Extinction Rebellion protesters - what to do?

Because there’s not the officers or the custody space for them. Over a thousand were arrested in the previous spate in London and it cost the Met millions it doesn’t have in OT and tied up huge numbers of officers who have far better things to be doing. It’s also extremely hard to justify using force on peaceful protestors regardless of how irritating and disruptive they’re being, and they’d be outrage if you had front pages of public order officers smashing about old dears and kids for trying to save the planet.
They’d actually be scoring a massive own goal if they ramped up their actions and would give us much more options to deal with them more robustly. Which is why they’re leadership has made sure they all behave themselves and have done a good job of it.
It's Friday night for godssake, stop with your common sense.
 

Mufulira

Old-Salt
What about spray them with a fine mist of joke shop fart spray, non lethal but they won't win many friends
IIRC John maser's fine book about protesters holding up a railway station where he platoon commander ordered his men to 'stand at ease' and then to piss on the recumbent protesters who quickly left after 30 odd tallywhackers let fly and drenched said group = no more protest just an reek of honest soldiers relief
 
Because there’s not the officers or the custody space for them. Over a thousand were arrested in the previous spate in London and it cost the Met millions it doesn’t have in OT and tied up huge numbers of officers who have far better things to be doing. It’s also extremely hard to justify using force on peaceful protestors regardless of how irritating and disruptive they’re being, and they’d be outrage if you had front pages of public order officers smashing about old dears and kids for trying to save the planet.
They’d actually be scoring a massive own goal if they ramped up their actions and would give us much more options to deal with them more robustly. Which is why they’re leadership has made sure they all behave themselves and have done a good job of it.
That weakness is what they will exploit as far as they can go and eventually you will be forced to intervene late and when their numbers are emboldened... Enjoy.
 
That weakness is what they will exploit as far as they can go and eventually you will be forced to intervene late and when their numbers are emboldened... Enjoy.
What are you basing that on, your extensive public order policing experience?
As I said they’d be shooting themselves in the foot if they escalated to violence or proper property damage as they currently enjoy substantial public support which they’d lose. It’d also give police far more options to get stuck in as they’re peaceful protesting is what is currently protecting them.
 

offog

LE
What are you basing that on, your extensive public order policing experience?
As I said they’d be shooting themselves in the foot if they escalated to violence or proper property damage as they currently enjoy substantial public support which they’d lose. It’d also give police far more options to get stuck in as they’re peaceful protesting is what is currently protecting them.
Also when they turn up in court they get told to be good. When the charge is assaulting a police office and damaging property it gets a bit more costly for them.
 
Also when they turn up in court they get told to be good. When the charge is assaulting a police office and damaging property it gets a bit more costly for them.
And getting a conditional discharge is an entirely different kettle of fish to getting your head kicked in trying to fight TSG :twisted:
 
What about spray them with a fine mist of joke shop fart spray, non lethal but they won't win many friends
Would anyone notice the difference in the smell from them?
 
Would anyone notice the difference in the smell from them?
They're probably mainly Trustafarians, not the Drugsy type of soap dodging Marxists doing the protesting
 
Is that new name for the young bored idle rich?
Pretty much, and they slum it pretending to be poor whilst usually living off daddies trust fund, and tend to pop up at the more woke protests
 

Tired_Tech

On ROPS
On ROPs
This nonsense can be put to bed quite easily.

Old school.

 
The reply back in 2012 was "A Home Office spokesman got back to us and said: "Since 2010, we have denied entry to over 100,000 people, including over 6,500 EU nationals."

In 2012 a new treaty on sharing criminal records among EU police and border forces (including UK) came into force.
Would be interesting to see any updated figures on the number of exclusions (not all right wing idiots like Wilders) which makes the "good luck on banning anyone else though" comment yet another obsessive fantasy.
What really needs to be asked is the make up of the 6,500 EU nationals excluded rather than making sweeping comments about good luck on banning anyone else.

From my experience of deportations it's only discovered they have previous convictions in their mother country once they've commited a crime in the UK.

Once they reside at her Majesty's pleasure immigration get involved and if necessary they are relocated to a immigration removal centre.

That said I've been surprised by the amount of deportations of EU citizens that does occur once in a custodial environment.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
 
What really needs to be asked is the make up of the 6,500 EU nationals excluded rather than making sweeping comments about good luck on banning anyone else.

From my experience of deportations it's only discovered they have previous convictions in their mother country once they've commited a crime in the UK.

Once they reside at her Majesty's pleasure immigration get involved and if necessary they are relocated to a immigration removal centre.

That said I've been surprised by the amount of deportations of EU citizens that does occur once in a custodial environment.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
Totally and utterly different question to what was asked. Can we exclude people from the EU coming to UK? The answer is yes and we do so.
Of course, it then gets changed to for what reason etc which was not what was asked in the first place. One says "all criminals not security" and up pops another with "not criminals though". As if they have inside knowledge of the system.

And you're talking of deportations after they've done something wrong. The original bit was about not letting them in before they've done something wrong here.
 
Totally and utterly different question to what was asked. Can we exclude people from the EU coming to UK? The answer is yes and we do so.
Of course, it then gets changed to for what reason etc which was not what was asked in the first place. One says "all criminals not security" and up pops another with "not criminals though". As if they have inside knowledge of the system.

And you're talking of deportations after they've done something wrong. The original bit was about not letting them in before they've done something wrong here.
I've just asked the question you should have, who is actually excluded? This is really important to know and fairly key to your argument. Just to add I don't have an opinion on it as I also don't know the answer but my suspicion is it will be high profile people who are deemed a danger to the state.

It's not binary at all. I've seen people come through the system that have been nicked for fairly mundane things in the UK, it then transpires back home they've kettled a baby through some gang related debt and have been FO to serve their sentence back home.





Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
 

Tired_Tech

On ROPS
On ROPs
Points based system.

Award points for specific skillsets. Ie if we need car washers they get more points.

Take points of for arrests, convictions, health.

If they're found to have lied during the application process, arrested whilst here or convicted... Deport and ban.

entry based upon consent for UK to hold biometrics.
 

Latest Threads

Top