Having Just Watched The Film 'Dont Look...
ChatterBank7 mins ago
Some More Tolerance From The Rop ?
19 Answers
http://
Makes your blood boil doesn't it. Not terrorists or 'extreme'.
Presumably this is what the Muslims have in mind for the UK with their clamors for Sharia law?
Makes your blood boil doesn't it. Not terrorists or 'extreme'.
Presumably this is what the Muslims have in mind for the UK with their clamors for Sharia law?
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There have been 333 people die while in police custody in the UK since 1998. No police officers have been charged in relation to the deaths.
http://
Oops, nearly forgot, a Brit is injured in a foreign jail, they must be barbaric to let that happen, these people are savages.
http://
Oops, nearly forgot, a Brit is injured in a foreign jail, they must be barbaric to let that happen, these people are savages.
I think one important aspect which you have somewhat overlooked, Gromit, is that, as far as I know, none of the 333 people slain by murdering police officers in the UK was in jail, under sentence of death, for blasphemy. Nor, as far as I know, were any of them shot whilst they were incarcerated.
Furthermore, the report that the Guardian article refers to says that prosecutions were recommended in just 13 cases (3.9%) suggesting that in more than 96% of the cases police officers were not held to blame for the deaths. In those cases files for prosecution were prepared based on "relatively strong evidence of misconduct or neglect".
"It is clear to us there is some real difficulty in this area." Said IPCC chair Len Jackson. “The IPCC had a responsibility to investigate and present a file to the CPS if we feel there are any matters potentially of a criminal nature", he said. But then it was up to the criminal justice system. "We have a jury system that is as good as anything in the world, but it is clear that juries quite often find it difficult to convict police officers."
Methinks Mr. Jackson jumps to conclusions for what is clear to me is that juries quite often find it difficult to convict anybody of murder – police officer or not – unless robust, clear and incontrovertible evidence is available. Alas “relatively strong” evidence is usually not enough and to be unlucky with a jury on 13 occasions defies the odds.
A brief shufty at the causes of these deaths is also interesting. I’m sure the report would mention specifically if any had been shot. Since it does not I stand by my comment in my first paragraph. The majority were from natural causes, with nearly three-quarters relating to drug or alcohol abuse, so that rules out about 250. Out of the total of 333 deaths, 87 people had been restrained, most commonly being physically held down by officers. Easy to say that officers should be careful when handling raving drug-addled maniacs in the confines of a police cell. You should give it a go.
I don’t think your comparison stands up to much objective scrutiny.
Furthermore, the report that the Guardian article refers to says that prosecutions were recommended in just 13 cases (3.9%) suggesting that in more than 96% of the cases police officers were not held to blame for the deaths. In those cases files for prosecution were prepared based on "relatively strong evidence of misconduct or neglect".
"It is clear to us there is some real difficulty in this area." Said IPCC chair Len Jackson. “The IPCC had a responsibility to investigate and present a file to the CPS if we feel there are any matters potentially of a criminal nature", he said. But then it was up to the criminal justice system. "We have a jury system that is as good as anything in the world, but it is clear that juries quite often find it difficult to convict police officers."
Methinks Mr. Jackson jumps to conclusions for what is clear to me is that juries quite often find it difficult to convict anybody of murder – police officer or not – unless robust, clear and incontrovertible evidence is available. Alas “relatively strong” evidence is usually not enough and to be unlucky with a jury on 13 occasions defies the odds.
A brief shufty at the causes of these deaths is also interesting. I’m sure the report would mention specifically if any had been shot. Since it does not I stand by my comment in my first paragraph. The majority were from natural causes, with nearly three-quarters relating to drug or alcohol abuse, so that rules out about 250. Out of the total of 333 deaths, 87 people had been restrained, most commonly being physically held down by officers. Easy to say that officers should be careful when handling raving drug-addled maniacs in the confines of a police cell. You should give it a go.
I don’t think your comparison stands up to much objective scrutiny.
Quite so, 3Ts. And I forgot to add that deaths in police custody are not restricted to Muslim states and the barbaric UK. Finland (hardly renowned for police brutality) records about 20 per year (the UK figure in 2012 was nine – none shot).
The main cause of deaths in police custody in the UK is natural causes usually brought on or exacerbated by the victim’s own behaviour. The main cause of those deaths in Pakistan is collusion between police and religious extremists usually in support of Islamic blasphemy laws. Somewhat different, I think
The main cause of deaths in police custody in the UK is natural causes usually brought on or exacerbated by the victim’s own behaviour. The main cause of those deaths in Pakistan is collusion between police and religious extremists usually in support of Islamic blasphemy laws. Somewhat different, I think
Why do you expect tolerance in Pakistan where it’s a simple matter to have people locked up on charges of blasphemy?
//Accusations of blasphemy are rocketing in Pakistan, from one in 2011 to at least 68 last year, according to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. About 100 people have been accused of blasphemy this year.//
http://
//Accusations of blasphemy are rocketing in Pakistan, from one in 2011 to at least 68 last year, according to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. About 100 people have been accused of blasphemy this year.//
http://
ymb - "Presumably this is what the Muslims have in mind for the UK with their clamors for Sharia law?"
I fail to see the link between the illegal actions of a policeman in one country, and the notion that this is seen as desireable by proponents of Shariah law.
If a policeman shoots and wounds a prisoner, and kills another, that is unexplained and unexpected violence, which can occur anywhere at any time.
The nationality and location of the officer and prisoners, or the offences for which they are being held, has no relavence to the incident at all.
It makes my blood boil that an innocent man has been murdered and another innocent man has been wounded - but it doesn't boil because those involved are Muslims because that is not relavent.
I fail to see the link between the illegal actions of a policeman in one country, and the notion that this is seen as desireable by proponents of Shariah law.
If a policeman shoots and wounds a prisoner, and kills another, that is unexplained and unexpected violence, which can occur anywhere at any time.
The nationality and location of the officer and prisoners, or the offences for which they are being held, has no relavence to the incident at all.
It makes my blood boil that an innocent man has been murdered and another innocent man has been wounded - but it doesn't boil because those involved are Muslims because that is not relavent.
//Accusations of blasphemy are rocketing in Pakistan, from one in 2011 to at least 68 last year, according to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. About 100 people have been accused of blasphemy this year.//
It's basically a witchcraft situation over there. If you don't like the person next door, or perhaps just want their land you accuse them of being a witch (or blasphemer as it is in modern Pakistan).
Their society is retarded by about 350 yrs, which is frightening when you consider they got modern weapons.
It's basically a witchcraft situation over there. If you don't like the person next door, or perhaps just want their land you accuse them of being a witch (or blasphemer as it is in modern Pakistan).
Their society is retarded by about 350 yrs, which is frightening when you consider they got modern weapons.
Andy- "I fail to see the link between the illegal actions of a policeman in one country, and the notion that this is seen as desireable by proponents of Shariah law." - err he was shot for Blasphemy, sharia law is famously tolerant of blasphemy isn't it? If we lived under sharia blasphemy, among many other things would be punishable by death.
1 to 19 of 19
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.