News Why Are Riots Escalating in London?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cristo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Rioting in London has escalated over three consecutive nights, beginning after a peaceful protest against a police shooting turned violent. The unrest has spread widely, with significant destruction, including looting and arson, leading to a perception of the city resembling a war zone. Social media has played a crucial role in fueling the riots, attracting individuals from outside the initial protest area who are taking advantage of the chaos. The Metropolitan Police have struggled to maintain control due to being outnumbered, prompting discussions about the need for a more effective response. The situation reflects broader societal issues, including youth discontent and the influence of technology on mob behavior.
  • #121
FYI. http://www.latimes.com/news/la-fgw-london-arrests-20110813,0,1899326.story"
Courts are flooded with a huge variety of suspects -- from hooded youths with previous convictions to middle-class students, young professionals, adult working people and teenagers and children, some as young as 11 and 12. Often they are brought in by family members.

Most defendants are denied bail, or let go with a fine, but sentences are swift and mostly tough -- one boy caught with a case of bottled water looted from a supermarket was given a six-month jail sentence.

Many of those allowed out on bail left courts surrounded by TV cameras, covering their heads. Others were openly defiant and hurled abuse at the press crowds.

Politicians are busy looking for social remedies to the violence, with Prime Minister David Cameron reported to be looking to former Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton for advice on gang culture as he told Parliament in his Thursday address.
An aside, I stumbled across Britsh PM David Cameron, having a lively roundtable discussion on CSPAN yesterday in an emergency session of parliment, got an earful from the left, middle and the right. They are looking at addressing this short term and at the deeper underlying issues with eyes wide open. Each side was listening (for a change) to the other, for the most part. This is my opinion only. Compared to what I have seen in our two chamber's of government on CSPAN it was refreshing.

Rhody... :approve:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #122
rhody said:
An aside, I stumbled across Britsh PM David Cameron, having a lively roundtable discussion on CSPAN yesterday in an emergency session of parliment, got an earful from the left, middle and the right. They are looking at addressing this short term and at the deeper underlying issues with eyes wide open. Each side was listening (for a change) to the other, for the most part. This is my opinion only. Compared to what I have seen in our two chamber's of government on CSPAN it was refreshing.

Rhody... :approve:

There was an interesting session of Question Time last night where the panel were discussing the riots. Something I was heartened to see is there was minimal political bickering compared to normal (though it did flare up at times) and that by the end of it they all agreed that even if the original protest in Tottenham was peaceful that was not what spurred the rest of the riots, those occurred because normal criminals saw on their TVs and social networks that the police were overwhelmed and so took their chance (which leads to a snowball effect). In addition the panel agreed that the solution to this is two pronged; firstly in the short term extra police need to be out, provisions made to supply them with effective equipment and tactics and those who have been caught should be sent to court. Secondly in the long term broader issues of gang culture, poverty and crime should be tackled even more than they have been in a myriad of ways in order to minimise the situations that give rise to the people who do this.

Thats the hard part, coming up with the idea. Now they just have to complete the easy bit of making it work...[/sarcasm]
 
Last edited:
  • #123
ryan_m_b said:
Now they just have to complete the easy bit of making it work...
ryan,

They know what they are up against, but dealing with the long term, deeply embedded issues is going to be an extremely difficult task. I hope my last post did not imply in any way that it would be easy.

Rhody...
 
  • #124
rhody said:
ryan,

They know what they are up against, but dealing with the long term, deeply embedded issues is going to be an extremely difficult task. I hope my last post did not imply in any way that it would be easy.

Rhody...

I was being sarcastic, may have to edit my post to include a few :-p's
 
  • #126
When the cat's away the mice will play...

Britain's most senior police officer, the head of London's Metropolitan Police, Paul Stephenson has resigned following claims relating to the phone hacking scandal:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Olpm5mdBJMw

Don’t know the significance of this, some say it matters, some say it doesn’t...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #127
vici10 said:
Let us also remember that just several days before the riots England experienced the biggest wave of strikes since 1980s. The strikes and riots show deep dissatisfaction that people have.
...
Or it shows the sense of dependence on the state (the strikes were all public sector) and depravity (in the case of the riots) some people have.
 
  • #128
mheslep said:
Or it shows the sense of dependence on the state
And who is independent of the state?
 
  • #129
vici10 said:
And who is independent of the state?

Perhaps he means 'dependence on government employment as opposed to private sector'?
 
  • #130
vici10 said:
And who is independent of the state?
I'm guessing that was a hook for the false dilemma fallacy: if one is against the leviathan state then one must be for anarchy. But if I guessed wrong about your question, then I meant the people that went on strike were dependent on the state for their jobs and their guaranteed pensions, a guarantee largely not available in the private sector. In that context, employment, everyone who does not work for the state is independent of it.
 
  • #131
Personally, I think Pat Condell has the best take on this criminal, pampered scum who has absolutely nothing to complain about, but solely should be ashamed of themselves of choosing to be disgusting, unemployable models of subhumanity, rather than aspiring to what they, as everyone else, are fully capable of:
http://www.youtube.com/user/patcondell#p/a/u/0/9pAC0YSmK0g
 
  • #132
mheslep said:
In that context, employment, everyone who does not work for the state is independent of it.

I would add that not only those who are employed dependent on these jobs. Every student who goes to public school, every student who goes to publicly funded University, patients in the public hospitals, companies that use results of government funded research and many many others are depended on the jobs of public workers.
 
  • #133
Condell said:
Everyone connected with this riot, anyone convicted of taking part in this riot would automatically lose entitlement to state benefit for life and they would have their house demolished. Now that would be justice. And if it violated their human rights, so much the better.
Good start.
 
  • #134
arildno said:
Personally, I think Pat Condell has the best take on this criminal, pampered scum who has absolutely nothing to complain about, but solely should be ashamed of themselves of choosing to be disgusting, unemployable models of subhumanity, rather than aspiring to what they, as everyone else, are fully capable of:
http://www.youtube.com/user/patcondell#p/a/u/0/9pAC0YSmK0g

So what is your solution to the problem?
 
  • #135
mheslep said:
Good start.

So what would homeless penniless and convicted people do with themselves? Hmmm... let's see... they really would be unemployable then so they'd have to beg, steal or die.

Chances are, if they're willing to loot and riot, then they'd go for the stealing.

Suddenly the idea of cutting all their benefits and housing seems utterly stupid! Unleash the new wave of criminals who really do have nothing to lose.
 
  • #136
JesseC said:
So what is your solution to the problem?

Fire all cultural Marxists who have, over the decades, poisoned the social services with their pestilential sympathies to "the poor" that these really "deserve" a larger share of the societal pie.
Instate persons to such services who are willing to CONDEMN "the poor", in their face, of their whining, self-pity and ugly envy, rather than encouraging such vile personality traits.
"The poor" should act in a GRATEFUL, HUMBLE manner to the society which gives them money to live of, free of charge.
And it is precisely the front line, the social workers, who should force these individuals to develop that morally appropriate attitude.
 
Last edited:
  • #137
JesseC said:
Unleash the new wave of criminals who really do have nothing to lose.

That is what guns are made for to handle.
 
  • #138
arildno said:
That is what guns are made for to handle.

So basically you're idea is that rioters should be murdered.
 
  • #139
JesseC said:
So basically you're idea is that rioters should be murdered.

That is, indeed, the proper meaning of "riot control", once warnings to that effect have been issued.
Noone forces them to be thugs; it is their own choice to be despicable scum.
 
  • #140
JesseC said:
So what would homeless penniless and convicted people do with themselves? Hmmm... let's see... they really would be unemployable then so they'd have to beg, steal or die.

Chances are, if they're willing to loot and riot, then they'd go for the stealing.

Suddenly the idea of cutting all their benefits and housing seems utterly stupid! Unleash the new wave of criminals who really do have nothing to lose.
That implies the "there's no choice, no opportunity" fallacy. For appropriate ridicule of that notion see the Condel video again, and again.

Furthermore if from the events in Britain there are those for whose plight I should be concerned, it will first be those that were assaulted, had their homes or businesses burned, or were terrorized off the streets, not rioters and arsonists.
 
Last edited:
  • #141
arildno & mheslep

*sigh* I'm thankful neither of you are from the UK... you're entitled to your views but please keep them in your respective countries. :P
 
  • #142
JesseC said:
arildno & mheslep

*sigh* I'm thankful neither of you are from the UK... you're entitled to your views but please keep them in your respective countries. :P
Back at ya.
 
  • #143
Apparently 33% of the people in a survey said that they should use live ammunition to stop the riots, with slightly more saying that tasers and plastic bullets should be used.

I am being stopped and searched practically everywhere I go now.
 
  • #144
arildno said:
Noone forces them to be thugs; it is their own choice to be despicable scum.
I wouldn't be too sure of that. If they have denied a livelihood (jobs, infrastructure) to acquire for themselves the basic necessities of life - food, shelter - then, not only are they forced to turn to violence, they are - at least in principle - right to do so since, for them, society has effectively disintegrated.I would not have expected anyone over the age of 20 would suggest shooting them as an institutionalized solution.
 
Last edited:
  • #145
FeDeX_LaTeX said:
Apparently 33% of the people in a survey said that they should use live ammunition to stop the riots, with slightly more saying that tasers and plastic bullets should be used...
I think that sentiment is a natural consequence of the failure by the cops to use the normal, forceful but non-lethal riot control methods such as water cannons and rubber bullets. Take away the sense by society that there are consequences for running riot, that there is a system in place, and vigilantism comes next.
 
Last edited:
  • #146
DaveC426913 said:
I wouldn't be too sure of that. If they have denied a livelihood (jobs, infrastructure) to acquire for themselves the basic necessities of life - food, shelter - then, not only are they forced to turn to violence, they are - at least in principle - right to do so since, for them, society has effectively disintegrated.


I would not have expected anyone over the age of 20 would suggest shooting them as an institutionalized solution.
1. They DO have money. It is called social benefits.
2. They have not "been denied" jobs, they have chosen to be unemployable, and it began back in their school days, where they showed utter contempt for learning etc.
3. As a last resort in riot control, using sharp weapons is indeed, the correct solution.
Defensible measures to prevent ONGOING crimes are wholly other than punishments dealt out by court for PAST crimes.
That is why, for example, a shop owner is allowed to kill an armed robber, rather than handing over to him his goods.
That is why you as an outsider has the right to prevent a man from committing a rape, even if the situation means it entails killing him.
 
  • #147
I'll go further and ask where in the developed Western world is anyone forced to go without survival food and/or housing through no fault of their own?
 
  • #148
mheslep said:
I'll go further and ask where in the developed Western world is anyone forced to go without survival food and/or housing through no fault of their own?
However, what we DO have to struggle with are deeply immoral people actively encouraging "poor" people in their ideas that these are somehow "equally entitled" to the life of a millionaire..

This group of riot-inducing rabble equates quite nicely with..LEFTISTS.
 
  • #149
arildno said:
2. They have not "been denied" jobs, they have chosen to be unemployable, and it began back in their school days, where they showed utter contempt for learning etc.
Contempt?

Or hopelessness?

Is it your contention then that the country's problems only exist for those who have not completed basic education? That those who did complete it have a significantly good chance of finding work to support them and their families?

If I understand the current mood correctly, there is little hope to be had.
 
  • #150
DaveC426913 said:
Contempt?

Or hopelessness?

Is it your contention then that the country's problems only exist for those who have not completed basic education? That those who did complete it have a significantly good chance of finding work to support them and their families?

If I understand the current mood correctly, there is little hope to be had.
They have social benefits and have nothing whatsoever to complain about.
They are not "entitled" to anything more than means for physical survival, because life IS a human right, that others are obliged to help them with.
Neither happiness or prosperity are qualities of life others are obliged to help them with.
 

Similar threads

News Why Did London Police Blow Up a Tourist's Car and Issue a Parking Ticket?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K