Who wants to shoot Boris..
 

..... with a water cannon? ;)

I'm first in the queue as Boris Johnson agrees to be shot with the controversial crowd 'dispersing' device.
Do you agree with his decision to purchase them without official governmental backing?
Are they a necessary deterrent?

http://www.theguardian.com/science/b...s-water-cannon


The mayor's office said: "By purchasing them now we are able to save over £2.3m compared to buying new devices."

The water cannon will not be deployed until the home secretary authorises their use in England and Wales.

In a statement, the mayor's office said purchasing the cannon now for just over £218,000, before Theresa May approves them, meant they could be bought at a "considerably reduced rate"

Why is this, how are they cheaper before they're approved.. is it because they will be useless if she doesn't approve and he's wasted over £200k, has he forced her arm by purchasing them or did he know she intends to do so in time?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27781673

I'd like to shoot that bumbling oaf Boris right through the head.

But I would probably miss his brain by a good 12 inches or more.

Yes good promo

Don't see the problem with using water cannon, it's got to be better than rubber bullets and as a method of crowd dispersal in a riot situation pretty effective.

I think he's a good sport for agreeing to it. And yeah, wheel out the water cannon. I remember a "protestor" throwing a fire extinguisher from the roof of Millbank, without a thought that it could have killed at least one person. That's the kind of knucklehead that water cannons are devised for, not for peaceful protesters. People get the two confused.

Gotta love Boris offering to be shot with a water canon :laugh:

Being shot with a water cannon is not some kind of jolly jape is it, yes let's bring in heavy handed tactics to intimidate ant peaceful protesters.
Holding up one incident is not indicative of protesters across the country and in no way justifies the use of water cannon.
Let's try to maintain perspective here, many flail about the right to freedom of speech via the internet, does the importance not stretch to having your voice heard in public?

Water cannons are weapons and should never be used for crowd control. Because of the pressure and volume of water that is sprayed the force is so intense it can lift up solid objects and accelerate them into dangerous projectiles which could cause serious injury to anyone who is struck by them.

Water cannons should only be used as a last resort in a major riot situation and even then with caution.

I love Boris,yes shoot me now with a water cannon

You don't love him you just want to stroke his cannon.

:joker::joker: on a day like today Kizzy,I would love to get blasted:hehe: it's so so hot here.

I would have thought water cannon would only be used in riot situation Kizzy or an I being naive. I wish they had been available during the London Riots.

agreed...

Hope you've had a nice day Ninastar. Have you been colouring-in fags?

Yep, Brazilian and Croatian fags today... LOL

it looks like lettice is staring at the boobs of your avatar and is liking what she sees... omgz

:laugh2:

well back on topic
'Acpo's answer is that even if there is unlikely to be serious disturbance, "ongoing and potential future austerity measures are likely to lead to continued protest" that can "turn to serious violent disorder". It says that the weapon could have been used in contexts such as the student protests or those outside the Israeli embassy in 2009.

The water cannon, though Boris Johnson blushes to admit it, is for use against protesters. It is also, as Stuart Hall and his colleagues put it some decades ago, for "policing the crisis".

Some opponents of water cannon have stressed the risk of serious injuries. This is real enough, but it is epiphenomenal. The main point is to give police a weapon that makes defiance almost impossible, treating protest as something to be crushed and thus tilting the balance of power further away from citizens and toward the state.

It seems that shortly they are expecting protests, about what we don't know.... Note the keyword here is protest not riot.
We are well within our rights to protest, it's democratic and we have freedom of speech right?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...st-theresa-may

Overall I would side with having them.

Having said that, the main concern for me is, who has or will have the final say as to if and when they are to be used.
Hopefully never some waste of space like Theresa May or even Jacqui Smith for instance.

Would be good to think they would never be allowed to be used as they are potentially very dangerous weapons really but hopefully they may act as a deterrent in part.

Well they're being sold off, note though how the price is now different to the £218,000 they cost .....

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...h-1000-stereos