Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GlyphGryph]

Well, it sounds like the FBI gave them the "bombs" and told them to blow it up, so my guess is the better question, for them, is "why not?"

[Wayward Device]

Well, it sounds like the FBI gave them the "bombs" and told them to blow it up, so my guess is the better question, for them, is "why not?"

Hehe, you crazy Americans and your "it still counts as solving crimes if we set up the crime and entrap people" policing. Mind you, we have our fair share of policing nonsense over here in the UK. Just to balance things up:

1. The police station next to my old house was only open between 09:00 and 12:00, despite being the major station fro the area.

2.The incident that sparked last years summer riots, which basically went along the lines of "Highly trained armed response team arrest black man for having gun when he had no gun, based on evidence from an "anonymous" snitch. Highly trained firearms officers put handcuffed black man in police car. Highly trained firearms officer shoots and kills unarmed handcuffed black man because he was "going for his gun". As MP5s and confined spaces don't go well together, the bullet goes through him and hits another highly trained firearms officer, causing serious injury to his arm. Senior officers respond to community outrage by saying "Well, we might look into it, but come on! He was black and had a gun!".

[Ehndras]

Well, it sounds like the FBI gave them the "bombs" and told them to blow it up, so my guess is the better question, for them, is "why not?"

Hehe, you crazy Americans and your "it still counts as solving crimes if we set up the crime and entrap people" policing. Mind you, we have our fair share of policing nonsense over here in the UK. Just to balance things up:

1. The police station next to my old house was only open between 09:00 and 12:00, despite being the major station fro the area.

2.The incident that sparked last years summer riots, which basically went along the lines of "Highly trained armed response team arrest black man for having gun when he had no gun, based on evidence from an "anonymous" snitch. Highly trained firearms officers put handcuffed black man in police car. Highly trained firearms officer shoots and kills unarmed handcuffed black man because he was "going for his gun". As MP5s and confined spaces don't go well together, the bullet goes through him and hits another highly trained firearms officer, causing serious injury to his arm. Senior officers respond to community outrage by saying "Well, we might look into it, but come on! He was black and had a gun!".

...They seriously said that?

Holy shit.

[Wayward Device]

Well, the thing is the "inquiry" is still ongoing, but that's the general assumed timeline. It certainly what most young black Londoners would tell you if you asked them what happened. I think that he may have actually have been shot outside the car but there's still a hell of a lot of conjecture. And its not likely to be cleared up any time soon. It definitely caused the first riot that sparked all the others.     

And yeah, that's the gist of the PR response. They dressed it up a bit, 'ya know, "he was known to us, evidence, clear and present danger to officers, unavoidable actions". But there has yet to be any real hard proof given to the public of what really happened. I think the fact that vast numbers of people were actively attacking the police immediately after the press conference kinda speaks for how what they said went down.

[Leafsnail]

I know this board loves to assume the worst of police officers and call anyone who disagrees with that naive but there really is absolutely no evidence to suggest it went anything like that.  Heck, there are eyewitnesses saying that it didn't.  In fact, according to the eyewitness pretty much every aspect of how you described the incident is wrong, even if you assume Duggan didn't have a gun out (and to be honest it's not implausible that he did seeing as how he founded a violent criminal gang).

[Wayward Device]

Ok, ok, just to be absolutely clear, what I'm talking about is the perception of what happened. We don't know for sure what happened and we won't until there's a real inquiry and a report is released. To be even more clear, I'm not one of those people who's all "ALL POLIZAREBADZ!!!!". Not by any means (one of my oldest childhood friends is actually a serving Metropolitan police officer, not that that proves anything one way or another). I'm just pointing out that we have or share of fuckups over here too, since I had just criticized US policing. Feel bad for this derail now.   

[Mr. Palau]

Ohh sweet, sweet irony. a derail in a thread about anarchists?

Anyway, yeah these guys seem pretty damn stupid.

[Ehndras]

Ohh sweet, sweet irony. a derail in a thread about anarchists?

Anyway, yeah these guys seem pretty damn stupid.

Please don't call these retards Anarchists, its an insult to those who believe in proper political Anarchism.

[Criptfeind]

Seem about par for the course actually.

[Sheb]

Relevant.

[Agdune]

Heh, nice. Seems almost 50ies-era commie hunt-esque. If it wasn't so incredibly over-used and tired, even a reference to George Orwell could be used in describing the logic behind this saga.

Step 1) target people who are dicks/deviants, but generally minding their own buisness/harmlessly stupid
Step 2) introduce them to crime and encourage them to get even more involved in extremist circles
Step 3) provide them with ideas on what crimes to go commit
Step 4) provide them with the means to commit said crimes
Step 5) continue encouraging them every step of the way and ensure nothing happens to make them think this is a bad idea
Step 6) at the last second, spring your trap! Hold up these obviously born criminals as an example on why no-one is safe and the state needs further powers to screw with people.

I'm not one to start bitching about state powers, but this is an obvious abuse of it. They were probably dicks, but so is just about every person I've met at any religious function I've been forced to attend in the last 2 decades. Put the kind of effort into it that the FBI has done and you could probably get 2/3rds of the people you meet in the streets to commit a terrorist act, given time. Peer pressure is one hell of a powerful thing, and taking advantage of socially isolated morons is child's play for anyone who has resources and knows what they're doing.

Might as well have targeted a bunch of 10 year olds.

To clarify, I have no issues with agents infiltrating extremist groups. But infiltrating with the aim of escalating their behaviour enough to arrest them? Fuck no, there's something seriously wrong with someone's mission statements goin' on there.

[Sheb]

It remind me of a controversy we had a few yers ago in Belgium, where some local police force set up a trap by letting an iPad or similar on a table in front of the open window of a seemingly empty appartment.

[Lagslayer]

It remind me of a controversy we had a few yers ago in Belgium, where some local police force set up a trap by letting an iPad or similar on a table in front of the open window of a seemingly empty appartment.

Kind of reminds me of this guy. He leaves a broken game shark on the store counter to tempt stupid people into stealing it. It fries their gaming device. Traps are a controlled manner in which to catch criminals. Weather it is ethical or not and to what extent is debatable, but it can sure as hell be funny.

[GlyphGryph]

Leaving out a device people can steal is significantly more ethical than tell them, "hey, steal that device. Come on, you know you want to. I'll even make sure you don't get caught. And I can fence it for you. Heck, you know, you could even argue I told you it was mine, and you didn't know what you were doing. Come on, do it. What are you, chicken? Bok bok bok. Coward. I'll just get someone else to do it - or do it myself. All your accomplishing is cutting yourself out of the profits. And the owner is totally a child molester. He deserves to have it stolen"

And then, after they bring it back to him, he slaps them in cuffs and calls it a day.

There's a difference between simulating a normal criminal opportunity and seeing who jumps on it and actually convincing/enabling a person who wouldn't otherwise commit a crime to do so by acting as a peer.

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, it honestly sounds more like entrapment than anything else. Wasn't that supposed to be illegal?