Mp Manhandles Protestor

[thesshhh]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9341616/climate-change-protester-philip-hammond/
Your thoughts?

[agchristie]

Spath, Mrs May is not going to base her decision on 'what if' scenarios as a form of mitigation.

[ludwig]

I see Sqad more as the James Robertson Justice character, Sir Lancelot Spratt..

[Cloverjo]

As far as I know the protesters wore similar clothes to the hostesses so they blended in. So the woman approached the top table ‘with something in her hand’. The MP didn’t wait to see if she was doing hostess duties. He grabbed her by the neck and forced her out.

[weecalf]

Question why did he not hand the lady over to the other young lady who seemingly had came forward to take the lady from the room .He just ignored her as if to say I’m taking charge of this .

[Baldric]

She was heading for the Top Table with 'something in her hand' he did exactly the right thing and stopped her.
Where the hell were the Security?

[andy-hughes]

spath - // Andy at 13:14

OK "what if she had ben carrying a knife / gun / nuclear device" ? //

Then the outcome would have been different.

But she wasn't, and we are discussing what did happen, not what might have happened 'if ...' because that is pointless.

[andy-hughes]

Baldric - // She was heading for the Top Table with 'something in her hand' he did exactly the right thing and stopped her. //

He stopped her, but it's the manner in which he did it which is questioned.

If I wanted someone to stop doing something with their hands, I would pin their arms to their sides in a 'bear hug' and shout for security at the top of my voice - not bang them against a pillar, grab them by the neck and march them out of the room.

But then, as I have pointed out - the gentleman's behaviour was not motivated by selfless disregard for his own personal safety, it was motivated by temper and aggression.

[agchristie]

Can you imagine the perverse outcomes of Crown Court cases where verdicts were highly influenced on what could have happened?

[Baldric]

Andy, you really have no idea do you?

[andy-hughes]

Baldric - // Andy, you really have no idea do you? //

About the theory of relativity? Why bees can fly when the laws of basic aerodynamics say they can't? Why some people think Michael McIntyre is considered to be funny?

No, I have no idea about any of those things.

But if, as I suspect, you are talking about the subject under discussion, the violent behaviour of an MP, then yes I do have an idea, it may be different from yours, but I definitely have it.

Happy to put your mind at rest.

[spathiphyllum]

"But she wasn't, and we are discussing what did happen, not what might have happened 'if ...' because that is pointless."

What did[i happen was one man took it upon himself to decide what was necessary in the moment. This deission would have been influenced by recent events not only regarding milkshakes but potential terrorism not to mention acid attacks. Evidently, due to his now suspended status, this was wrong. However, who knows what went through his head. He took it upon himself at the time, and it was a brave decision.

I'm still conflicted on this. The woman was assign for it, though. [i]choke me instead of sea turtles]

[spathiphyllum]

"Spath, Mrs May is not going to base her decision on 'what if' scenarios as a form of mitigation.
"

Balderdash. The police do it all the time.

[zebo]

We have to remember that 'Uman Rights are only for those who treat society with contempt.

[andy-hughes]

spath - // Evidently, due to his now suspended status, this was wrong. //

I don't need someone to be suspended from his job to know that what he did was wrong - I can see that from the video provided.

[Baldric]

Thank you Andy for confirming my point.

[sanmac]

Surely the entire concept and basic principle behind any kind of security is based upon what COULD or MIGHT happen and what can be done to prevent it happening. (In this situation there appeared to be no security.)

[andy-hughes]

zebo - // We have to remember that 'Uman Rights are only for those who treat society with contempt. //

As I have said before, this woman's views on climate change are not the issue here, in a free society, having views contrary to the majority does not mean the right not to be assaulted is recinded.

[ChillDoubt]

After what happened to Jo Cox, the minister was well within his rights in dealing ‘robustly’ with an unquantifiable threat.

He ought not face any further sanction IMHO.

[andy-hughes]

sanmac - // Surely the entire concept and basic principle behind any kind of security is based upon what COULD or MIGHT happen and what can be done to prevent it happening. (In this situation there appeared to be no security.) //

That may be a valid point - but the issue, as I keep repeating, is not that Mr Field acted from a point of view of 'security' - he acted from a point of view of temper and assault, which defenders are now trying to dress up as a 'security' issue, when clearly no-one else thought the same way, or indeed, acted in the same way.

[agchristie]

//This deission would have been influenced by recent events not only regarding milkshakes but potential terrorism not to mention acid attacks.//

Yet only one reacted.Hmmm