Jesus H. Christ, forget US gun crimes - we must ban knives in the UK now!

London murder rate beats New York as stabbings surge.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...fied-_-TWITTER

London murder rate beats New York as stabbings surge - London overtook New York in murders for the first time in modern history in February as the capital endured a dramatic surge in knife crime.

Fifteen people were murdered in the capital, against 14 in New York. Both cities have almost exactly the same population.

London murders for March are also likely to exceed or equal New York’s. By late last night there had been 22 killings in the capital, according to the Metropolitan police, against 21 in the US city.

Cowards weapon of choice .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

London murder rate beats New York as stabbings surge.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...fied-_-TWITTER

London murder rate beats New York as stabbings surge - London overtook New York in murders for the first time in modern history in February as the capital endured a dramatic surge in knife crime.

Fifteen people were murdered in the capital, against 14 in New York. Both cities have almost exactly the same population.

London murders for March are also likely to exceed or equal New York’s. By late last night there had been 22 killings in the capital, according to the Metropolitan police, against 21 in the US city.

---

May and her cronies have no interest in protecting us. I actually think they hate ordinary people. This ex-copper explains what is going on very well :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lolJaZta6DM

The copper suggested public protection is a low priority for a government which cares even less about the poorest in inner cities, particularly for the non-whites. They've elbowed many thousands of police officers under the guise of essential austerity measures while simultaneously prioritising tax cuts for the wealthy and failing to tackle corporate welfare. I think we all know or suspect that most of the shootings and stabbings are gang and/or drug related. I must confess I couldn't care less about crim on crim murders and murder attempts whether they're poor/deprived or not, but when the police haven't the resources to properly investigate a raft of other crimes along with anti-social behaviour then we should all be alarmed.

The householder arrested today on suspicion of a stabbing murder should be released and handed some sort of Community Award rather than be charged with an offence. Hither Green 'burglar' stabbing: Man, 78, arrested - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-43639183

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Organ Morgan.

The copper suggested public protection is a low priority for a government which cares even less about the poorest in inner cities, particularly for the non-whites. They've elbowed many thousands of police officers under the guise of essential austerity measures while simultaneously prioritising tax cuts for the wealthy and failing to tackle corporate welfare. I think we all know or suspect that most of the shootings and stabbings are gang and/or drug related. I must confess I couldn't care less about crim on crim murders and murder attempts whether they're poor/deprived or not, but when the police haven't the resources to properly investigate a raft of other crimes along with anti-social behaviour then we should all be alarmed.

The householder arrested today on suspicion of a stabbing murder should be released and handed some sort of Community Award rather than be charged with an offence. Hither Green 'burglar' stabbing: Man, 78, arrested - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-43639183

---

I read somewhere that the job of the police is to protect criminals. That sounds mad but when you think about it if there weren't any criminals there wouldn't be a need for a police force. The police need a certain amount of crime. If the criminals weren't protected by the police they would receive the lynch mob treatment they get in countries where law and order has broken down. In parts of South America and Africa thieves are chased down the street by mobs and then stomped to death. That arrest of the 78 year old is a warning to us that we mustn't hurt criminals. They are like a protected species to the police.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

I read somewhere that the job of the police is to protect criminals. That sounds mad but when you think about it if there weren't any criminals there wouldn't be a need for a police force. The police need a certain amount of crime. If the criminals weren't protected by the police they would receive the lynch mob treatment they get in countries where law and order has broken down. In parts of South America and Africa thieves are chased down the street by mobs and then stomped to death. That arrest of the 78 year old is a warning to us that we mustn't hurt criminals. They are like a protected species to the police.

---

Those last two sentences are utterbbollocks. He had to be arrested to preserve the integrity of the investigation. Only under arrest could clothes be seized, swabs taken, a thorough house search and preservation of scene conducted.

The police gathered the evidence which showed that the man in question acted in self defence and made the decision eaised for the CPS.

If he hasn’t been arrested can you imagine the stink that burglarinb bastard’s family would have kicked up? There would have been that element of doubt and they or one of their representatives would have kicked up a stink.

Now they have nothing, case closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CardiffIrish2

Those last two sentences are utterbbollocks. He had to be arrested to preserve the integrity of the investigation. Only under arrest could clothes be seized, swabs taken, a thorough house search and preservation of scene conducted.

The police gathered the evidence which showed that the man in question acted in self defence and made the decision eaised for the CPS.

If he hasn’t been arrested can you imagine the stink that burglarinb bastard’s family would have kicked up? There would have been that element of doubt and they or one of their representatives would have kicked up a stink.

Now they have nothing, case closed.

---

Do you really think the police can only do a proper search of a house if they arrest someone ? Wrong. On TV you see coppers and their dogs searching houses without anyone being arrested all the time. The police are sending us a message telling us that we are not allowed to defend ourselves.

In the Daily Mail's manure heap of lies and nonsense there is a good article about the arrest by Peter Hitchins. He wrote : "The police of this country are at their most enthusiastic when they are defending their monopoly against the danger of competition. It would be disastrous for them if anyone else started enforcing laws in the way most people want them enforced."

It is all about an occupational group protecting their monopoly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

Do you really think the police can only do a proper search of a house if they arrest someone ? Wrong. On TV you see coppers and their dogs searching houses without anyone being arrested all the time. The police are sending us a message telling us that we are not allowed to defend ourselves.

In the Daily Mail's manure heap of lies and nonsense there is a good article about the arrest by Peter Hitchins. He wrote : "The police of this country are at their most enthusiastic when they are defending their monopoly against the danger of competition. It would be disastrous for them if anyone else started enforcing laws in the way most people want them enforced."

It is all about an occupational group protecting their monopoly.

---

You can go on an on and on about occupational groups and the Police protecting the monopolies but the facts of this case are simple.

Police turn up to an incident where a body has been found. A man isn’t possession of a weapon. He is arrested.

A prompt and effective investigation finds out that the Male is a burglar, the house is searched, evidence has to be secured therefore it’s onlh wise before making conclusions that the man is arrested.

Procedure then ensures that forensic evidence is gathered, teh CPS are updated and kept in the loop by the Police and the gentleman is subsequently exonerated.

This (again repeating my point) ensures that the small minority of people who feel the burglar has been given rough justice have no grounds for complaint.

Peter Hichens who takes his money from that pile Of shite can talk all he likes about monopolies but he hasn’t got a ****ing clue about Police procedure and his quite crass populist rabble rousing is extremely ill informed.

Hope this clears things up for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CardiffIrish2

You can go on an on and on about occupational groups and the Police protecting the monopolies but the facts of this case are simple.

Police turn up to an incident where a body has been found. A man isn’t possession of a weapon. He is arrested.

A prompt and effective investigation finds out that the Male is a burglar, the house is searched, evidence has to be secured therefore it’s onlh wise before making conclusions that the man is arrested.

Procedure then ensures that forensic evidence is gathered, teh CPS are updated and kept in the loop by the Police and the gentleman is subsequently exonerated.

This (again repeating my point) ensures that the small minority of people who feel the burglar has been given rough justice have no grounds for complaint.

Peter Hichens who takes his money from that pile Of shite can talk all he likes about monopolies but he hasn’t got a ****ing clue about Police procedure and his quite crass populist rabble rousing is extremely ill informed.

Hope this clears things up for you.

---

Yes, it has cleared something up for me. I had previously thought you were just uninformed but now I know you are delusional.

Peter Hitchens spent a few years studying the history of the police in the UK for his book "A Brief History of Crime " so I would imagine he would have a better understanding of police procedure than you.

The police would have been able to size up that situation in 15 minutes. A well known burglar had been stabbed by a 78 year old man in the course of a burglary. The police used that old man for their own ends - namely to tell us that we are not allowed to defend ourselves from criminals because that is the job of the police. He was released only when public disgust with their behavior became too damaging to police public relations. The Daily Mail did a good job exposing the police's attempt to make an example of that man.

I have policeman friends but the British police as a whole are not your friends. In reality they are just security guards for a ruling elite who are back scuttling this country without a condom.

Mate, Peter Hitchens has spoken a load of bollocks. I was a Policeman for 14 years and know exactly the protocol and process.

But it’s pointjess arguing with you as you come up with your smug rhetoric.

You can’t educate those who won’t listen. Hichens is talking shite and you’re regurgitating it .

The Daily Mail if it wasn’t so lazy, Lying and eager for cheap publicity could have found out that was proper procedure that was carried out but as ever did their usual printing of bullshit.

Go ask your Police Friends and they’ll tell you all was done correctly.

I can't imagine Hitchens would need a detailed knowledge of current procedures to write an historical book.

Whether I agree with him or not, I always enjoy watching Peter Hitchens debate as it's rarely dull.

But his brother Christopher will always be my favourite. The one and only 'Hitch'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CardiffIrish2

Mate, Peter Hitchens has spoken a load of bollocks. I was a Policeman for 14 years and know exactly the protocol and process.

But it’s pointjess arguing with you as you come up with your smug rhetoric.

You can’t educate those who won’t listen. Hichens is talking shite and you’re regurgitating it .

The Daily Mail if it wasn’t so lazy, Lying and eager for cheap publicity could have found out that was proper procedure that was carried out but as ever did their usual printing of bullshit.

Go ask your Police Friends and they’ll tell you all was done correctly.

---

Your post does not make sense.

1. You are saying that even though the police know with a high degree of probability that it was self-defence they still have to change the homeowner with murder. Why can't they just interview him under caution? To charge someone with murder means the police believe he intended to murder the burglar.

If that is the rule then does that rule also apply to all classes. For example, the homeowner had been Baroness Trumpington or any other member of The House of Lords would they have been held overnight and charged with murder? What if it was a member of the Cabinet?

2. If that is the rule in this country then why is there not a similar rule in most other countries. In the USA at the moment they can't believe what we have done to that 78 year old. There is no way he would have been charged with murder. That says something about the different functions of the police here and there - i.e. enforcement of state control verses law and order.

3. You keep going on about the feelings of the family of the burglar. Why is that relevant? Are you suggesting the police charge people with murder just to make some people feel better regardless of whether or not a murder has been committed?

I will ask my policemen friends and I will post further on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

Your post does not make sense.

1. You are saying that even though the police know with a high degree of probability that it was self-defence they still have to change the homeowner with murder. Why can't they just interview him under caution? To charge someone with murder means the police believe he intended to murder the burglar.

If that is the rule then does that rule also apply to all classes. For example, the homeowner had been Baroness Trumpington or any other member of The House of Lords would they have been held overnight and charged with murder? What if it was a member of the Cabinet?

2. If that is the rule in this country then why is there not a similar rule in most other countries. In the USA at the moment they can't believe what we have done to that 78 year old. There is no way he would have been charged with murder. That says something about the different functions of the police here and there - i.e. enforcement of state control verses law and order.

3. You keep going on about the feelings of the family of the burglar. Why is that relevant? Are you suggesting the police charge people with murder just to make some people feel better regardless of whether or not a murder has been committed?

I will ask my policemen friends and I will post further on this.

---

1. Not once have I suggested that the Police have to charge with murder. I said arrest and investigate which is completely different to charge. So that’s the first thing you’ve misquoted. The CPS decide on charge, the Police arrested. I’ve got no idea the relevance of bringing Baronness Trumpington, Lord Charles or screaming Lord Sutch or whoever into this. You’re trying to make a political point (wrongly) where I’m discussing the Police procedure.

2. I can not speak for other countries, I am merely discussing what I see in this case and what I know about Brtisth Police procedure.

3. I have said that a thorough investigation which included as had to be done the arrest of the Male at the scene has been concluded In a thorough manner. There appears to be no unanswered questions and no ‘what ifs?’ and some potential representative of the deceased can not turn it around and make it look justice was not done.

In regards to other postings you’ve made on this letting search dogs into a scene of a crime would only hinder and destroy the integrity of a scene.

As for your utterly ludicrous suggestion all this can be done in 15 minutes, well that doesn’t even deserve a response.

You’re perfectly entitled to your opinion that the Police are a security force for the Elite no matter how much I may disagree with you but frankly you have no idea of the procedure involved and you’ve made wrong assertions based on your view points. P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CardiffIrish2

1. Not once have I suggested that the Police have to charge with murder. I said arrest and investigate which is completely different to charge. So that’s the first thing you’ve misquoted. The CPS decide on charge, the Police arrested. I’ve got no idea the relevance of bringing Baronness Trumpington, Lord Charles or screaming Lord Sutch or whoever into this. You’re trying to make a political point (wrongly) where I’m discussing the Police procedure.

2. I can not speak for other countries, I am merely discussing what I see in this case and what I know about Brtisth Police procedure.

3. I have said that a thorough investigation which included as had to be done the arrest of the Male at the scene has been concluded In a thorough manner. There appears to be no unanswered questions and no ‘what ifs?’ and some potential representative of the deceased can not turn it around and make it look justice was not done.

In regards to other postings you’ve made on this letting search dogs into a scene of a crime would only hinder and destroy the integrity of a scene.

As for your utterly ludicrous suggestion all this can be done in 15 minutes, well that doesn’t even deserve a response.

You’re perfectly entitled to your opinion that the Police are a security force for the Elite no matter how much I may disagree with you but frankly you have no idea of the procedure involved and you’ve made wrong assertions based on your view points. P

---

1. Although you didn't say he had to be charged with murder you did say he had to be arrested :

"to preserve the integrity of the investigation. Only under arrest could clothes be seized, swabs taken, a thorough house search and preservation of scene conducted."

But we have all seen those things being done in TV documentaries about the police without anyone being arrested. That is what I meant about the dogs searching houses.

But the police went further than arresting him. They charged him because they thought had "sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction". According this police training site the decision to charge can be made either by the police or the CPS so you can't just blame them :

https://www.app.college.police.uk/ap...e-preparation/

They later dropped the charge because they feared the public backlash. They didn't give an F about that man or his poor wife.

2. You do something for 14 years and you don't wonder why it is done that way or how it is done in other countries. Since you are not curious enough to know what happens elsewhere I will tell you. That man would not have be arrested in most parts of the world. He would have been thanked.

3. Charging him with murder and then letting him go has the opposite effect to the one you are claiming. If they had enough evidence to charge him in the first place why did they let him go.

It wouldn't have taken an intelligent policeman 15 minutes to work out what had happened in that house. I'm reminded of Dirty Harry's quote :

"When a naked man is chasing a woman through a dark alley with a butcher knife and a hard on, I figure he isn't out collecting for the Red Cross. "

You’re trying to be clever by using a lot of words and not actually saying anything.

He was not charged at any point, he was arrested, bailed without charge and then released without charge.

You are not listening when you need to as you keep getting this completely wrong.
For what seems like the 1000000th time at no point was He CHARGED!!!!!

I couldn’t give a shit what happens in other countries, I didn’t when I was in the Police as I was too busy.

You have no idea what Goes on at a serious incident, and speculating on it from behjnd a keyboard makes you look very stupid and opinionated. I’d suggest you soeak to your police Friends and show them your assertions on how things can be dealt with in 15 minutes and they’d laugh at you.

Police can charge for certain summary only offences they can not for murder as it is inditable only and the CPS alone retains decisions for murder cases.

You’ve spent a lot of time repeating the same inaccuracies, go and educate yourself rather then listen to opinionated writers like Peter Hichens

I've been so worried by the Salisbury / Syria false flags that I didn't realise he hadn't actually been charged. Still, he should not have been arrested on suspicion of murder in the first place.

I'm surprised that you were able to correct me on details but then again even a broken clock is correct once a day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Vincent

I've been so worried by the Salisbury / Syria false flags that I didn't realise he hadn't actually been charged. Still, he should not have been arrested on suspicion of murder in the first place.

I'm surprised that you were able to correct me on details but then again even a broken clock is correct once a day.

---

I’ll take the cheap insult that you specialise in as a compliment. You got it wrong and maybe you should learn a lesson before you go spouting bollocks again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CardiffIrish2

I’ll take the cheap insult that you specialise in as a compliment. You got it wrong and maybe you should learn a lesson before you go spouting bollocks again.

---

If you want you can have the expensive insult, but you'd do better to keep the cheap one and rest on your laurels.

Thanks CardiffIrish2 for educating some of us regarding your knowledge and experience. As a neutral reading this thread your contribution was the most credible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie

Thanks CardiffIrish2 for educating some of us regarding your knowledge and experience. As a neutral reading this thread your contribution was the most credible.

---

Thank you TBG 👍