Should Kettling Be Allowed By Police

OhNoYouDidn't

Kettling is in the news as the British Government are under pressure to defend the use of the tactic (described below) at the student protests recently:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettling

Kettling, also known as containment or corralling,[1] is a police tactic for the management of large crowds during demonstrations or protests. It involves the formation of large cordons of police officers who then move to contain a crowd within a limited area. Protesters are left only one choice of exit, determined by the police, or are completely prevented from leaving. Detainees can be denied access to food, water and toilet facilities for a long period.[2] Sometimes arrests are made.

I think its a particularly moody tactic as everyone in a given area, whether protesting or not, peacefully or not, is contained, often for days, with no access to food, water or toilets, long after the situation is contained.

Also we have seen use like this:

Kettling was used once again during the 2009 G-20 London summit protests outside the Bank of England, as part of the police Territorial Support Group's "Operation Glencoe".[2] When police started to allow protesters to leave the kettle, they were photographed by Forward Intelligence Teams and told to give their names and addresses (which they are legally not required to do). Some refused to do so and were forced back into the kettle by police

I liked Ian Hislops comment on it that what the Met seem to have forgotten is that kettles boil....

What sayeth the group?

seamus

I don't see any particular problem with police cordons maintaining control over crowds of protestors by herding them into one particular area. Properly confining them though with no exit path can only lead to injuries and an escalation of tension. Likewise for constantly pushing them back. The aim should be to define an area where the protestors can stay and restrict movement out of that area except by a single defined path directly out of the area.

Ideally you would order them in such a way that their exit path does not make it easy to get back to where they are and are therefore more likely to disperse.

I would be surprised in any case if protestors have been confined "for days".

OhNoYouDidn't

seamus wrote: »

I don't see any particular problem with police cordons maintaining control over crowds of protestors by herding them into one particular area. Properly confining them though with no exit path can only lead to injuries and an escalation of tension. Likewise for constantly pushing them back. The aim should be to define an area where the protestors can stay and restrict movement out of that area except by a single defined path directly out of the area.

Ideally you would order them in such a way that their exit path does not make it easy to get back to where they are and are therefore more likely to disperse.

I would be surprised in any case if protestors have been confined "for days".

All protesters Seamus?

senordingdong

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I liked Ian Hislops comment on it that what the Met seem to have forgotten is that kettles boil....

What sayeth the group?

Maybe that's half the point.

Focus them into a certain containable area, then allow the crowd to boil and therefore, burn out quicker.

Fo Real

I think it's a great tactic to contain crowds when they're getting too rowdy.

On a related note, Iran has summoned the British ambassador to Tehran to discuss the British police's "violent and inhumane" policing tactics during the recent student protests. source. A bit rich coming from the world's number one sponsors of terrorism. Not to mention Iran's handling of the Green Revolution protests last year over the rigged elections. They weren't too kind to their own students then.

seamus

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

All protesters Seamus?

All unplanned/secret/potentially troublesom protests. Play it by ear.

If you're planning a peaceful protest, you ring up the Gardai and tell them to expect X amount of people going from A to B before settling at B for a couple of hours. That way the Gardai will arrange for closed streets, will practically escort you to your destination and will put a very helpful barrier at your destination to designate the protest area.

On the other hand, if a few hundred people just turn up somewhere without adequate notice, then the Gardai will have to take extraordinary measures to ensure minimum disruption to the rest of the population.

Bill2673

How do you seperate the "good" protesters from the "bad" protesters from the people who happen to be walking down the street at the same time?

Incidentally, from what I read, in the UK they kettled off OAPs and kids as well as protesters for several hours.....

The difficulty now is that the term kettling is such a dirty word, that even if they try to do it in a fairer way, it will still be seen as a huge violation of human rights....

Fratton Fred

I fail to see what the problem is.

A peaceful demonstration is rarely kettled, the trouble is "rent a mob" turn up to a lot of demos these days with the sole intention of causing trouble.

I don't really see what else a copper is.supposed to do.

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I fail to see what the problem is.

A peaceful demonstration is rarely kettled, the trouble is "rent a mob" turn up to a lot of demos these days with the sole intention of causing trouble.

I don't really see what else a copper is.supposed to do.

1: Make a distinction between peaceful protesters, not so peaceful protesters and people out shopping

2: Let people leave if they want to.

Neither appear to be happening with the Met.

Spudmonkey

I think yes.

The riots in London and Greece really show the destruction that can result from public demonstrations. It may well be only small factions causing this but those who attend these rallies should be aware that there are always going to be trouble makers. It is very hard it control a crowd of 20-50 thousand and isolate those who are peaceful from the trouble makers. The onus should be on the protesters every bit as much as the police.

OhNoYouDidn't

seamus wrote: »

All unplanned/secret/potentially troublesom protests. Play it by ear.

If you're planning a peaceful protest, you ring up the Gardai and tell them to expect X amount of people going from A to B before settling at B for a couple of hours. That way the Gardai will arrange for closed streets, will practically escort you to your destination and will put a very helpful barrier at your destination to designate the protest area.

On the other hand, if a few hundred people just turn up somewhere without adequate notice, then the Gardai will have to take extraordinary measures to ensure minimum disruption to the rest of the population.

But thats exactly what the students did...

The issue here was when it kicked off, every man, woman and child in the area of the protest was kettled and detained against their will, regardless of what their involvement was.

Is that a: legal, b: acceptible or c: even necessary from a policing point of view?

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

1: Make a distinction between peaceful protesters, not so peaceful protesters and people out shopping

2: Let people leave if they want to.

Neither appear to be happening with the Met.

And how are they supposed to do this, conduct exit interviews?

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

But thats exactly what the students did...

The issue here was when it kicked off, every man woman and child in the area of the protest was kettled and detained against their will, regardless of what their involvement was.

Is that a: legal, b: acceptible or c: even necessary from a policing point of view?

A yes
B unfortunately yes
C unfortunately yes.

Bill2673

Fratton Fred wrote: »

A yes
B unfortunately yes
C unfortunately yes.

what you've got there is a matter of opinion.

They cordoned off a group of 11 year old kids who were coming out of a shop with a bunch of rioting and agitated protesters. The kids were stuck there for several hours.

I don't think thats acceptable.

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

And how are they supposed to do this, conduct exit interviews?

Which they do apparantly.

The point being, surely they should be doing entry interviews? Or at least use common sense and allow the clearly not involved go quickly. Its stretching credulity that a group of 11 year olds needed to be detained for 9 hours.

Maybe you think its acceptible for OAP's and schoolkids to be detained for hours on end by the police and forced to run a gauntlet when they are finally allowed leave, but I don't. Its a crude and clumsy tactic that involves too many innocents and creates a situation that is usually more volatile than the one they are attempting to contain. And its very dubious from a basic human rights perspective.

Fratton Fred

I think we should define what is strategy and what are tactics.

Kettling is a strategy the met use that works, but sometimes the tactics and operations need improving.

Just because you claim a group of 11 were hemmed in for several hours (do you have a link by the way) doesn't mean the overall strategy is wrong.

Out of the protesters there were a minority (but a minority that numbered hundreds if not thousands) that were bell bent on violence. You can't have them running around as a group causing chaos.

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I think we should define what is strategy and what are tactics.

Kettling is a strategy the met use that works, but sometimes the tactics and operations need improving.

Just because you claim a group of 11 were hemmed in for several hours (do you have a link by the way) doesn't mean the overall strategy is wrong.

Out of the protesters there were a minority (but a minority that numbered hundreds if not thousands) that were bell bent on violence. You can't have them running around as a group causing chaos.

Well of course it 'works'. If you refuse to let 10,000 people move for an afternoon, the 8,000 protesters in that number can't protest and the 80 can't misbehave. The question is whether its an appropriate strategy, especially considering, as you say, the tactical interpretation on the ground leaves a lot to be desired.

Close every pub and there will be no trouble in a town centre at midnight. Is that a proportionate response?

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Well of course it 'works'. If you refuse to let 10,000 people move for an afternoon, the 8,000 protesters in that number can't protest and the 80 can't misbehave. The question is whether its an appropriate strategy, especially considering, as you say, the tactical interpretation on the ground leaves a lot to be desired.

Close every pub and there will be no trouble in a town centre at midnight. Is that a proportionate response?

what about the other 1920?

At the first protest the police were very low key and there was chaos, or would you prefer that.

I've been on several marches and I have to hand it to the Met, they are pretty good at spotting who is and who isn't a trouble maker.

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

what about the other 1920?

Ehh, thats my point.... Do the state have the right to trample on that many peoples basic right to go about their business to stop a small number of people potentially breaking the law?

Fratton Fred wrote: »

At the first protest the police were very low key and there was chaos, or would you prefer that.

They are my choices are they? Kettling or carnage?

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I've been on several marches and I have to hand it to the Met, they are pretty good at spotting who is and who isn't a trouble maker.

Like this guy here....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWFz_hoKo3Q

Mr. Presentable

No problem with kettling.

If you are not part of the protest stay away.

You can tell bad protesters because they cover their faces.

Me? I'd make it an arrestable offense to wear a hood and/or conceal your face when in a protest or march. Also, I think in the recent case in London they ought to have used water cannon on the protestors prior to kettling them.

Turner

Why dont the peaceful protesters target and deal with the trouble makers and restore peace to their so called "peaceful protest"

OhNoYouDidn't

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

No problem with kettling.

If you are not part of the protest stay away.

You can tell bad protesters because they cover their faces.

Me? I'd make it an arrestable offense to wear a hood and/or conceal your face when in a protest or march. Also, I think in the recent case in London they ought to have used water cannon on the protestors prior to kettling them.

Are you including the 11 year old kids and grannies out shopping in that? :rolleyes:

silverharp

The Met did some work on this they did come to the conclusion that police in Judge Dredd gear does wind people up. at some events they used a softer approach and it seemed to have a positive effect. If someone is being violent tazers etc are fine in my book , if anything the police look too restrained at times, once someone is throwing missiles they ought to be arrested if possible, charged and heavily fined.

Mr. Presentable

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are you including the 11 year old kids and grannies out shopping in that? :rolleyes:

There was a request previously on the thread for substantiation, but as there has been none I can only presume this is a red herring.

OhNoYouDidn't

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

There was a request previously on the thread for substantiation, but as there has been none I can only presume this is a red herring.

Three from the first page of google when you search London Children Kettling.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-new-battle-lines-of-protest-2144069.html

http://www.eastlondonlines.co.uk/2010/11/local-school-children-caught-in-police-kettling-manoeuvre/

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/25/london-police-brutal.html

Cannibal Ox

When the British police get all dressed up for a party, they sure as hell don't miss an opportunity for a dance. What ever about violent protestors, the police will use their battons, will use their horses, and will take photos and details of everyone they can possibly land their eyes on given the opportunity. You confine several hundred geared up police and several thousand protestors outside in the freezing cold, staring each other down for hours on end, with limited access to food and toilets, and **** is going to go down. Kettles always boil.

Mr. Presentable

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Three from the first page of google when you search London Children Kettling.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/the-new-battle-lines-of-protest-2144069.html

http://www.eastlondonlines.co.uk/2010/11/local-school-children-caught-in-police-kettling-manoeuvre/

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/25/london-police-brutal.html

With all due respect, the boingboing link is not a reliable source - it's some sort of blog. There is no mention in the other two of innocent bystanders being caught up in the crowd control. They were (albeit very young - where were their parents) protestors and as such should be treated accordingly.

I am not in favour of children being mistreated in any way, but there are practical reasons why these young protesters don't get special treatment.

So I stand by my opinion that the police are correct in their actions, regardless of the age of a small number of the protesters, and regardless of the possibility some of the protesters are pregnant. If you don't want to be regarded as one of the mob, stay out of the mob.

In your OP you asked for opinions on the police action of kettling. Are you only interested in ones that agree with your own?

karma_

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

With all due respect, the boingboing link is not a reliable source - it's some sort of blog. There is no mention in the other two of innocent bystanders being caught up in the crowd control. They were (albeit very young - where were their parents) protestors and as such should be treated accordingly.

I am not in favour of children being mistreated in any way, but there are practical reasons why these young protesters don't get special treatment.

So I stand by my opinion that the police are correct in their actions, regardless of the age of a small number of the protesters, and regardless of the possibility some of the protesters are pregnant. If you don't want to be regarded as one of the mob, stay out of the mob.

In your OP you asked for opinions on the police action of kettling. Are you only interested in ones that agree with your own?

Well, no matter what the police do, no matter how underhanded and unfair their tactics there will always be a minority out there who will support them unwaveringly and with conviction, does not matter what they do, they will always be right in their action.

Fratton Fred

karma_ wrote: »

Well, no matter what the police do, no matter how underhanded and unfair their tactics there will always be a minority out there who will support them unwaveringly and with conviction, does not matter what they do, they will always be right in their action.

Errr, the opposite is also true, if not moreso.

Mr. Presentable

karma_ wrote: »

Well, no matter what the police do, no matter how underhanded and unfair their tactics there will always be a minority out there who will support them unwaveringly and with conviction, does not matter what they do, they will always be right in their action.

That's true, as it is with anything. There are always people so up to the neck in an opinion they can't see beyond it.

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Errr, the opposite is also true, if not moreso.

Thats the standard right wing kneww jerk reaction. Anyone who questions the tactics the police use in a situation is actually anti-police and trying to undermine them.

My swiss. No-one has disputed the Mets right and obligation to deal with rioters. People are questioning is the tactic of rounding up large groups of people who have broken no law and detaining them for a long period. The manifestation of that is pregnant women, OAP's and children kept against their will without food, water and toilets in sub zero temperatures.

Does a diabetic have to go into a coma or the likes before this registers with you?

OhNoYouDidn't

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

With all due respect, the boingboing link is not a reliable source - it's some sort of blog. There is no mention in the other two of innocent bystanders being caught up in the crowd control. They were (albeit very young - where were their parents) protestors and as such should be treated accordingly.

And 'accordingly' is held against their will for 6 or 7 hours in freezing cold with no access to food or water despite having broken no law? Seriously?

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

I am not in favour of children being mistreated in any way, but there are practical reasons why these young protesters don't get special treatment.

Which are?

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

So I stand by my opinion that the police are correct in their actions, regardless of the age of a small number of the protesters, and regardless of the possibility some of the protesters are pregnant. If you don't want to be regarded as one of the mob, stay out of the mob.

Will you get a grip. The whole point is that the police rounded people up. EVERYONE on a given street is corralled, thats the whole point of the excercise. Those who were not part of the 'mob' ended up there as a result of the police action.

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

In your OP you asked for opinions on the police action of kettling. Are you only interested in ones that agree with your own?

No, I'm intetrested to read other opinions on the matter. So far the response has simply been 'tough' and I'm not buying that.

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Thats the standard right wing kneww jerk reaction. Anyone who questions the tactics the police use in a situation is actually anti-police and trying to undermine them.

My swiss. No-one has disputed the Mets right and obligation to deal with rioters. People are questioning is the tactic of rounding up large groups of people who have broken no law and detaining them for a long period. The manifestation of that is pregnant women, OAP's and children kept against their will without food, water and toilets in sub zero temperatures.

Does a diabetic have to go into a coma or the likes before this registers with you?

you've never been on a demo have you?

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

you've never been on a demo have you?

Of course I have.

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Of course I have.

So you've seen first hand the anarchists and the way they work? Or the direct action wing if the SWP?

Or even Kettling first hand?

How many diabetic people passed out in the demo, or pregnant women had difficulties?

The Met are very good at policing these things and they are very quick to get needy people out. If you are a 16 year old and fit and healthy, then tough, your inconvenience is less important than keeping the nutters from running riot. I think you'll find a lot of the organisers agree with this as well.

Yep, there are a lot of nasty bastards in the Met, but did see the live pictures of a line of copper, facing off to hundreds of demonstrators throwing.g things at them? That would make me pretty Damned nasty tbh.

karma_

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So you've seen first hand the anarchists and the way they work? Or the direct action wing if the SWP?

Or even Kettling first hand?

How many diabetic people passed out in the demo, or pregnant women had difficulties?

The Met are very good at policing these things and they are very quick to get needy people out. If you are a 16 year old and fit and healthy, then tough, your inconvenience is less important than keeping the nutters from running riot. I think you'll find a lot of the organisers agree with this as well.

Yep, there are a lot of nasty bastards in the Met, but did see the live pictures of a line of copper, facing off to hundreds of demonstrators throwing.g things at them? That would make me pretty Damned nasty tbh.

What kind of argument is that, essentially saying that you cannot oppose kettling unless you have been kettled. Have you been kettled? is that a prerequisite to having a pro-kettling point of view? I could almost guarantee that you have never been kettled and I'd also doubt very much if you have ever been within a mile of a protest of any kind.

BlaasForRafa

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Thats the standard right wing kneww jerk reaction. Anyone who questions the tactics the police use in a situation is actually anti-police and trying to undermine them.

My swiss. No-one has disputed the Mets right and obligation to deal with rioters. People are questioning is the tactic of rounding up large groups of people who have broken no law and detaining them for a long period. The manifestation of that is pregnant women, OAP's and children kept against their will without food, water and toilets in sub zero temperatures.

Does a diabetic have to go into a coma or the likes before this registers with you?

See this is a problem I have with kettling. I have zero problem with the police smacking around rioters but the way kettling is being used seems to be pretty indiscriminate. Herding thousands of people into a small area with little access to food, water and sanitary facilities is eventually going to lead to an unfortunate incident

There has to be a more efficient way of seperating the troublemakers from the innocent protestors and passers-by.

OhNoYouDidn't

Fred, Presentable,

Let me put a hypcothetical situation to you. Yourselves and your partners are out of a Saturday afternoon on Grafton St doing a bit of shopping and all that jazz, popular this time of year.

You are in, say, Brown Thomas and have a coffee and a sandwich afterwards. Unbeknown to you, 20 protesters are outside chanting about something or other. Fur, makeup tested on piglets, them selling blood diamonds, the owner is a scientologist. Who knows. As you walk out into the street, every single person on lower Grafton St, including you, is corralled by the Gardaí and are not allowed leave. 500 people, in the freezing cold for 6 hours with no food, water, access to medication if required or sanitation. Before you leave you are manhandled, photographed and made give your details.

Are you honestly going to tell me you would stand there for 6 hours and reassure the ladyfriend that its grand, these protesters might have been disruptive and you support the police's right to detain you without charge, in the cold, for that length of time in the public interest? Would. You. Fcuk.

Sand

Fred, Presentable,

Let me put a hypcothetical situation to you. Yourselves and your partners are out of a Saturday afternoon on Grafton St doing a bit of shopping and all that jazz, popular this time of year.

You are in, say, Brown Thomas and have a coffee and a sandwich afterwards. Unbeknown to you, 20 protesters are outside chanting about something or other. Fur, makeup tested on piglets, them selling blood diamonds, the owner is a scientologist. Who knows. As you walk out into the street, every single person on lower Grafton St, including you, is corralled by the Gardaí and are not allowed leave. 500 people, in the freezing cold for 6 hours with no food, water, access to medication if required or sanitation. Before you leave you are manhandled, photographed and made give your details.

Are you honestly going to tell me you would stand there for 6 hours and reassure the ladyfriend that its grand, these protesters might have been disruptive and you support the police's right to detain you without charge, in the cold, for that length of time in the public interest? Would. You. Fcuk.

If protests were unpoliced, people would moan. If they are policed, people moan.

Any large gathering of people requires policing - being on a protest doesnt grant the protestors rights that exceed the rights of all other people to personal safety and protection of their property. Containment is a strategy the police have reached in light of experience with policing protests and large gatherings - occassions where they are often heavily outnumbered.

Given a choice between policing the protests or not policing them, I believe policing them is the lesser evil - even if it inconveniences the protestors.

LeixlipRed

The Gardai are completely incompetent. So it's a moot point.

OhNoYouDidn't

Sand wrote: »

Given a choice between policing the protests or not policing them, I believe policing them is the lesser evil - even if it inconveniences the protestors.

I think you have missed the point. The issue here is whether the particular tactic is acceptable or not, not the concept of policing protest marches.

It isn't a zero sum

Spudmonkey

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Thats the standard right wing kneww jerk reaction. Anyone who questions the tactics the police use in a situation is actually anti-police and trying to undermine them.

My swiss. No-one has disputed the Mets right and obligation to deal with rioters. People are questioning is the tactic of rounding up large groups of people who have broken no law and detaining them for a long period. The manifestation of that is pregnant women, OAP's and children kept against their will without food, water and toilets in sub zero temperatures.

Does a diabetic have to go into a coma or the likes before this registers with you?

Seems like an overblown example to suit your own argument.

People have to take responsibility for their own actions. With the way protests can escalate to violent proportions, parents should take responsibility for their kids, as should the elderly and pregnant women. If something is going on and you don't want to be corralled, then be somewhere else.

A: Lets leave the Gardaí out of this for once... This is about the kettling practice in Britain.*

B: This debate was going great, lets not start making it personal.

*As far as I know, this is not a tactic used in Ireland... yet


/Mod hat off:

Is it not against the law to confine minors without telling their legal guardians? I don't get how they can hold minors (any number) in this way.

Sand

I think you have missed the point. The issue here is whether the particular tactic is acceptable or not, not the concept of policing protest marches.

It isn't a zero sum

I believe it is you who have missed the point. The police have a responsibility to maintain law and order and protect the safety of the wider public. Containment is a strategy they have pursued based on their experience of policing protests which can and have turned violent - its not without tradeoffs but there are no easy answers when it comes to policing large groups. Away crowds at football games are often prevented from leaving at the same time as the home fans where the police believe theres a risk of clashes between rival groups.

Sure, containment is inconvenient for the protestors but If protestors believe it is illegal they ought to test it in a court case - I think theyll find that internet law is different to real law.

Sand

Sand wrote: »

I believe it is you who have missed the point. The police have a responsibility to maintain law and order and protect the safety of the wider public. Containment is a strategy they have pursued based on their experience of policing protests which can and have turned violent - its not without tradeoffs but there are no easy answers when it comes to policing large groups. Away crowds at football games are often prevented from leaving at the same time as the home fans where the police believe theres a risk of clashes between rival groups.

Sure, containment is inconvenient for the protestors but If protestors believe it is illegal they ought to test it in a court case - I think theyll find that internet law is different to real law.

Sorry sand. But the title of the thread is "Should Kettling Be Allowed By Police". By saying, "If protests were unpoliced, people would moan. If they are policed, people moan." and "The police have a responsibility to maintain law and order and protect the safety of the wider public.", you are using a strawman argument. And have missed the point of this thread.

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Fred, Presentable,

Let me put a hypcothetical situation to you. Yourselves and your partners are out of a Saturday afternoon on Grafton St doing a bit of shopping and all that jazz, popular this time of year.

You are in, say, Brown Thomas and have a coffee and a sandwich afterwards. Unbeknown to you, 20 protesters are outside chanting about something or other. Fur, makeup tested on piglets, them selling blood diamonds, the owner is a scientologist. Who knows. As you walk out into the street, every single person on lower Grafton St, including you, is corralled by the Gardaí and are not allowed leave. 500 people, in the freezing cold for 6 hours with no food, water, access to medication if required or sanitation. Before you leave you are manhandled, photographed and made give your details.

Are you honestly going to tell me you would stand there for 6 hours and reassure the ladyfriend that its grand, these protesters might have been disruptive and you support the police's right to detain you without charge, in the cold, for that length of time in the public interest? Would. You. Fcuk.

But we're not talking about a few people protesting in a shopping street, this is about tens of thousands of people protesting with several hundred determined to start a riot. Your scenario is miles off reality.

Fratton Fred

karma_ wrote: »

What kind of argument is that, essentially saying that you cannot oppose kettling unless you have been kettled. Have you been kettled? is that a prerequisite to having a pro-kettling point of view? I could almost guarantee that you have never been kettled and I'd also doubt very much if you have ever been within a mile of a protest of any kind.

I haven't been kettled, no. But I was at the CND rallies in the mid eighties and the anti apartheid rally held to commemorate Nelson Mandela's 25th anniversary in prison. At the latter, I was on the verge of joining the SWP but I had a reality.check that day.

I was also present at several "bash the rich demos" and witnessed the poll tax riots.

I've been there, seen it, done it and even bought.the tee shirt.thank you.

Fratton Fred

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I haven't been kettled, no. But I was at the CND rallies in the mid eighties and the anti apartheid rally held to commemorate Nelson Mandela's 25th anniversary in prison. At the latter, I was on the verge of joining the SWP but I had a reality.check that day.

I was also present at several "bash the rich demos" and witnessed the poll tax riots.

I've been there, seen it, done it and even bought.the tee shirt.thank you.

How capitalist of you :pac:

Fratton Fred

Papa Smut wrote: »

How capitalist of you :pac:

It was a fare trade not for profit meet free tee shirt!

Sand

Papa Smut wrote: »

Sorry sand. But the title of the thread is "Should Kettling Be Allowed By Police". By saying, "If protests were unpoliced, people would moan. If they are policed, people moan." and "The police have a responsibility to maintain law and order and protect the safety of the wider public.", you are using a strawman argument. And have missed the point of this thread.

Containment is how the protests are policed. Containment isnt done for the laugh or for the giggles - its done to maintain law and order and protect public safety in what can and have been large and potentially violent crowds. Trying to analyse the strategy of containment outside of the context of its purpose is a bit limited. The police have a job to do, they do it based on their experience of doing that job.

So yes, containment should be allowed, until proven to be illegal or unconstitutional in a court of law for police to do so. Other than the "Its sooooooooooo unfair" defence, whats left to discuss?

marienbad

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I haven't been kettled, no. But I was at the CND rallies in the mid eighties and the anti apartheid rally held to commemorate Nelson Mandela's 25th anniversary in prison. At the latter, I was on the verge of joining the SWP but I had a reality.check that day.

I was also present at several "bash the rich demos" and witnessed the poll tax riots.

I've been there, seen it, done it and even bought.the tee shirt.thank you.

Fred ,who was it said ''not to be a socialist at 20 show the want of a heart and not to be a conservative at 30 shows the want of a head''. The list of protests you were on would indicate that is a journey you have taken. I was on some of those protests also and in every single case the 'Establishment' attempted to demonize the protesters and warned of the imminent end of civilization as we know it. Never happened, never will,
But the protesters were proved right on the poll tax, on apartheid, on CND.And I hope they will be proved right on the current issues.

The right of peaceful assembly for the purpose of protest is a fundamental
right in any functioning democracy and we in Ireland should know that better than most as long before Ghandi and Mandela our own Daniel 0'Connell used the only weapon left to the disenfranchised to achieve Catholic Emancipation in 1829.

On the other hand we have the forces of law and order, an impossible task at the best of times,but even more difficult it times such as these.
But that being said there is not a police force on this earth that does not believe it is being denied the latest state of the art in whatever, be it equipment , tactics , manpower. The is why in a democracy policy decisions are kept well away from them.

The police got it wrong when they baton charged the miners on horseback,they got it wrong on the poll tax riots in Trafalgar Sq. and they got it wrong in the Reclaim the Streets in Dublin. I have no doubt that time and the courts will show they have it wrong now with this 'kettling'.

And just in case you think this is just anti police, not so, they got it right on most of the apartheid marchs ,a lot of the CND events and on the print workers demos at Wapping.