Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 25, 2024, 05:00:26 PMTell me about your hooligan days Guppy.
Quote from: Josquius on April 26, 2024, 08:13:55 AMCurious, I seem to recall the flat you almost bought but didn't was also near there.Yeah that place was basically next door. I'm a little further away now.
QuoteI suspect you're actually a secret Millwall fan. Why else would anyone claim to support the blue Liverpool team? :p
Quote from: Josquius on April 26, 2024, 01:23:55 AMThe only time I ever went to Wembley my soul was destroyed by Charlton winning
Quote from: Tamas on April 26, 2024, 10:53:52 AMIsn't that pretty much the definition of protest? Most protests, at least?No, not at all. I think that describes almot zero protests.
QuoteMore importantly, in this case, the very point of the Jewish guy's counter-protest was to test whether the crowd can tolerate a Jewish person in their ranks. Of course he and his fellows would had filmed it if something happened, what's the point of being abused/beaten up to prove a point if you can't prove it?Right but this is the disingenuousness.
Quote from: Josquius on April 26, 2024, 10:46:49 AMPart of me says I smell more of the Unbiased Katie sorts.Probably neither as the first one hold opinions of Jews roughly the same as Palestinians.
But it could also be a self aware but largely genuinely felt joke that helps earn a few dollars and builds publicity.
QuoteAnd I think the role of the police is slightly difficult with protests and it is about balancing rights. It is absolutely right that people are able to protest on Palestine and the police protect that right; it would also be absolutely right for there to be counter-protesters and it would be for the police to place those groups in different areas to make sure that it doesn't escalate. That's not what's happened but, similarly, while people have a right to protest other people have a right to go about their lives doing what they want to do (though I have less sympathy for someone trying to provoke something to generate content) - and I think the police need to support that as long as it's not disruptive or likely to cause a risk to public order.
Quote from: Sheilbh on April 26, 2024, 10:43:44 AMOn policing interesting IFS paper flagged by John Burn-Murdoch, which feels like a useful example of 90% of policy in the UK in the last 15 years.
As part of austerity 70% of police stations in London were closed. This was also part of Cressida Dick's move to a more "US-style" policing of police in cars and vans responding.
Anyway the paper shows that violent and serious crime increased in areas near the closed stations, there were lower deterrence and clearance rates (the two things the police are supposed to do) and reduced reporting of non-violent crimes. This disproportionately affected the poor.
In addition, the policy provided a short term cost-saving from closing stations. But in order to fix the problems above (and just get back to where you were before the closures) they estimate you'd need to hire about 15-20,000 more police which would be significantly more expensive.
It's long Osborne. Cut the easy spending, only to cause negative consequences that will be far more expensive to fix than the initial saving.
Page created in 0.043 seconds with 14 queries.