Man Utd v Liverpool

I hope they get the idiot that caused the facial injury to this policeman, he could have lost an eye.

[img]https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article24025892.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_SDC_MDG_-Police-face-slashed_20802JPG.jpg[/img]

Quoted from promotion plaice

I hope they get the idiot that caused the facial injury to this policeman, he could have lost an eye.

[img]https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article24025892.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_SDC_MDG_-Police-face-slashed_20802JPG.jpg[/img]

A bit worse than lobbing the occasional chair but correct, the guy is an idiot and should be locked up even if he is is a "true fan". Amazingly this was recorded by The Daily Mirror and not the Right Wing press.

Quoted from Abdul19

I always wonder why fans who cause a bit of trouble are unfailingly referred to as 'so called fans'. That police fella above isn't a 'so called policeman'.

If I go to 46 games a season and lob a plastic chair every now and again, I'm still a fan.




Disclaimer: I've never actually lobbed a plastic chair.

If you could have gone to our last 46 games and lobbed a plastic chair at Fenty you'd be called FANtastic!

Quoted from DB

If you could have gone to our last 46 games and lobbed a plastic chair at Fenty you'd be called FANtastic!

Day’s the chair man

Fenty’s the barstool

Quoted from rancido

So what's are you objecting to? The police per se, the police as they are structured, the people who the police recruit or the whole concept of a police force?

Well on this specific occasion it’s the officers dragging a member of public out of view so their colleague could punch him 7 or 8 times while he was held down. In general it’s the fact that they uphold, by force, an abstract social order predicated on wage labour and private property. Is that ok with you?

Quoted from Rick12

Yes that policeman was a bit overzealous but you cant generalize. Not all of them act like that.

‘Overzealous’ is a euphemism in this case for ‘violent, cowardly thuggery’. Repeatedly punching someone while he is held in the ground? Hardly self-defence or the use of necessary force is it?

Then they chase the cameraman away because they are trying to hide their crime. Disgusting behaviour.

I bet he doesn’t get disciplined. There’ll be some sort of lie put out as an excuse.

Quoted from ska face

Well on this specific occasion it’s the officers dragging a member of public out of view so their colleague could punch him 7 or 8 times while he was held down. In general it’s the fact that they uphold, by force, an abstract social order predicated on wage labour and private property. Is that ok with you?

Of course members of the public never attack solitary policemen without provocation or gang up on the police when they are trying to control violence? It's an answer which leads to another question. What kind of structure would you propose to keep order in a modern society? Would you protect yourself or your property as an individual without including some kind of police structure? If a member of your family was assaulted, robbed or raped would you sort it out yourself or use an "abstract" social order. Maybe vigilantes are your solution or kangaroo courts to mete out punishment/justice.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

‘Overzealous’ is a euphemism in this case for ‘violent, cowardly thuggery’. Repeatedly punching someone while he is held in the ground? Hardly self-defence or the use of necessary force is it?

Then they chase the cameraman away because they are trying to hide their crime. Disgusting behaviour.

I bet he doesn’t get disciplined. There’ll be some sort of lie put out as an excuse.

So what justification is there for somebody attacking a policeman with a bottle or was he defending himself against a horde of police officers just out to cause trouble.

Quoted from rancido

Of course members of the public never attack solitary policemen without provocation or gang up on the police when they are trying to control violence? It's an answer which leads to another question. What kind of structure would you propose to keep order in a modern society? Would you protect yourself or your property as an individual without including some kind of police structure? If a member of your family was assaulted, robbed or raped would you sort it out yourself or use an "abstract" social order. Maybe vigilantes are your solution or kangaroo courts to mete out punishment/justice.

You’ve just watched a video of a person being dragged off the street, held down and punches repeatedly, and you’re insinuating that it’s OTHER PEOPLE who may be the vigilantes meting out punishment? Incredible.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

‘Overzealous’ is a euphemism in this case for ‘violent, cowardly thuggery’. Repeatedly punching someone while he is held in the ground? Hardly self-defence or the use of necessary force is it?

Then they chase the cameraman away because they are trying to hide their crime. Disgusting behaviour.

I bet he doesn’t get disciplined. There’ll be some sort of lie put out as an excuse.

Police are lot more accountable than they once were which is right .In this case that policeman went over the top and hope he gets reprimanded to some degree and can change his ways .

You need to realize the pressures of the job though.Some police will slip by the wayside in terms of standards. Put yourself in the polices shoes for a year and you may have a better understanding of what they face. In the main dealing with lawbreakers and a lot of stress and confrontation not to mention the shift work. I always remember someone who I use to work with had a sister who said was a lovely person before joining the police. Once in the uniform the constant in his words "fighting " a majority of the time with lawbreakers changed her to a differing persona. She lost a lot of the niceness she once had.The job wore her down.

Quoted from ska face

Well on this specific occasion it’s the officers dragging a member of public out of view so their colleague could punch him 7 or 8 times while he was held down. In general it’s the fact that they uphold, by force, an abstract social order predicated on wage labour and private property. Is that ok with you?

Law and order has mostly always existed  though . Without it you need to realize what happens. Just to recap police went on strike in Canada in the late 1960s:

"As a young teenager in proudly peaceable Canada during the romantic 1960s, I was a true believer in Bakunin’s anarchism. I laughed off my parents’ argument that if the government ever laid down its arms all hell would break loose. Our competing predictions were put to the test at 8:00 a.m. on October 7, 1969, when the Montreal police went on strike. By 11:20 am, the first bank was robbed. By noon, most of the downtown stores were closed because of looting. Within a few more hours, taxi drivers burned down the garage of a limousine service that competed with them for airport customers, a rooftop sniper killed a provincial police officer, rioters broke into several hotels and restaurants, and a doctor slew a burglar in his suburban home. By the end of the day, six banks had been robbed, a hundred shops had been looted, twelve fires had been set, forty carloads of storefront glass had been broken, and three million dollars in property damage had been inflicted, before city authorities had to call in the army and, of course, the police to restore order. This decisive empirical test left my politics in tatters (and offered a foretaste of life as a scientist).”

Pinker, Steven (2003). The Blank Slate. Penguin Books. p. 285.