The Politics Thread 2020

[Norman]

3 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

Racism hasn’t ‘got better’, it’s definition and how it manifests itself in society have changed.  

Once again I pop into this thread and see those who like to have an opinion completely missing the point. Much like they can’t see past their own little tunnel vision argument. 

It's a thread for opinions. A forum.

Maybe write a post saying where they are missing the point. You might get past your own tunnel vision that way. 

[Norman]

2 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Ok mate ?

Well you're missing the vital stat, aren't you. How many are unlawful? 

Maybe you could change my mind.

[maxjam]

24 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

There may be a a lesser case than could be argued is true of the US, but the States have hardly set an unattainable benchmark, have they?

Stating there is 'no case to answer' is simply not true. The numbers may pale alongside US totals, but irrespective of that pointless and irrelevant comparison, there have still been over 160 BAME deaths in police custody since 1990 and for the families and friends of the victims, I would argue there is very much a case to answer.

Some stats for you that might provide insight as to why folk are so angry:

• The proportion of BAME deaths in custody where restraint is a feature is over two times greater than it is in other deaths in custody
   
• The proportion of BAME deaths in custody where use of force is a feature is over two times greater than it is in other deaths in custody
   
• The proportion of BAME deaths in custody where mental health-related issues are a feature is nearly two times greater than it is in other deaths in custody
   

Total BAME deaths in police custody or otherwise following
contact with the police, England & Wales 1990-date

Type                            Metropolitan Police                  Other Forces                  Total

Custody                                        84                                        79                            163

Shooting                                      15                                          5                               20

All custody & shooting deaths    99                                         84                             183

While the overall death-count is broadly in line with the 2011 census - that is, BAME victims account for 14% of the total figure - it is the number of deaths where BAME victims have died while under restraint that is the most notable anomaly.

Is it any wonder then, that the manner of George Floyd's killing has triggered fury among the family and friends of those who have died here in the UK under very similar circumstances?

Furthermore, and setting aside any BLM considerations, over 1740 people have died in police custody or otherwise following contact with the police in England & Wales since 1990. Perhaps those numbers beg no questions for you, but don't assume that everyone else feels the same way as they clearly do not.

Given these statistics and again, setting aside any racial context, can you explain how it is you can state as you have that, 'there is no case to answer for police brutality in this country'?

And notwithstanding the dangers presented by mass-gatherings at this time, is the real question not , why are black folk protesting, but rather, why isn't everyone? 

Where did you get those stats from?

This BBC article suggests slightly different;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52890363

Furthermore a good percentage of deaths following police contact are due to road accident or suicide or intoxication;

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statistics/deaths_during_following_police_contact_201718.pdf#page=42

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statistics/deaths_during_following_police_contact_201819.pdf#page=43

Over the past two years there has been (the 2017-18 figures are here and 2018-19 is here).

They show that of 39 custody-related deaths:

17 involved the use of force by police officers

11 of these deaths were of white people

6 were of black people - nearly a third of the total

The IOPC says, of custody-related deaths overall, it does not "necessarily mean that the use of force contributed to the death". It says mental health or drug and alcohol problems are factors. In 2018-19, almost two-thirds of the custody-related deaths were directly linked to intoxication.

[Norman]

5 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Where did you get those stats from?

This BBC article suggests slightly different;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52890363

Furthermore a good percentage of deaths following police contact are due to road accident or suicide or intoxication;

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statistics/deaths_during_following_police_contact_201718.pdf#page=42

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statistics/deaths_during_following_police_contact_201819.pdf#page=43

Over the past two years there has been (the 2017-18 figures are here and 2018-19 is here).

They show that of 39 custody-related deaths:

17 involved the use of force by police officers

11 of these deaths were of white people

6 were of black people - nearly a third of the total

The IOPC says, of custody-related deaths overall, it does not "necessarily mean that the use of force contributed to the death". It says mental health or drug and alcohol problems are factors. In 2018-19, almost two-thirds of the custody-related deaths were directly linked to intoxication.

I'm being lazy here, but does it give a figure for unlawful deaths? 

[maxjam]

5 minutes ago, Norman said:

I'm being lazy here, but does it give a figure for unlawful deaths? 

Nope - and being lazy myself I cba to work it out myself!

It does look like cases that can't be easily categorised - suicide, drugs, car crash etc are 'subject to independent investigation' that I would hope would alert us to any cases of police brutality.

[Comrade 86]

Just now, Norman said:

I mean a great wall of text, that says deaths in custody of BAME is in line with the population. 

We have to use different restraint techniques on BAME. Sickle cell etc. So again, I'm not surprised figures dating from 1990 record higher for BAME under restraint. There have been major changes and awareness there. 

Actually it's a 'great wall of text' that illustrates an anomaly for BAME folk dying while under physical restraint ie. the same way George Floyd died. It seems in your haste to rubbish the argument, the crux of it has gone right over your head. 

As for progress, the highest death count in a decade was in 2017 so the major changes and awareness argument isn't really stacking up either.

I've tried to present some data, you've countered with Twatter gags, more opinions dressed as facts and some blather about sickle cell, while ducking the only question actually put to you. As such, I'll politely recuse myself from our 'debate' now and bid you a pleasant evening ?

 

 

[Norman]

4 minutes ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Actually it's a 'great wall of text' that illustrates an anomaly for BAME folk dying while under physical restraint ie. the same way George Floyd died. It seems in your haste to rubbish the argument, the crux of it has gone right over your head. 

As for progress, the highest death count in a decade was in 2017 so the major changes and awareness argument isn't really stacking up either.

I've tried to present some data, you've countered with Twatter gags, more opinions dressed as facts and some blather about sickle cell, while ducking the only question actually put to you. As such, I'll politely recuse myself from our 'debate' now and bid you a pleasant evening ?

 

 

It's not blather. I'm advanced in restraint techniques. Sickle cell is at the top of importance for me as I don't work with women and don't have to worry about pregnancies. It's drilled into us.

It shows an anomaly, yes. But further evidence from @maxjam shows a lot has to be taken into account.

Just wondered if there was a good solid base to argue that our police use racist brutality when making arrests. It's a massive thing to accuse the police of. Was just making sure the facts were being presented right. 

And the Twitter handle wasn't a joke. I'm actually interested to see your unfiltered opinions.

[maxjam]

25 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

Racism hasn’t ‘got better’, it’s definition and how it manifests itself in society have changed.  

Once again I pop into this thread and see those who like to have an opinion completely missing the point. Much like they can’t see past their own little tunnel vision argument. 

Would evidence of racism getting 'better' not include comparing watching football matches in the 80s (picked that decade as that was my starting point) to now?

I recall pretty much the entire crowd singing racist chants, now-a-days as per several high profile cases it is by and large individual idiots.  Furthermore, schemes are in place that allow match goers to text cases of racism to authorities in an attempt as stamping it out further.

IMO society has moved forwards with the majority of people taking care with the actions they take and the words they speak.

[TramRam]

7 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Would evidence of racism getting 'better' not include comparing watching football matches in the 80s (picked that decade as that was my starting point) to now?

I recall pretty much the entire crowd singing racist chants, now-a-days as per several high profile cases it is by and large individual idiots.  Furthermore, schemes are in place that allow match goers to text cases of racism to authorities in an attempt as stamping it out further.

IMO society has moved forwards with the majority of people taking care with the actions they take and the words they speak.

Millwall...nuff said ?

[TuffLuff]

26 minutes ago, Norman said:

It's a thread for opinions. A forum.

Maybe write a post saying where they are missing the point. You might get past your own tunnel vision that way. 

Yeah but do you honestly care about the other opinion? I mean you suitably ignored the important sentence on my original post here just so you can have an opinion here didn’t you. I think you are proving my point a little.

Lets look at your opinion from today that racism was worse in the 70s. How would you like to measure that? From personal experiences or what? Racism can have a physical form, in words and actions but also in mental ways that have been institutionalised. As a society we try and eradicate the physical, when we see it many of us actively attempt to stop it. But we ignore the mental, the institutionalised. So we call a statue to a slave owner a part of history rather than just taking it down, we don’t consider the mental effect that has of which Rosenior spoke of yesterday. We don’t consider that black kids are more likely to get arrested than white kids (from the MOD analytical services). The thinking for that is because BAME people live in poorer areas, that they are more likely to get into gangs or whatever, rather than maybe wondering why BAME are living in poorer areas. We scoff at things like the Equality Act to stop discrimination with job applicants but never ask why an ethnicity pay gap exists(according to the Office of National Statistics the difference is broadly 3.8%). There are many other examples I could go into, but essentially isn’t ignoring all these things and writing on an Internet forum about racism being worse in the 70s also a part of this?

[DarkFruitsRam7]

A statement from Boris: 

The first few seconds made me groan because it gave off the impression that the protests in the UK are solely based on George Floyd's death, but he does seem to move away from that notion as the statement progresses. He's right in recognising that we've come a long way in recent decades, and I'm especially glad (and surprised) that he acknowledges that institutional racism (or discrimination, or difficulties, whatever you want to call it) does still linger.

Unfortunately, he makes no mention of how he plans to tackle those issues. Surely that was the natural next step?

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

45 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

A statement from Boris: 

The first few seconds made me groan because it gave off the impression that the protests in the UK are solely based on George Floyd's death, but he does seem to move away from that notion as the statement progresses. He's right in recognising that we've come a long way in recent decades, and I'm especially glad (and surprised) that he acknowledges that institutional racism (or discrimination, or difficulties, whatever you want to call it) does still linger.

Unfortunately, he makes no mention of how he plans to tackle those issues. Surely that was the natural next step?

one placard I've seen in pictures in the last two hours  says Racism= small dick energy ???. What is that about ?Where do you start.  Another says end racist section 60. Had a quick look . Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (s.60) gives police the right to search people in a defined area during a specific time period when they believe, with good reason, that: serious violence will take place and it is necessary to use this power to prevent such violence; or that a person is carrying a dangerous object or offensive. Why end that ?

They were two signs out of four.  What next step would you suggest.  You'll have a thousand people with a hundred views and get nowhere as I pointed out earlier, then you have a load of people arguing amongst themselves.

Its ironic that those placards were under the defaced Churchill statue. It was him that was part of the team that brokered the irish free state deal. Michael Collins believed he had signed his own death warrant with the deal and he had, he went from hero to zero in ten minutes as half the people who idolised him hated him and then civil war ensued.  That's how these things work= we demand to be heard till your hearing that person ahead of me and I think differently on that point. That's just one issue.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

10 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

one placard I've seen in pictures in the last two hours  says Racism= small dick energy ???. What is that about ?Where do you start.  Another says end racist section 60. Had a quick look . Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (s.60) gives police the right to search people in a defined area during a specific time period when they believe, with good reason, that: serious violence will take place and it is necessary to use this power to prevent such violence; or that a person is carrying a dangerous object or offensive. Why end that ?

They were two signs out of four.  What next step would you suggest.  You'll have a thousand people with a hundred views and get nowhere as I pointed out earlier, then you have a load of people arguing amongst themselves.

Its ironic that those placards were under the defaced Churchill statue. It was him that was part of the team that brokered the irish free state deal. Michael Collins believed he had signed his own death warrant with the deal and he had, he went from hero to zero in ten minutes as half the people who idolised him hated him and then civil war ensued.  That's how these things work= we demand to be heard till your hearing that person ahead of me and I think differently on that point. That's just one issue.

Neither I, nor Boris, mentioned anything that you raise in your post.

I just think that if a PM recognises an issue, the natural next step is to articulate how he plans to resolve it. It doesn’t necessarily matter what the varying aims of the protestors are at this point, as I simply want to know what Boris plans to do about a problem that he himself has identified. Only then can I judge his response, but until then I’ll assume he plans to do nothing about it.

[i-Ram]

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:Unfortunately, he makes no mention of how he plans to tackle those issues. Surely that was the natural next step?

Not sure how you might reasonably expect a stream of off-the-shelf policies/strategies to quickly fix this issue.  It is crucial that next steps are properly considered.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

1 minute ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Neither I, nor Boris, mentioned anything that you raise in your post.

I just think that if a PM recognises an issue, the natural next step is to articulate how he plans to resolve it. It doesn’t necessarily matter what the varying aims of the protestors are at this point, as I simply want to know what Boris plans to do about a problem that he himself has identified. Only then can I judge his response, but until then I’ll assume he plans to do nothing about it.

So you want somebody to do something about something, having no idea what the something is they want him to solve as the something hasn't been outlined by those protesting .

Brill

[DarkFruitsRam7]

4 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Not sure how you might reasonably expect a stream of off-the-shelf policies/strategies to quickly fix this issue.  It is crucial that next steps are properly considered.

A fair point, but an indication that he’s willing to at least do something would help slightly. He made no mention of any future action, which I found surprising.

2 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

So you want somebody to do something about something, having no idea what the something is they want him to solve as the something hasn't been outlined by those protesting .

Brill

No. He should do something about the specific issues that he identified in his speech. He’s not going to be able to please every single protestor, and nor should he aim to.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

2 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

A fair point, but an indication that he’s willing to at least do something would help slightly. He made no mention of any future action, which I found surprising.

No. He should do something about the specific issues that he identified in his speech. He’s not going to be able to please every single protestor, and nor should he aim to.

So would you rather he expanded further without the relevant consultation as indicated in your post, or wait thereby preventing further issues. I've heard that many things from that many people over four days.

As the saying goes you can't please every protestor all of the time, but if you don't do enough to please enough of them you have people protesting with a differing agenda for months.

[ramit]

2 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

A statement from Boris: 

The first few seconds made me groan because it gave off the impression that the protests in the UK are solely based on George Floyd's death, but he does seem to move away from that notion as the statement progresses. He's right in recognising that we've come a long way in recent decades, and I'm especially glad (and surprised) that he acknowledges that institutional racism (or discrimination, or difficulties, whatever you want to call it) does still linger.

Unfortunately, he makes no mention of how he plans to tackle those issues. Surely that was the natural next step?

The whole thing made me groan.  Warning the BAME community of it's susceptibility to being laid low by the virus after the mass protests rings hollow to me.  He knew this was coming, but chose to be reactive instead of proactive and warn about the danger to blacks and Asians beforehand and appeal to them not to gather in tight groups.  Do folks really think that would have gone down so badly?  It would have been leadership.

Congratulating himself for leading the most inclusive government to date, to show how far from racism he and his party is, made me laugh.  Conservatives are not named conservatives out of the blue, they stick to the old ways, they are a white man's club and it's both sad and hilarious to witness those of other origins joining them in the vain hope that their time will eventually arrive to lead and have real power, like some delusional Russian Jew in the Nazi party.

[Andicis]

1 hour ago, ramit said:

Conservatives are not named conservatives out of the blue, they stick to the old ways, they are a white man's club and it's both sad and hilarious to witness those of other origins joining them in the vain hope that their time will eventually arrive to lead and have real power, like some delusional Russian Jew in the Nazi party.

Wow. What an incredibly poor take this is. 

[Anon]

3 hours ago, Andicis said:

Wow. What an incredibly poor take this is. 

Now now, Ramit obviously knows what is best for minorities. He has every right to be angry if they don't behave exactly how he wants them to.