JJZM wrote:Not sure what you want cleared up mate? I just gave my two cents as jequirity said.
I'm not looking for a argument so I can progress to be a prized member of the St Andrews Debating Society like yourself.
There was so much wrong with what you wrote, that I was intrigued enough to ask whether you believed it to be true. And you apparently do. I am not (nor do I have any desire to be) a member of a debating society. Just... if you weren't looking for an argument, why did you post something so inflammatory (on the internet, of all places)?
Allow me to explain:-
JJZM wrote:I couldn't be arsed to write an essay but I was pretty darn embarrassed at the government's inability to respond to groups of yobs taking advantage of the nation's capital city.
It was less "the government" and more "the police". And it happened in places other than London... which is the capital of England (where the riots took place) not the UK. I'm making that point, because you repeatedly refer to Britain, when the rioting was restricted solely to England.
The police shot dead a black guy in mysterious circumstances. Why mysterious? Because the full details weren't immediately made available. The police were the only ones at the scene who opened fire. Not that unusual if the dead guy had been threatening to shoot them with his own gun... but was he? Did he even own a gun? Well, we still don't know.
In a background of race-based stop-and-searches that (shamefully, still) happen far too often, many of the locals protested outside the police station. After a lot of waiting around, some of the more restless ones decided that a quiet and lawful protest wasn't enough. So they "went off on one". The police didn't storm in with the full violence they are capable of. Why? Well, they'd just killed a man (possibly an innocent man) and this was a protest
against the police.
This was a sensible thing to do... with one caveat; elsewhere, people saw the police adopt a hands-off approach. This was a green light for the property vandalism/theft that followed over the next few nights. The big mistake was that the police were still in their original position of better-not-be-violent. When they should have gone in to prevent the crime, they decided to search the CCTV recordings and arrest people in their homes. Great arrest rate - shitty for the victims.
It was a decision by a Met officer who (thankfully) blew his chances of securing the position of the (empty) top position. It wasn't the government (who were mostly all on holiday).
JJZM wrote:I'm currently interning in the USA and it made me ashamed to be British
The list is far too long, but I'll opt for a single reason why a Brit (in America) has
zero reason to be ashamed of his nationality; Guantanamo Bay. If a mishandled police situation made you ashamed (in America, FFS) to be British, then
you are reason enough for
me to be ashamed to share your nationality.
JJZM wrote:good thing I'm from N. Ireland so I have dual Nationality.
...because nobody from Northern Ireland has any reason to be ashamed of their countrymen.
JJZM wrote:Not that I'm pro-Nazi or anything but by contrast, in Nazi Germany during the reign of Hitler, yobs like this would be relocated to concentration camps and the unrest would be taken care of swiftly.
I think that people who hold your views should be "relocated to concentration camps"... see where illiberalism goes so badly wrong? I'm guessing not, as the repugnance of that one sentence dismisses all hope that reason and understanding can be applied to you.
JJZM wrote:Britain needs to man-up a bit and learn from Belfast's police force - who know how to deal with a good riot.
Belfast is in Britain, so you seem a smidgen confused. Cardiff, Swansea, Glasgow & Edinburgh... completely riot-free. Perhaps (in your Gestapo-state dream world)
England needs to "man-up a bit".
Go read a history book*, FTLOG... and make an effort to understand some of it.
* Preferably not one written by David Starkey.