If the only policing you have done is from the comfort of your armchair and learnt vicariously through officers you see on the TV from that armchair, I reserve the right to disregard your opinions on such matters. 🤷♂️
This is where your lack of understanding on the use of force is evident. An arrest is not self defence, yet force can lawfully be used to effect it. Taking fingerprints is not self defence, yet force can lawfully be used to take them.
Anyway on that note, and despite some back and forth, we’re not going to see eye to eye on this so I see little point in discussing further. I appreciate your opinion, I just happen to think it’s ill informed.
So if the words display an intention, such as “touch me and I’ll smash your fucking face in”, you would disregard that? How would you effectively deal with someone failing to obey a lawful instruction, and committing an offence in doing so, without the use of force? Once that force is resisted with a kick towards you and then by bear hugging you to the ground are you going to do nothing?
I’m intrigued at what point you’re going to use force, as you seem quite keen for it not to be.
I’m not sure now whether you’re deliberately being obtuse. I mentioned a number of factors that can influence and inform decision making and you’ve chosen one of them and equated it to the most extreme outcome.
Ok, let’s play your way. What’s being said between the parties as you view that footage from across the road? What legal orders to disperse are in place?
You’re asking me to make an assessment from the comfort of my bed on people who are having to wear public order gear because they’ve been under a barrage of incoming missiles and abuse for hours. I’m not privy to any exchange of words or the manner in which they’re said and I don’t know what if any directions, such as dispersal orders, may have been given. So the “objective test” you’re asking me to make would only be objective if it were made in the same circumstances.
I’ve seen other incidents where I’ve definitely thought “that will require some serious justification” and couldn’t see myself using that force but I don’t jump on social media to critique it because I’m not in their shoes.
Now you’re ascribing to me a description of what you perceive to be “minor scuffles”. Just as it doesn’t matter whether you think it’s unreasonable force, it doesn’t matter whether I think it’s reasonable. The ONLY thing that matters is what each officer using force believed at the time.
“The reasonableness of the use of force has to be decided on the basis of the facts which the user of the force honestly believed to exist. This involves a subjective test as to what the user believed and an objective test as to whether he had reasonable grounds for that belief. To apply a different test to the actions of state agents, such as police officers, would inappropriately hinder their actions to the detriment of their own safety and that of the public.” R v HM Coroner for Inner South London 2006
I’m not sure why, when faced with a question that posits that you only have one option, you answer with an option that isn’t available to you. The answer is: of course you would use your shield even though you were ordered not to. To do otherwise would be foolish. I understand the circumstances are different, the point I am making is that one can use whatever force they believe to be reasonable in the circumstances they find themselves in. Just because you don’t think it’s reasonable, because of some arbitrary instruction you were given about shield use, doesn’t mean it isn’t.
The footage is in the thread. I can’t help you work Twitter. They try to move him forward so that he’s not behind police lines, he resists by pushing against their shields, he kicks out at one officer and when arrested he bear hugs a Sgt leading to the strikes being put in. The legality of the force used is for a court to determine if it comes to that and will be based on what was in the officers mind at the time. I also talk as a former police officer.
@Madmozza@bbcquestiontime Literally about any other politician - "They always avoid scrutiny"
Man trying to become an MP gets some scrutiny - "They're going in a bit hard here".
Sure, 3:51:10 secs. Wearing baseball caps and standing quietly in a line across the road. I guess that's how people get ready to "go to war".
I genuinely don't mind the back and forth here but if you're going to ask me to ignore what my eyes can see to suit your narrative I'm going to have to bow out.