok.

Are we pretending there aren't protocols for armed criminals to ensure the police DO have a chance against a knife?

Ok.

Are we also pretending you have experience of tackling people with knives?

Ok.

Are we also pretending your argument makes any rational sense?

Ok.

The man could also HAVE HAD A BOMB!!!! Still doesn't change the actual events.

Not that we saw, but we do know that the officers were aware he was dangerous (which was proven right) which was more than enough.

You don't have any experience of tackling people with knives either, so it's an irrelevant "point" you are trying to make there.

And tbh... I didn't from the beginning but at least I tried. https://i.imgur.com/6ClNhHV.png

Catch the criminals who carry weapons on them as these policeman did and there will be no problems in the future :clap1:

Erm... it was your point I responded to.

Yeah cus I could see enough from the way you were replying innit

:nono: I was at Sainsburies actually, Tapatalk was open on this thread so that's probably why it said I was still on it.

The TiBB cliquiness wasn't specifically about this thread although there's some minor tag-teaming going on, it's just something that's obvious and ongoing for the whole forum. That's not really unusual I suppose, it's an old forum with a lot of long-term members, so it's probably somewhat inevitable. There are times when it's glaring though. As Annie pointed out its not entirely a one sided thing, although there is a section that is (in my view) encreasingly emboldened and smug and I don't think it's a very good look... Especially given some of the "private stuff" that has a habit of leaking. The pile-ons aren't much fun to watch either, I mean yes sometimes people are full of **** that deserves calling out but... When one person who is perfectly capable of holding their own is doing that amply and 4 or 5 others tag along to have a pop? It just... I dunno. Grubby. Yuck, etc.

It makes me sad in my heart because I genuinely do like most members in various ways :smug: in a good thread or debate but when the circle-jerky stuff starts it all gets a bit sad.

That I have no experience of being a police officer?

Then when I responded you're not a police officer yourself you told me it was an irrelevant point to make?

Ok Stacey :thumbs:

I get that, and I agree to an extent. Not sure why you posted that to do with my conversation though. I'm not part of any clique, so it was just weird that you chose that time, especially after my conversation with caprimint, when I asked her a question about her post and her next 569593 replies were specifically only about me and not the topic. The context didn't make any sense.

since Solider left the bookies, he has not only gone SOFT but has started shopping at Sainbury's D: very middle class D:

If you agree with anyone on TiBB you are part of their clique..that's how it works on TiBB, you no longer have a mind of your own you are part of a GROUP :bawling:

On the actual thread topic... Having bothered to ask some security and mental health professionals for the actual situation with this stuff rather than blaring layperson assumptions, it seems to be both more complicated and more simple than is being made out.

There are overall no hard and fast rules in defense and restraint, other than it has to be proportionate to the level of threat (to the professional, other members of public, and to the person being restrained themselves who can hurt the self with thrashing etc.)

If ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY there's no such thing as too much force. If someone is about to stab you, you can punch 'em square in the throat, so long as it was a genuine and provable last resort of self defense or to protect someone else.

This is of course why body cameras being mandatory is VITAL and why if you see something you think is excessive, you absolutely SHOULD film it and report it, as was done in this case.

What actually constitutes excessive force is down to the chain of command to decide and a court of law if necessary (obviously with the right to press for further scrilutiny if its being overlooked).

In this case, the officer's superiors clearly do think that there's a strong case for this being a needless and excessive use of force based on the video evidence.

That's it really. Open and shut. It's not really up to laypeople to decide that it might have been fine... His commanding officer says it wasn't fine so it wasn't fine. Either he ignored elements of his training or his training was lacking.

However... Using any means possible to restrain someone at all costs if they are a danger to themselves or others is valid, and for good reasons.

But yeah he used excessive force according to his own superiors so... End of story there, really. The only question is, was it due to poor training and inexperience or was it out of malice? I don't think there's any evidence at all of that in this case though. I do think there's conflation with George Floyd that are needless, disingenuous and ultimately unhelpful.

I went to M&S but it turns out they shut at 6 on a Sunday. I was almost sick right there in the car park.

Good job I never agree with you on anything then :smug: I don't want you lowering the standards of my one man clique. :fist: