DJKillaQueen

(smiley wot laughs hard init) I am missing them though (smiley wot frowns init)

dita-on-tees Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > oh no, I hate it when I click on a link which I > assume will put me on some sort of Mi5 list > labelled potential Nazi. It is the list titled 'potential collaboraters' though - not the one titled 'agitators' - so you are safe!

There should be a sign at the start of the lane but the view of that is obstructed if you are overtaking a bus at the bus stop outside the station. If a sign isn't there then it should be.

( insert thumbs up )

Why relax the rule? (it's law btw). There is absolutely no reason to speed around with sirens or lights unless there is a call to respond to and imagine if an accident happened as a result - the Police would be sued - that's why the 'emergency only' rule applies.

TFL are respnsible for that bus lane. Complain to them but don't expect anything to change. Otherwise observe the rules of the lane and you won't get fined.

The Police are not allowed to use sirens unless they are going to an incident. The same is true for all the emergency services. If the sirens are on then the officers are resonding to something.

Definitely the result of social networking imo. News travels fast and reaches far more people.

Yes I don't have them anymore either. Did you change something Admin?

Jeepers! lol.

But not every looter is responsible for those four deaths and the man who was responsible for three of them has been arrested and will face a murder charge. We also have laws for public order offences. Infact we have existing laws that cater for every aspect/ act of rioting and looting. It's like the call to remove benefits or housing.....there are laws already in place that set out the legal conditions of that. It would require a change in law to enact and you can not change the law to punish rioters and looters in isolation, you would have to include any kind of public order offence, burglary, etc.

I just heard an interesting comment on the radio. Someone made the point that we had MPs stealing through expenses, we had recent relevations of police taking money from the press. Where is the vitriolic backlash against those people...the demands to seize their property etc. Whilst absolutely the rioters should be punished, it should be proportionate to the crime and relative to the way other types of robbery and vandalism are punished.

This forum is great for so many for so many different reasons. I love it, and because of that will always support those who make it possible. A big thumbs up from me, to you know who!

oh kid...if there is no trainers to be had u is safe init blood!

Ooooh babes always work for me Dogger x

Just for the record, Dan Garfield's twitter comments were in jest, in an exchange with a friend. That friend is the cyclist that he refers to. Sometimes it helps to look at things in their true context before piliorying an innocent comment.

I think there's a lot of truth in that edresi. One of the first hurdles youth workers face when dealing with those kinds of young people is in getting the to hsve any kind of respect for others not like themselves. It's not easy.

I think it could work, esp as I heard it was a small group of around 30 looters in LL last night. If local people diffuse those smaller groups, then the Police can focus on the larger more violent areas of rioting.

I think if enough people can get together then it's a good idea. Most of these yobs are teens anyway. Are we going to let them do this night after night?

I completely agree with that Alice. I would also say that the comments of some community leaders over the past two days have only served to fuel speculation and rumour too.

I agree LD.....and I think the Police are worried about the fb and twitter communications. It's going to be a long night for them, and those of us watching too! There'll be an inquiry of course. The man that was shot had been under surveillance and one remembers for example Charles de Menezes, and that the Police can get it very wrong. But Menezes was not armed, because he was not the suspect under surveillance. In this case, Mark was the one under surveillance, and under surveillance by specialist gun crime devisions like Trident. A firearm was recovered from the scene and shots were fired from it. The inquiry will look at who shot first etc but at the end of the day, Mark put himself in that situation. That doesn't mean he automatically deserved to be shot dead but when you come under the radar of those Police divisions, there's usually something that the wider community needs protection from. Having said all that though, I agree that it's unwise to speculate too much on what any inquiry might conclude. But that goes for the rioters too - no excuse for what they are doing. *And given how long it takes me to type with one hand at the moment, I'm probaly several posts behind the one I'm replying too by now as well lol*

He was carrying a gun and given plenty of opportunity to surrender I would think......the Police don't gun down people at the drop of a hat. The rioters are I think just bored local young men on the whole.

A couple of days ago a gunman fired shots at Police and in turn was shot dead. Now local youths and people have attacked the Police Station and are rioting..... Sky News Live Feed

You mean to tell me that Annette is a he? *truly shocked ;-)*

I'd also add what should us British people be doing? How are the border agencies supposed to know is someone if being shipped out to be forced into marriage? When they are, there is often little that can be done. The only options are diplomatic anyway.