Off TopicAre you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
(
rob, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
While I've got very serious concerns about the shooting of a man who was unarmed at that exact instantIt's fucking difficult to occupy any kind of moral high ground when the only reason you are unarmed is becuase you've just thrown your gun out of the car.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:02,
4 replies,
latest was 11 years ago)
*dribble*www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ROVER-SD1-V-PLAS-EFI-3500cc-1985-AUTO-GOLD-AC-with-nice-reg-number-/321279800260?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item4acdc4b3c4
(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:03,
Reply)
It's right up your street mate, it's even in Jewish Gold.Plus, chocolate interior!
*bongle*
(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:07,
Reply)
Thought you might, but you hadn't posted yet.Fucking sexy, isn't it.
(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:11,
Reply)
Lovely.I really want this:
www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-E24-M635-CSi-M6-/121159314334?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item1c35a86b9e
(
Fucking hell Jeff I am not a robot, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:17,
Reply)
This one pleasewww.ebay.co.uk/itm/Aston-Martin-DB4-Series-IV-/161143475485
(
sporters I’m sincerely gratitude to you, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:19,
Reply)
That is lovely, old BMWs love to rust. I'd like an E28 M535, myself.(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:19,
Reply)
How are you getting on with your Vulva?(
Fucking hell Jeff I am not a robot, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:21,
Reply)
it looks like the box that my niece's scooter came in at christmas(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:21,
Reply)
bmw's are horrible cars anywaymostly driven by cunts. but that one is particularly boxy and grim.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:39,
Reply)
^ THIS ^i don't know much about him, but it doesn't look as if we lost the cure for AIDS or cancer here...
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:04,
Reply)
No, but we lost something here.(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:06,
Reply)
It isn't really a question of whether the little scrote occupied any kind of moral ground, more the fact that this was found to be a lawful killing.Taken in the context of policemen never having being held accountable for any deaths at their hands.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:06,
Reply)
Shut up. Are YOU going to be a firearms policeman in Tottenham?
Exactly.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:07, Reply)
I have no desire to kill black people with impunity.(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:08,
Reply)
blah blah blahbloo bloo bloo
The Police less successful zzzzzzzzzzzzz
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:11, Reply)
Just 'cos you caught the wrong end of a Peeler's cudgel at your last sab meet.(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:08,
Reply)
I have concerns about that.It should be looked at. But, we don't know the details, the court did, and the court found it to be lawful.
It could be they just shot an unarmed man for no reason.
Or, it could be that they knew he was armed (which was true) and they didn't know he had just thrown the gun away (who knows) and they were nervous and when he went to his pocket to get his phone they thought he was going for a gun and shot him (which is the court's basic finding)
Moral high ground was not the right way for me to put it, I more meant that if you are carrying a gun and the police know you're carrying a gun, then you can't exactly take being shot as a surprising outcome.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:11,
Reply)
plus you are a known troublemaker - ok this by itself isn't enough to warrant being shot, but it is an explanation as to why the police were more nervoushe wasn't exactly an innocent 6 year old boy
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:14,
Reply)
The court heard the evidence from several police officers who, of course, closed ranks and supported one another.The jury was always likely to trust the word of one or more police officers.
I probably would too.
Yes Duggan was a wrong'un, but that doesn't mean the policeman with the gun was whiter than white.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:23,
Reply)
A jury of Londoners said he was lawfully killed on the evidence. They probably wish they had your namby pamby wishy washy wavy gravy assumptions to help them.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:28, Reply)
They had a lot of conflicting evidence to sort through though. It certainly wasn't as open and shut as that.(
GeordieJay Bummers are deaf, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:30,
Reply)
The court heard evidence from a lot of people, not just the policeI didn't say they were angels. I didn't say they didn't make a mistake. They shot a man who was at the time, unarmed.
What matters, as to whether it's lawful, is whether it was reasonable to presume he was armed, thus making any gesture such as reaching inside a jacket, a potential threat.
You're the police. You knew he started off with a gun. You didn't see him throw the gun. I don't think it's too unreasonable to assume he's probably still got a gun.
Edit: "who, of course, closed ranks and supported one another" ? You've got actual evidence of that? Who's making up things to suit their prejudices now?
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:30,
Reply)
or another gun in a different pocketor a mate with a gun. or a knife.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:31,
Reply)
That's not a knife.(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:00,
Reply)
allegedly.The shot through his chest was a bit haphazard though.
(
GeordieJay Bummers are deaf, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:06,
Reply)
He managed to throw it 30 feet over a wall and they still thought he was armed?(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:07,
Reply)
Plus he was using his phone just before he was shot and this also looked like a gun.What was he? Clint Eastend?
(
GeordieJay Bummers are deaf, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:11,
Reply)
well obviously, since they can't have seen itotherwise they'd have picked the fucking gun up and put it back in his hand, no? Assuming they are the corrupt executioners his lawyer claims they are.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:14,
Reply)
if you're carrying one gunhow is it beyond all possibility that you have another weapon somewhere about your person? more likely than someone who ISN'T carrying a gun anyway. again, more reason to make the police jittery.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:16,
Reply)
I'm not entirely comfortable with armed officers being 'jittery'(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:19,
Reply)
In which case you're not comfortable with anybody human being armed with anything other than flowers and poetry.Soldiers get "jittery".
(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:20,
Reply)
My nan gets jittery.I wouldn't give her a gun either.
(
GeordieJay Bummers are deaf, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:22,
Reply)
No, I am not comfortable with any human being armed.I'm not a big fan of killing.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:24,
Reply)
Well, unluckily for you, lots of humans are really rather fond of it.Luckily for you, there are people out there willing to try to stop people like them hurting people like you. Occasionally they get it wrong. They're human, it happens.
(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:26,
Reply)
Despite how it may appear to you, I'm actually in favour of the police and agree that they have an almost impossibly hard job.But there often needs to be more accountability for their actions - they're human too and will inevitably include that 'one bad apple' amongst their ranks occasionally.
cf. That thug Simon Harwood
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:31,
Reply)
See I don't necessarily disagreebut your position here seems to mostly be "I don't like guns, can't they police with kisses?" which is at best idealistic and at worst gayer than Jay up to his elbow in Quentin Crisp.
(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:33,
Reply)
But don't you think it's incredible that every single time someone has died directly at the hands of the policeit's turned out simply to be an unfortunate mistake that anyone could have made and not the fault of a cunt who enjoyed having the power to either smack people around or shoot them?
That doesn't strike you as at all unlikely?
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:33, Reply)
Police officers killed on duty since 1900 = 248Members of the public killed by police officers since 1990 = 1476
Number of police officers convicted of a criminal offence following a death in custody since 1990 = 0
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:39,
Reply)
See, that's just showing your predjudicesyou weren't at any of the 1476 hearings so you can't comment.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:40, Reply)
shame he wasn't at any of the 1476 shootings(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:41,
Reply)
Not saying it never happens, just that it's not the factory setting.(
Kroney, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:39,
Reply)
Not trueHarwood was found responsible for Ian Tomlinson's death. With de Menezes, the Met were found to be responsible for his death.
So in 2 out of the last 3 high profile police killings in London the police have been found to be responsible. I don't think that represents a particularly insitutionally biased justice system, myself.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:44,
Reply)
No one has been convicted for either of those deaths though, have they?And in both cases there were a lot of lies or misinformation put out by the police.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:49,
Reply)
Harwood was tried for manslaugterand acquitted*. Unless you are telling me the entire UK justice system is prejudiced?
I think there are complications in the Menezes case as to whether you actually CAN prosecute a firearms officer personally. His killing was effectively ruled unlawful and the Met forced to change practice.
*he was acquitted, as I am sure you know, because there is no reasonable way that he could have know his actions could result in Tomlinson's death. The bloke was brain damaged, had no balance, had alcohol related epilipsy and was also pissed at the time. He was discharged from the police because he was a thug. However that doesn't make him guilty of manslaugter.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:58,
Reply)
But when it happened lies were put out to the press straight away saying he was causing troubleand that the police had nothing to do with it. It was only because of a passer by who filmed it and passed the footage to a paper that anything actually happened.
If it hadn't been for that then that thug would still be working for the police.
The issue here is that there is seen to be, and I think because there is, absolutely no accountability for police officers who assault or kill members of the public or commit other miscarriages of justice.
The guy that covered up Hillsborough got to retire on his nice cushy pension and will never face any cesnure for what he did.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:04, Reply)
I'm not saying very bad police shit hasn't happened.since they have, though, in all the mentioned cases the police have eventually (very eventually in the case of Hillsborough) be forced into some degree of accountability and responsibility.
What I'm saying is that you've got no evidence that's what's happened in this case, and by making assumptions based on the past, your position is not really any more valid than Swipes or Stunned's.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:10,
Reply)
But I'm not saying that did happen in this case?I do find the jurys decision a bit strange, they agreed that Duggan didn't have a gun and that a number of officers were lying when they said he did, but they still think he was lawfully killed. So fine.
But the officers were said by a jury to be lying about a number of things, and yet nothing will happen about that.
Swipe says a few dead people are the price you pay for a safe society. I disagree that there should be as many dead people or at least where there are the police should be held accountable and not lie and spread misinformation which again they have done.
I don't feel the police are trustworthy and the facts of this case, regardless of the final outcome, just reinforce this view.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:16, Reply)
It's good to have you back, AlYou've been away too long.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:17,
Reply)
AND the cunts failed to catch the cunt who kicked off all those wing mirrors(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:20,
Reply)
THey did, but I totally busted a stiffy and nutted on all their mums faces and they let me go.(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:22, Reply)
Were they really found to be lying or just mistaken? (I know, you could lie about being mistaken)You know how these things basically work, though. The officers involved are instantly told to shut up, handed to their PCS rep/lawyer (which let's not forget, as hand-wringing lefties, we fight for them to have), are told to say absolutely nothing incriminating, and in the end to make a statement that he had a gun as far as they are concerned. Straight after the shooting, the police have to come out and say something, so out of lack of knowing what the fuck is going on rather than malicious lying I suspect, they say "the subject was believed to be armed" or some shit.
I don't like it, but I don't think it's anywhere as institutionally corrupt in this case as you seem to think. And the jury's decision is not whether they are honest upstanding chaps or if they couldn't remember what fucking colour their trousers are but only, really, if they had reasonable grounds to think he had a gun. and the jury felt they did. And frankly, from the little information we have, I don't see how you can argue that it's not reasonable to assume a man that definitely did have a gun and that you hadn't seen throw the gun away, might have a gun.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:29,
Reply)
But there were multiple witnesses, independant ones, who said that he clearly did not have a gunand that what he was holding was a phone. It was the police who said that there was no doubt in their mind that he was holding a gun and the one who pulled the trigger said he could see the barrel projecting through the sock.
The jury said they were certain that Duggan didn't have a gun, but still said the killing was lawful, so presumably they took the view of "he might have had another one".
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:41, Reply)
There was only one "independent" witness.The others were police or people in the car.
The one guy who was independent changed his story 3 times and was more than 100 yards away at the time, started off saying he was holding a gun, retracted and then said he was holding a phone.
With the jury/gun thing, that's not how it works at all. The jury are saying they are certain he had thrown the gun before he was shot. They AREN'T saying they believe the police knew he had thrown the gun. They've had days to look at the evidence. The police have to make a decision in an instant. To be a lawful killing there only had to be reason for the police to think he was going for a gun, and the jury's position was that he had chucked it but the police didn't know he had chucked it.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:46,
Reply)
Also, I'm not sure how else you think it would have come to light in the case of Harwood?It's not like there were a raft of police witnesses with any real understanding of what happened, and since he was a shit, he was hardly going to turn himself in, was he?
There are cunts in the police, and the police has at times been insititutionally cunty. Doesn't mean they always are, or that they automatically are being in this case.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:14,
Reply)
I know it doens't mean they always are cuntybut you should expect to be able to hold the police to a higher standard as it's their job to not be cunty and when they are cunty, they all cover each others backs and that does huge damage to society's relationship with the police.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:18, Reply)
surely it should be everybody's job not to be cunty?if there were no cunts, we wouldn't need police at all.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:21,
Reply)
agreedbut this is an inquest, not the police. it's a fucking big step from saying "the police in the past have been cunty and covered each other's backs" to "the crown and the justice system are instituationally corrupt" just because a verdict doesn't sit well with you.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:36,
Reply)
The crown and justice system aren't institutionally corrupt, but you can certainly feelthat the police could be with some justification.
If this was simply another sad case when the die happen to fall with the police then this wouldn't be the touchpaper it is likely to turn into, but the police have never been properly held to account and you can see how it is really starting to wrankle with people.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:43, Reply)
see, this is idealistif nobody were armed, that would be much better for everyone. unfortunately, there will always be plenty of armed people.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:27,
Reply)
so what would you recommend?1 - only people with nerves of steel, essentially psychopaths, join the police force? also they must have no emotions and no adrenalin.
2 - the police aren't armed, but the criminals are?
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:21,
Reply)
I would like to see the intelligence they had actually being used properlyand this situation not occurring at all. I would also like not to see lies being fed to press by the police immediately after these things occur.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:23, Reply)
I would like to see the intelligence they had actually being used properly - this applies to soooooo many people/situations
100% agreed, but there are always going to be rare exceptions, as this case was, where people will have to react quickly.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:25,
Reply)
But it wasn't a "rare exception" it was a botched operation.They appear to ahve stopped the car late despite knowing in advance that he was picking up the gun up. It appeared to be a fuck up form start to finish, particularly since one police officer nearly killed another one with a ricoheting bullet
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:27, Reply)
people make mistakes; until we have robocop doing the job, we are stuck with that riskI bet you've made loads of mistakes at work - who hasn't? unfortunately this one had very severe consequences. but I totally agree with badger: in today's society, armed police are a necessary evil, as you simply cannot expect them to deal with parts of today's society without being armed. when you think of how many things the police do, this is a very small percentage.
yes it's disturbing, but I think it's better than the alternative, as badger said much better than I am doing.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:29,
Reply)
There is quite a significant difference between making a mistake that involves ordering too many paperclipsor sending out a report with a typo in it, and shooting a man dead.
I do hope you can see that.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:30, Reply)
of course i canbut from time to time, in a world where we are policed by human beings, mistakes are going to be made. occasionally those mistakes will have grave consequences. i'm not saying it's ok or right, but I can't think of a better alternative, until tangles is king of the world and we all live in one gigantic happy yurt.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:32,
Reply)
www.b3ta.com/questions/offtopic/post2182788
The better alternative is that when people die an open and thorough investigation is carried out and the police don't close ranks and lie.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:34, Reply)
that is your assumptionthat they are closing ranks and lying. you weren't there, and you weren't at the hearing...
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:38,
Reply)
5.9.83.79/questions/offtopic/post2182803
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:39,
Reply)
so, what's your alternative?personally I think there are massive flaws, but it's still as good as it's going to get in a world where some people are happy to rob and maim and terrorise and rape and murder others.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:41,
Reply)
What Al said"The better alternative is that when people die an open and thorough investigation is carried out and the police don't close ranks and lie."
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:42,
Reply)
rightso what kind of investigation do you want to see, other than a british court case, british justice being the model justice system in many countries around the world?
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:44,
Reply)
I'd like to see that in every case, but it isn't.I'm not saying the situation didn't warrant the officers shooting him, they may well have done, but as soon as it happened the police lied to the press stating that he had opened fire on them first, which they knew not to be the case. But nobody got censured for that.
In the case of Ian Tomlinson it was only because a member of the public passed their evidence to a newspaper that an officer was investigated, and despite being found guilty of unlawfully killing a man, the chap was discharged.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:48, Reply)
The alternative is to have actual accountability to those that we give huge power toif you are a police officer you should be held to a much higher standard and there should be a truly independent investigatory body to look at any officers when there is suspicion of them being involved in the death of a member of the public.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:43, Reply)
let's not forget that they do an often dangerous job, and get paid fuck-allwho would do the job with that hanging over them as well?
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:44,
Reply)
They get paid very fucking welland nobody forces them to do that job.
They have so much power they ought to be held accountable.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:49, Reply)
i disagreeI don't think police or teachers or nurses get paid anywhere near enough
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:54,
Reply)
They could be paid more, they could stop trying to steal their pensionsbut they are not paid badly.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:58, Reply)
I'm all for paying public servants properly.You should know that.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:50,
Reply)
I'm with Al hereThe police have a pretty solid track record of closing ranks, why do you think there's never been a successful prosecution for coppers where people have 'fallen down the station stairs' etc?
They lie, they collude and they close ranks.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:42, Reply)
wellknown scottish skaghead and druggie in hating police shocker(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:43,
Reply)
nothing to do with thatBut this is yet another incident of the coppers doing something demonstrably wrong and where someone died as a result. And once again, they get away with it.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:46, Reply)
you were gurning too much for that to be audible(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:47,
Reply)
that's just not correct. Some arsehole was driving around the city WE live in with a firearm.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:49, Reply)
SMASH THE SYSTEM MAN!KILL THE PIGS! FREE DRUGS FOR ALL BABYGURLZ!
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:51,
Reply)
it's actually quite good fun*dances to obscure record*
*wanks self off with hamster*
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:55,
Reply)
he was no threat to the coppersThey made a mistake, a man died a violent death, there should be someone held accountable and that person should be punished.
I really don't see how you can argue against that.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:57, Reply)
It's OK, he wouldn't have been able to shoot Dozerall the DPM and mirror finish would have rendered him a hidden target.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:51,
Reply)
Regrettable incident blah blah. The individual copper though had reasonable suspicion that the lad was armed, which he was. Duggan got OUT of the car after a hard stop and started moving his arms about.
I am surprised he was only shot twice.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:36, Reply)
It's pretty fucking difficult to not be jitterywhen you know you are trying to stop someone who you knew had a gun when you started following him.
The best solution is no armed officers. But that is only possible if you have no armed criminals. Just thank fuck we live in a society where this was at least investigated and put before a jury.
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:26,
Reply)
I think investigated is the wrong wordThat implies it started with no preconceptions, and you know fine well that anyone investigating this would be looking for every reason not to find cause for this to be concluded as a mistake.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:28, Reply)
I think we've all got prejudices about thisso none of us are qualified to know how well, or not, it was investigated. The fact remains that it was investigated and it was put before a jury. Prejudice about the UK legal system notwithstanding, that's what should have happened and what did happen
(
the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:36,
Reply)
The police officers involved weren't interviewed under caution though, were they?The investigation was made by fellow officers, who aren't exactly well known for finding fault with one another.
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:33,
Reply)
^^^Clearly doesn't know any coppers. Professional Standards Division, as any cop will tell you, are a shower of tossers who would sell their own granny for a conviction.
(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:52, Reply)
I'm sure that helps them to do their job properly.(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:54,
Reply)
But by taking that logic you start saying "well, we don't know they don't have a gun so we should assume they do and just shoot everyone"(, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:22, Reply)
it depends where they are Tottenham? fine. hull? fine. stockport? fine. Birmingham? fine. Milton Keynes? fine (well, not between 8 and 11pm tonight).
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:23,
Reply)
Double time if they also have a backpack.(
GeordieJay Bummers are deaf, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:23,
Reply)
Remember the double tapwww.youtube.com/watch?v=QDYEG38P_yU
(
tangledupinblue hairy badge with moving eyes, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:10,
Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread