It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
If one of these scum are killed its no loss to society, if they run over someone minding their own business and kill them then that's the tragedy.
I would just like to ascertain the level of bloodlust that would satisfy the baying crowds. After all you clearly think a system of laws is a waste of time and long for a wild west/mad max style of might makes right, but I'm curious what level of violence you think is appropriate to what crime?
Fail to stop at a red light - lose a finger?
Credit card fraud - eyes pecked out by crows?
Software piracy - stomach filled with rabid rats?
Perhaps every legal transgression - death. No trial, no right of appeal... Just death
Yes a moped rider may get injured, but a fleeing criminal on foot might run in front of a bus, your logic suggests the human rights of criminals should come first and police should not chase them.
Liberal Apologists get real here....
If you have actually seen first hand the viciousness and aggression involved in these type of muggings and assaults you would be scared to walk down the road......really..;.these feral street rats are completely out of control and incredibly vicious and they have hit on a winner by using mopeds and scooters as the perfect escape tool
So , local bobbies should blow their whistles and proclaim "Stop Thief ..in the name of the Law " and the kids involved will stop in their tracks " ok Guvnor,it's a fair cop " I don't think so. They are more likely to stab a police officer or slash him with a machete .
It is a shame that such radical tactics are to be used and sad that society has degenerated to the extent where the only way to fight fire is with fire ......I'm sure that one day there will be some sonic wave stun gun or faze 'set to stun ' but in the meantime there would seem to be little or no other way of trying to keep normal people safe from these bastards and ultimately the protection of the majority of society must prevail.
If there was a viable alternative I'm sure it would be in practice but it seems that there isn't ....of course ,in many countries they would be taken down with both barrels of a Police shotgun which is totally effective but a step too far.
The not so viable alternative would be to sort out or society, education , housing, poverty, healthcare but to name a few, we seem to forget what an actual society is.
There's no blood lust involved however if this is the only means of catching them then there's the risk injury could occur and that's solely on the head of those that are knowingly going out to commit these crimes. Play stupid games and win stupid prizes.
You've misconstrued what i've said to be "kill them all" which clearly isn't what i've said.
If they were stealing a loaf of bread to feed their starving family then I think a sympathetic understand could be given and a more obvious understanding of where these individuals have been failed by the state but that's not the case, this is crime by choice to satisfy their want of quick and easy money.
Stealing a handbag might be a trivial crime in the grand scheme of things, but it's seriously upsetting to someone who was just getting on with their own day, and any punishment meted out to someone caught in the act is justified IMO, including a hideous death.
Just leave other people alone, it's that simple.
My objection to Draconian punishment has only ever been that in a court of law it's often only based on a likelihood of guilt. Anyone who's caught red handed is fair game as far as I'm concerned, I really think people have just had enough of little fucking toerags everywhere.
If it's clear they're in the process of committing a crime and trying to escape, I don't think id lose much sleep knowing they might get knocked off a scooter in the process.
Criminals were recently observing my family's routine in order to break in to our house while we were out.
The stupid bastards didn't observe well enough though. If they did they'd know my wife is disabled and often can't make it in to work.
So they turned up on a Tuesday afternoon when she should be at work, but she was in the house with the kids. She watched them through the net curtains, stood about 6 inches from them. Got a full description, took a video of them circling the house, then when they started trying to pry open the backdoor with a crowbar she put her head out the window and screamed WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU'RE DOING?!
She said you could hear the car skidding all over the place as they tried to get away.
What would they do if they got in and realised my wife and kids were in there? I'd hope that they'd leave, but you don't know. They could have killed them all and id come home to an emptied out house and a dead family.
Shrews was suggesting that some liberal bogeyman would be delighted if the police paralysed a moped thief (presumably in a "told you so" vein?). I was suggesting that no-one was going to be happy about someone getting paralysed.
The logic is pretty clear to me. Appropriate engagement by the police and justice system - good. Paralysing people - not good.
Are you perhaps thinking that I said to let the moped thieves carry on without fear of repercussion? I did not say that. You can check my post.
Once the police have indicated that you are to stop, you stop, end of! Since it’s technically resisting arrest if you don’t then police are entitled to take whatever measures they think are necessary to apprehend the culprit and protect the public. That means anything from applying handcuffs to shooting the offender. When violence is used there are routine investigation that the level of violence was needed, as in this case.
However, it’s not up to the police to safe guard the offender, indeed it is the responsibility of every individual to live with the choices they make, irrespective of circumstance, these don’t get deferred to anyone other than the individual making them.
If you don’t want to get arrested, hit by a police car or shot by the police then don’t commit crimes. If you are going to commit violent crimes on unsuspecting members of the public then you have chosen to run the risk that the police might well respond to your actions violence back, if you are surprised by that then you are not only a criminal but intensely stupid.
I find it somewhat surprising there are no bleeding-heart comments for the poor members of the public that have been assaulted, deprived of their property and potentially run over, it’s interesting that their right not to have random violence perpetrated on them seem to be getting forgotten here, in lieu of the supposed rights of the criminal?
How about deliberately mowing a person down in a car, death penalty?
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
Here.?
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=police+shoot+innocent&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwik06H69ojfAhX_RBUIHVLSAx4Q_AUIDygC&biw=1280&bih=571
There are a relatively small number of perpetrators.
Catching one of them might easily stop 50 crimes a month.