UK student facing trial for spreading pro-liberty propaganda

[Viking]

Respecting the police is.

I'm not sure it is good for public order if the police can request you to do anything and you must comply.

When it comes within the scope of their authority then you should. It is within the authority of the police to confront those who are defacing public property. The public sidewalk is public property.

Disagree when things like this are so unevenly applied. Then it just becomes a method by which the police can terrorize citizens.

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

[merithyn]

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

I'm within my "scope of power" if I beat my son for mouthing off to me, but that doesn't mean that it's the appropriate response to the situation. One would hope that someone in that position of power would use better judgment. That, I think, is the point.

As has been shown, those above the officers decided that the officers were incorrect in their application of said powers, so I'm not sure how you can continue to defend their actions.

[garbon]

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

I'm within my "scope of power" if I beat my son for mouthing off to me, but that doesn't mean that it's the appropriate response to the situation. One would hope that someone in that position of power would use better judgment. That, I think, is the point.

As has been shown, those above the officers decided that the officers were incorrect in their application of said powers, so I'm not sure how you can continue to defend their actions.

[garbon]

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

I think his subsequent arrest can count as being terrorized.

[Valmy]

the police officer first asked politely.

Where did it say the officer asked politely?  And it sure escalated quickly from request to arrest.

Not questioning that the cop can arrest people I was questioning his judgement.

[CountDeMoney]

Kind of like arresting the one black kid for jaywalking while ignoring the 12 whites ones who do it. (Which does happen here with some regularity.)

He looked like he was up to something.

[Viking]

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

I'm within my "scope of power" if I beat my son for mouthing off to me, but that doesn't mean that it's the appropriate response to the situation. One would hope that someone in that position of power would use better judgment. That, I think, is the point.

As has been shown, those above the officers decided that the officers were incorrect in their application of said powers, so I'm not sure how you can continue to defend their actions.

The appropriate response was to ask this kid to stop, the officer did that. The kid refused to stop. The kid was then warned. The kid ignored the warning. The kid was the arrested.

So what if the police hierarchy decided to try and make this go away. This is on the lower end of the scale of what is defacing public property but it is still public property and it is being defaced. The fact that the chalk will disappear next rainstorm is beside the point. Permanent Markers and Paint eventually fade away too, the only difference is time.

You can argue that the policeman showed poor judgement, I'm not arguing against that. I'm saying the policeman acted within the scope of his powers and responsibilities guided by his professional judgement.

[CountDeMoney]

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

The policeman's sergeant would've told the policeman that he's got more important fucking things to do.

[Ed Anger]

WOTS ALL THIS THEN?

[CountDeMoney]

WOTS ALL THIS THEN?

You forgot the RIGHT

[Ed Anger]

 

[CountDeMoney]

MOVE ALONG THERES A GOOD CHAP

[garbon]

Why are we imitating how Jos speaks?

[mongers]

The police have substantial power and can already terrorize civilians and means to deal with that already exist. In this case the police officer didn't terrorize this civilian, the police officer first asked politely. The policeman was acting within the scope of his power.

The policeman's sergeant would've told the policeman that he's got more important fucking things to do.

To be fair some of the London drug gangs are somewhat scary, so these sort of cases generate lots of paperwork, time in the station and the prospect of brownie point with the higher-ups for political policing.

[merithyn]

I'm within my "scope of power" if I beat my son for mouthing off to me, but that doesn't mean that it's the appropriate response to the situation. One would hope that someone in that position of power would use better judgment. That, I think, is the point.

You can argue that the policeman showed poor judgement, I'm not arguing against that. I'm saying the policeman acted within the scope of his powers and responsibilities guided by his professional judgement.

Please to re-read the bolded part. Thanks.