Do you blame him or not, MP manhandles woman protester

q85dw7osi4lebg

He was dead right.

meeeeh

Strumms wrote: »

He didn’t. The force he used was in proportion to the perceived threat. No way would a court convict anyone for what we have seen.

Do you think this will end in court? It's not even relevant. Average age of tory voter went from 40 something under Cameron to 50 something. They are loosing voters and this will not help.

weldoninhio

Tell me how wrote: »

Sheer volume of the number of posters with these types of views in a short space of time is quite revealing. And worrying. Both for the suggestions that she should have been treated more harshly and the view (contrary to video evidence) that he did nothing wrong. Not to mention the implication that all climate activists should be treated the same way.

You quoted me, for stating FACTUALLY, that she was not grabbed by the throat and that is worrying?? :rolleyes:

super_furry

Danzy wrote: »

John Prescott hit a protester a left hook that would rattle a Wall and he was lauded for it.

He didn't and rightly didn't apologize.

Being a protester dies not make one immune from response.

John Prescott had a man violently had a man smash an egg on his face.

Mark Field had a women walk past him.

Ash.J.Williams

Lux23 wrote: »

She has a right to protest. He had a right to have her removed, but he didn't need to drag her by the throat. He only has himself to blame.

she does have the right to protest, however civilians have the right to be vigilant. What if she was armed? In the USA she'd be dead.

ILoveYourVibes

Tell me how wrote: »

This thread is weird.
Many of the views you have expressed in this post would probably be also held by many of the people who you are arguing against in this instance. I have no interest debating them today.

That is very interesting. Perhaps we would agree on many other things? I dont know.

I actually HATE arguing though. So avoid those threads and just be silly on here

I get upset easily. I prefer to talk generally. And i don't like to upset people.

Hurrache

twinytwo wrote: »

Man this thread just goes to show how many snowflakes and sjw warriors there are these days. Come outside of your bubble once in a while.

Talk about selective viewing to suit your agenda.

She got removed with minimal force, no he did not "drag her by the throat.

Everyone crying assault needs to get a life

I think it's all the hardmen here that are afraid of a woman with a handbag, talking about how they'd take out the threat, or drop her, are the ones in the bubble.

Danzy

meeeeh wrote: »

Do you think this will end in court? It's not even relevant. Average age of tory voter went from 40 something under Cameron to 50 something. They are loosing voters and this will not help.

It won't end in court, the moment The charge was decided on her Counsel would have informed her it would not be entertained, it is for PR purpose, that is understandable and for her cause the right course of action.

ILoveYourVibes

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

she does have the right to protest, however civilians have the right to be vigilant. What if she was armed? In the USA she'd be dead.

What if he was armed?

Anyhow she was shouting peaceful protest and was wearing a sash that was the same of the visible group she was part of that was there legally.

NIMAN

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

If she has a husband he should go and beat up Mark Fields!

That would be premeditated assault, and her husband could do jail time for it.

ILoveYourVibes

Hurrache wrote: »

I think it's all the hardmen here that are afraid of a woman with a handbag, talking about how they'd take out the threat, or drop her, are the ones in the bubble.

They are not hard. They are insecure.

meeeeh

Danzy wrote: »

It won't end in court, the moment The charge was decided on her Counsel would have informed her it would not be entertained, it is for PR purpose that us understandable.

It doesn't matter. I presume he is in politics long enough to know he can only loose from encounter like this. She doesn't need to go to court, she got all attention she needed.

Who do you think tory leadership are angry at this morning? The protestor or Rambo?

BarryD2

AustinLostin wrote: »

Yeah this is an important point, video is cut so we only see her moving up the room. Not any time before or after. What's the point in debating blame without the full context?

Well that's normal in this type of social media campaigning - you cut the video so that it only demonstrates the POV you wish to put out.

As regards her only being a harmless woman, doesn't cut the mustard in these days of political correctness. Equal treatment is well, equal.

ILoveYourVibes

NIMAN wrote: »

That would be premeditated assault, and her husband could do jail time for it.

:rolleyes:

What is the world coming to? A guy assaults your wife and you can't punch him even once??
This is ridic.

Tell me how

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

she does have the right to protest, however civilians have the right to be vigilant. What if she was armed? In the USA she'd be dead.

Can you post any evidence of protesters in American being killed in similar circumstances?

American security forces talk a good game but plenty of time protesters interrupt events.

ILoveYourVibes

meeeeh wrote: »

It doesn't matter. I presume he is in politics long enough to know he can only loose from encounter like this. She doesn't need to go to court, she got all attention she needed.

Who do you think tory leadership are angry at this morning? The protestor or Rambo?

He is more like Bambi gone wrong ...but you are right. He acted like a schoolchild.

ILoveYourVibes

Tell me how wrote: »

Can you post any evidence of protesters in American being killed in similar circumstances?

American security forces talk a good game but plenty of time protesters interrupt events.

The USA takes freedom of speech very seriously.

NIMAN

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

:rolleyes:

What is the world coming to? A guy assaults your wife and you can't punch him even once??
This is ridic.

Unfortunately thats the law.

If a guy assaults my wife, I mean proper assault and not like we seen in this video clip, then her/my first port of call should be the Gardai.

If I go and get tooled up and batter the guy, then I could be done for assault.

I'm with you, I know its not fair, but thats how the law works I'm afraid.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Anyway of course it was rough handling. Grabbing people by the neck ain’t on.

tritium

Cryptopagan wrote: »

Were any of them armed?

Should we just take the chance that security has massively failed and been compromised but they managed to check for weapons successfully, just did everything else a bit ****?

ILoveYourVibes

NIMAN wrote: »

Unfortunately thats the law.

If a guy assaults my wife, I mean proper assault and not like we seen in this video clip, then her/my first port of call should be the Gardai.

If I go and get tooled up and batter the guy, then I could be done for assault.

I'm with it, I know its not fair, but thats how the law works I'm afraid.

I understand what you are saying. And you are no doubt correct.

But if a guy grabbed my neck in that manner I would expect my husband to DECK HIM! And I would expect the other guy to just not press charges and realize he was punched out by the better man!

But the world has gone mad! We've gone too far!

ILoveYourVibes

tritium wrote: »

Should we just take the chance that security has massively failed and been compromised but they managed to check for weapons successfully, just did everything else a bit ****?

The building i would imagine has metal detectors on the entrance.

Zenify

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

she does have the right to protest, however civilians have the right to be vigilant. What if she was armed? In the USA she'd be dead.

What if he was armed?

Anyhow she was shouting peaceful protest and was wearing a sash that was the same of the visible group she was part of that was there legally.

Wearing a wash saying Greenpeace makes her more of a threat in the eyes of most law enforcers.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Tikki Wang Wang wrote: »

Potentially this could have been a terrorist attack ! Cause and effect !

If it was a lad with a bomb strapped on Fields would have jumped under the table.

ILoveYourVibes

Zenify wrote: »

Wearing a wash saying Greenpeace makes her more of a threat in the eyes of most law enforcers.

There are metal detectors on the entrance to the building you know.

Cryptopagan

tritium wrote: »

Should we just take the chance that security has massively failed and been compromised but they managed to check for weapons successfully, just did everything else a bit ****?

I’m sure there were metal detectors and X rays on the way in, same as going through airport security. I’m not sure how the protesters got to be there, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they bought tickets.

NIMAN

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I understand what you are saying. And you are no doubt correct.

But if a guy grabbed my neck in that manner I would expect my husband to DECK HIM! And I would expect the other guy to just not press charges and realize he was punched out by the better man!

But the world has gone mad! We've gone too far!

So we agree, but why are you saying this woman was assaulted then?

You seem to be arguing against yourself?

tritium

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

The building i would imagine has metal detectors on the entrance.

You’d imaging or you’d know?

Would metal detectors pick up a bottle of acid for instance?

Which entrance did all the protestors use?

whiskeyman

Fascinating range of options here.
I'd reckon if this was 10 years ago, it wouldn't have even made the news.

riffmongous

Dax Rich Pastry wrote: »

They didn't handle it though did they? They ignored it and hoped that somebody else would handle it. The spatial awareness here is dismal.

Because there was obviously nothing to handle. Look at how everyone else just shepherds the protestors calmly and there is no trouble.