Mr Prime Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 No im not. I find that offensive. By the way, what obtuse mean? Look, its obvious you are siding with dibble. We dont mind, just dont be so closed minded to the possibility that this copper could have been a trigger happy thug shooting a blind man in the back with a tazer Or he could have had sight problems. Or he could just be an idiot who shouldnt be left in charge of anything more dangerous than a cap gun. Yes I side with him here until I know more and yes he might be trigger happy. I was anti them re the miners strike and Hillsborough and they were right to sack Harwood even though he was found not guilty of killing Tomlinson. Note that there's not pattern of pro or anti there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 Yes I side with him here until I know more and yes he might be trigger happy. I was anti them re the miners strike and Hillsborough and they were right to sack Harwood even though he was found not guilty of killing Tomlinson. Note that there's not pattern of pro or anti there. Bold bit. Very balanced indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Boy Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 And neither were you, but you're satisfied it was a sword; all I can think of is that you've never seen a blind person. The bloke shouted when on floor I'm blind, yet they still handcuffed him, just as well he didn't have a gun the copper or he'd have shot him. Oh and a stupid person, believes everything the police say, oh I own 3 samurai swords & noway can they be mistaken for a white stick I suppose if someone shouts I'm innocent while handcuffed on the floor they let them go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Bold bit. Very balanced indeed What's wrong with siding with him until I know more? I didn't realise yahoo was on the level of the New York Times or the BBC. I simply don't jump at the chance to imagine he was a nutter with a yearning to taser someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 What's wrong with siding with him until I know more? I didn't realise yahoo was on the level of the New York Times or the BBC. I simply don't jump at the chance to imagine he was a nutter with a yearning to taser someone. He might have thought that he was being helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I suppose if someone shouts I'm innocent while handcuffed on the floor they let them go? He shouted I'm blind, there is a bit of a difference dear boy, it must be bad enough being sightless without being manhandled by this lot. He would not be in a position to see anyone or what they were doing, hence he was petrified & shouted what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 He shouted I'm blind, there is a bit of a difference dear boy, it must be bad enough being sightless without being manhandled by this lot. He would not be in a position to see anyone or what they were doing, hence he was petrified & shouted what he did. The point is, if a person shouts they are blind or ill or some other reason not to be cuffed then turn out not to be and assault the copper when his guard is down then what? The police cuff everyone with very few exceptions. There is a difference between maliciousness and safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 What's wrong with siding with him until I know more? I didn't realise yahoo was on the level of the New York Times or the BBC. I simply don't jump at the chance to imagine he was a nutter with a yearning to taser someone. Everything if you then berate those who dont want to side with him then claim your being balanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I think a good rogering with the blind man's stick might just impress on the constable involved that it neither looks like nor feels like a samurai sword Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 The point is, if a person shouts they are blind or ill or some other reason not to be cuffed then turn out not to be and assault the copper when his guard is down then what? The police cuff everyone with very few exceptions. There is a difference between maliciousness and safety. Yes, malicious would be to taser a blind man from behind then claim you thought he was carrying a lethal weapon. Oh, hang on,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.