Baton rounds on hand so that protesters can be shot if needs be.

[I1L2T3]

The problem is that the people incriminating themselves are now covering their faces as witnessed during the last riots, yes there are some people stupid enough not to cover their face whilst committing crimes but I would bet the ring leader that are at every protest cover their face so never get court. If it was illegal to cover your face during public protests filming them would prevent a lot of crime. The protesters would need to know that the consequence of covering their face was arrest.

I wait for all the comments about infringing people’s rights to cover their face.

 

This is a challenge for the police certainly. They seemed to have a clear approach to this yesterday - they were closely observing everybody and just pulling certain people out of the protest. If their strategy was intelligence led or people were pulled out for clear reasons that is fine.

[I1L2T3]

I like the cut of ya jib lad.

 

Seconded.

 

I think the last week has marked a dangerous turning point. I really hope I'm wrong. More later.

[Conrod]

The police did a reasonable job today I think. Provocative behaviour on both sides it seems but it passed off peacefully enough.

 

Was today everything you hoped for Conrod? Sadly no skulls cracked or baton rounds fired but I'm sure you'll be building your hopes for the next time.

Don't be puerile. I would never wish for unrest - much better for the rabble to behave and save the trouble and expense of dealing with them.

[I1L2T3]

Don't be puerile. I would never wish for unrest - much better for the rabble to behave and save the trouble and expense of dealing with them.

 

I'm not the one who is behaving like a child who had his trip to the cinema cancelled;).

 

How should we get them to behave Conrod? By using threats?

[L00b]

You should read more widely. February this year French gendarmes used tear gas on protesting pensioners.

Still no need to

 

I know about that one (and others). Didn't cover themselves with glory on that occasion - however, the intervention was not without due cause.

 

And that said, in the wider context of the number of protests there, small fries. You should see when the miners or farmers go at it with the CRS, now that's proper sport. Tear gas is really small potatoes in these situations

The right is the freedom of assembly. Police can restrict this right of course but there has to be a clear reason to do it and the restriction should be proportionate to the risk. There was no need to make an announcement about baton rounds for a relatively small scale student protest.

The announcement about baton rounds did not restrict the right to freedom of assembly. I still don't understand your argument.

Violent protestors do induce fear. That is why they do what they do. But it is not the job of the police to induce fear - that is the key point.

I still don't understand your argument. It was perfectly clear at all times that police would not use baton rounds if the protest went about peacefully. How did the annoucement produce 'fear' (to normal, law-abiding protesters - the very vast majority)?

[ronthenekred]

I still don't understand your argument. It was perfectly clear at all times that police would not use baton rounds if the protest went about peacefully. How did the annoucement produce 'fear' (to normal, law-abiding protesters - the very vast majority)?

 

A peaceful demonstrator would have no control over a rioter so therefore having no control over the police. Result= peaceful demonstrator resists going to demo?

[I1L2T3]

Still no need to

 

I know about that one (and others). Didn't cover themselves with glory on that occasion - however, the intervention was not without due cause.

 

And that said, in the wider context of the number of protests there, small fries. You should see when the miners or farmers go at it with the CRS, now that's proper sport. Tear gas is really small potatoes in these situations

The announcement about baton rounds did not restrict the right to freedom of assembly. I still don't understand your argument.

I still don't understand your argument. It was perfectly clear at all times that police would not use baton rounds if the protest went about peacefully. How did the annoucement produce 'fear' (to normal, law-abiding protesters - the very vast majority)?

 

I see. You knew about the French police throwin tear gas bombs into a crowd of elderly protesters. Have you watched the video? I guess you also conveniently forgot about the use of tear gas and baton rounds in 2010 during protests about raising the pension age from 60 to 62.

 

The police did not restrict the right of free assembly but they used other measures to try and restrict the size of the crowd - one of which was to publicise their control methods in a way they never had before. As I said they realised the mistake and backpeddled somewhat.

[L00b]

A peaceful demonstrator would have no control over a rioter so therefore having no control over the police. Result= peaceful demonstrator resists going to demo?

That is well understood, but getting I1L2T3 to admit as much without circumvolutions is like pulling teeth

I see. You knew about the French police throwin tear gas bombs into a crowd of elderly protesters. Have you watched the video? I guess you also conveniently forgot about the use of tear gas and baton rounds in 2010 during protests about raising the pension age from 60 to 62.

Nope. See here:

<...>

I know about that one (and others).<...>

By the way, it was one gendarme in a small town (Anduze) in the middle of nowhere.

 

That's not minimising the gravity of the occasion, just adding some context

[I1L2T3]

That is well understood, but getting I1L2T3 to admit as much without circumvolutions is like pulling teeth

Nope. See here:

 

By the way, it was one gendarme in a small town (Anduze) in the middle of nowhere.

 

That's not minimising the gravity of the occasion, just adding some context

 

So you admit to knowing about at least two instances in the last two years where French police have taken a radically different approach but still insist they use the same approach as the British police. Ooops

[Conrod]

I'm not the one who is behaving like a child who had his trip to the cinema cancelled;).

I'd be most intrigued to learn how I have done that - do please quote and show me where I've displayed that sort of behaviour, and I will learn from it. If you have made the accusation in error, or just lied, I'm sure you will have the moral fibre to apologise .

 

 

How should we get them to behave Conrod? By using threats?

I've already expressed my view on the need for firm Policing of rioters and protestors. Anybody who chooses to participate in violent protest or civil unrest should expect harsh treatment, and that would include - at the starting level - baton rounds.

 

I'll ask you again, as you avoided answering last time: "What level of control do you consider appropriate for violent rioters who threaten innocent life?"