We are all soldiers in a war, it's true, we are. While sitting on our phones and tablets, or behind our PC's, each time we share, like, or air an opinion in any matter, be it war, immigration, or other political causes, we all fire a shot.
A single shot in a propaganda war which is raging across social media.
Of course we are all entitled to have opinions, and of course social media is there, so why the hell not share it. I know I do. But just for a second, take a breath, and think about this.
Wars are fought on propaganda, they have been for decades, and will continue to be for decades to come. Its a big and sometimes complex word, and really not as simple as one government telling their people how well they are doing, and forcing the message onto the people of the opposition.
Instead, these days it is done through hatred, confusion, and lies. Most of it which finds its way into our minds through the media and social media.
Posts reporting one side of a complex story, or taking a single snapshot of something that has been happening for 2 years, and using its powerful image or story to impress on others how serious the situation is. Why it takes ONE thing to make the whole of society to burst into action, I don't know. And quite frankly it pisses me off. If we are that high and mighty, that interested in humanity and the good of our country... What exactly have YOU been doing for the past 20 years to support that ethos? For many, I will hazard a guess and say naff all! (me included)
Look at 9/11 for example. There we were, rolling into a new millennium, not a care in the world. Then an organisation who most had never heard of struck with horrific force, taking the western world by surprise. This followed on with 7/7 in London, and with that the scene was set. All brown people are Muslims, Muslims are evil, Muslims want to kill the West. Clearly no doubt about it, 2 acts, (with a few more after) and a whole load of hype by the media and extremists on both sides, and it was job done. A religion resigned to the history books as one who reigned terror on the West. (A little like the Christians of centuries before, but we won't talk about that as it was for the greater good and all eh!)
And now here we are again. Syria.
There are two parts here, which I will try and separate, but I apologise in advance for any cross overs.
Firstly there is the refugee situation. I say refugee and NOT immigration for a reason. Let me explain for those who don't get it. The media have done a number on you, so it's ok, you are forgiven.
Immigration is the act of someone who has decided to move from the country of their residence, to another country. Hoops are jumped through, papers are complete. Requirements are usually met, in order to be accepted and integrated into the country of their choice.
Refugee is a person who is fleeing violence or threat of harm or violence in their current country of residence. Not through choice, but through necessity and persecution. The move is sudden, undesired, and usually involves dropping everything and running.
Now, I am not for one second saying the issue is not clouded or taken advantage of. Lets be honest, its perfectly clear in most refugee situations, that some of it is fuelled by greed and the want of a better life. Countries endless decisions to make travel between countries easier, encourage freedom of movement, and welcome migrants into their countries with arms maybe a little too wide open clearly doesn't help. But I'm not going into detail about the whole EU freedom of movement thing, as that's a whole other bone to chew on. That is migration, carried out by immigrants, seeking economic migration to better themselves.
The part I will comment on however are those from outside the EU, who are not part of the freedom of movement agreement, but still want to seek a better life and settle within certain choice parts of the EU. Travelling from their country of origin, way across Europe, before presenting themselves to the officials of their country of choice and applying for asylum. Falsely claiming asylum, straining many systems from border control, to transport, right through to the actual immigration and asylum systems. The problem is, we are so fed up of seeing people trying to get onto lorries to get across the Channel, that we have become intolerant to genuine asylum seekers.
Now again, I am not saying every person trying to get across the Channel is a fake, but there are plenty of questionables.
Fitting then don't you think, that the media, one of the group of instigators for hatred and anger towards whatever their target is for the current week or month, started showing huge interest in Calais, getting the UK wound up tightly about how it would affect everyone as more and more immigrants and asylum seekers bled into the country. Even taking the time to berate the government for using words such as a swarm. How despicable..... Or is it.
Well, there is an algorithm used when planning evacuations and people flow through buildings when they are at their design stage. It predicts movement behaviours in certain situations. The algorithm is called Distributed Swarm Evacuation Planning . How dare they indeed!
Anyway, getting back to Calais, or moving on from it at least, we have Syria. Clearly currently undergoing a devastating war, people terrorised, and genuinely fleeing violence. Again, most of them are anyway. I am sure there is a small percentage, like in any walk of life, taking advantage of it. Given the opportunity, most would. So now that the media have stirred the pot, built up intolerance and hatred towards anyone helping anyone else from another country, transferred that to social media, and built up a load of support for it. Now we have Syria, a genuine cause, which now no one has any time for and is blinkered by past events.
So as things in Syria unravel, and their world falls apart, we in the Western world continue with the important stuff. Bigotry, propaganda, and our faithful belief in anything we read in the media or social media. Very rarely do people ever bother to find things out. Instead we read something, go through the "its on the internet, so must be true" verification process, and immediately share, with a strong worded opinion of our own. Shot fired!
The funny thing is, each time we fire a shot of ignorance onto the internet, two things happen. One group take our comments, and use it to show others how fed up of the situation we all are. Waving it in the face of the undecided, screaming how many people have liked their status, and its proof, all the proof we need that its all a scam.
The other group take our negativity, and hatred, and show it to the other side. Showing their supporters and again the undecided, how much hatred and anger is directed at them. Their race, religion, or beliefs, and justifying why they should make a stand against you. Its always so easy to see one side of a story, and once we have our beliefs, it is almost impossible to open your eyes wide enough again to take a second, better look.
Think of it this way, if bullets were reusable, would you think more carefully about how many shots you fired at the enemy, knowing they could fire them back at you?
Now, the latest twist in the story is a message from ISIS (apparently) A threat that 500,000 would flood across Europe, claiming asylum, but in fact they will ALL be terrorists, and will destroy us all. Holy shit! Is this for real?
No, its propaganda at its finest. Like I said, most wars are fought with propaganda. Take a section of the world which is not paying much attention to the other. Put in place an all out assault which will displace tens of thousands, maybe millions. In the meantime, tell the country which isn't paying any attention that you will send an army to destroy them. Now launch your attack, drive the people from their homes and seeking refuge, and crank up the propaganda, media hysteria, social media assault vehicle.
Let me explain it simply.
IF, and I mean IF, this is all part of the plan to "destroy" Europe, its working well, and we are all playing our part.
Just like someone splitting from their cheating ex, hitting someone where it hurts (the pocket) is always the way to go.
Without weapons, without firing a shot or detonating any bombs, ISIS can cause serious damage to the UK and most of Europe.
Firstly by displacing the people of its country, it places strain on a country and its economy, let alone its resources and manpower, as well as infrastructure to cope with the sudden influx. Then in turn the influx causes stress, anger, hatred, and instability in society. This alone is powerful, and as I said before, is fed back to the extremists to fuel their cause. But also while all this is going on, the economy of any country involved in the whole matter, be it armed forces, taking refugees, or just part of the situation, takes a battering. Shares drop in price, currencies devalue, stability turns to instability.
Like I say, the crazy part about this, is its warfare at its finest, but without any fighting (between the counties at least)
So right now, as I look in my social feeds, I see fear, distrust, anger, and a call to push back. Social instability. How long before there is a high profile, mass attended protest march. One planned as a peaceful one, but joined by the extremists on the West side (so they believe), and one which will turn into a violent, expensive, distraction, and cause even more instability.
The cycle is endless, and not about to lose momentum any time soon. I don't expect this post to make any difference whatsoever. I did however want to go on the record, put my thoughts out there, and get it off my chest.
If you have read this far, kudos to you, and thank you for reading. I would also hazard a guess that there is hope for you yet.
Whatever your belief, whichever side you support. I'm not saying stop posting, I'm not saying stop caring. I am simply asking that you put a pause between the seeing and sharing routine. A pause just to see if it's true, believable and not just hateful bullshit.
This what the Snopes website was built for, but on steroids.
Snopes made it's name from disproving stories posted on the internet. Gang initiations, celebrity stories, scams, police alerts etc. Think about this for a moment. Snopes made its name for one reason, and one reason alone. There are SO many gullible people on the internet who follow the belief that if you read it on the internet its true. It still to this day continues to make fools of people stupid enough to read any old bullshit they see on the internet, and then not content with being dumb enough to believe it themselves, they share that shit, and perpetuate it!
You got to admit, it's a fair point.!
Right, I'm done here for now, thanks again for reading.
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 9, 2015
Friday, January 10, 2014
Modern day police, the media, and the public.
Recent days have seen some terrible stories out there, deeply damaging to the reputations of the police, and I should point out from the start that the stories are what the media are reporting, and not necessarily based on cold hard facts, or indeed contain all the facts available. But more focus on what makes the hard hitting headline.
I think it is fair to say one thing for sure, the reputation and trust in the police is something that has always been a talking point in society. Minority groups, ethnic groups, immigrants, people of certain social stature are just a few of the areas that relationships with the police not only have 'room for improvement' but also ones that are unlikely to ever really see huge changes in perception, both ways in some cases.
The most recent case to really blow up was of course the conclusion of the Mark Duggan inquest, where it was ruled as 'unarmed and lawful killing'. Accepting that Mr Duggan was indeed unarmed at the moment he was struck by bullets fired by SO19 officers. However the report is keen to impress upon people that he was 'at some point' in possession of a firearm, and one the officers were informed he would have in his possession.
I'm not going to go into the ins and outs of the case itself, it is a very controversial case to say the least. I have my own personal opinions on what happened, having sifted through a bit of the evidence which has reached the public domain. However will be keen to see the full and official report whenever that becomes available.
But one of the most focused upon issues in the Duggan case is of course the belief that the officers colluded with each other before making their official reports. Reports that would be later called into question. 'Facts' such as all the reports apparently referring to a gold vehicle, when the vehicle was in fact silver, point to the fact that all the officers based their reports from a similar pool of information. The likelyhood of all the officers independently mistakenly noting it as a gold vehicle is pretty slim. The is IF indeed these 'facts' reported by the media are found to be true. Or if it is another example of the media short quoting in order to get a sensational story.
Speaking of the media and their reporting of the case, when the verdict was given, watching all media outlets, I could not help but feel the sensational and aggressive way the story was being reported was in some way almost insighting a violent and explosive reaction, maybe hoping for something again on par with the riots of 2011.
The next story involving the police which made big headlines at the time, and has come back in to the public's crosshairs this morning is the Andrew Mitchell 'Plebgate' affair. With one of the officer's, PC Wallis, who was claiming to have witnessed the events, having now resigned, adding more fuel to the fire of why people should trust the police.
One of the things that really bites for me is my previous application to join the Met about 5 years ago, and having been refused based on a minor criminal conviction I received some 17 years prior to applying. While on the one hand I can understand the Police stance on the matter, that their name should not be able to be questioned should a serving officer be required to give evidence. With the word of someone with a criminal record being far easier to call into question, than that of someone with no record.
But on the other hand when you read stories in the media (true or hyped) of officers being charged with offences but kept in service, or other officers like Wallis who dare to lie on such a high and public level, when already given so much trust and serving in SO16, DPG. Sometimes I see these things, and it for a moment trivialises my 'offence' and I feel cheated from not being allowed to serve. Especially given how much involvement I have had with the police since then, with a lot of assistance being given.
Anyway, this is about the police, not me, so onwards and upwards as they say.
Growing up as a kid back in the 80's, The days of wooden truncheons, big helmets, and very little PPE being worn. The thought of calling a copper a name was bad enough, but god forbid considering laying hands on one. Respect for the police was inbred, knowing that they had the power to make life a little miserable for you, knew the people on their patch, and kept a close eye on anyone they knew had been released from prison following one of their arrests. In the social groups I grew up in from hitting my teens, I have crystal clear recollections of some of the encounters of my friends and the officers. But as much as some wanted to avoid coming into contact with the police, the respect was always there in one way or another.
In the current day and age, the last couple of generations have somehow turned that message around, and it seems that there are huge social groups of people out there who have an unsubstantiated hatred for the police, just for merely existing. No interactions, no run ins, just life long taught messages of 'hate the police, they are bad'. For some I can start to understand why this may happen. If someone close to you has been affected by corruption of some form from within the police force, a victim of racial hatred on one of its rare occasions from within the force, or any other sort of hard hitting miscarriage of justice, then it is only natural to in some way preach hatred of the establishment. But the masses who claim to hate the police, and want anarchy, are just opportunist little thugs riding on the wave of social disruption for pleasure or gain.
Going back to Mark Duggan for a moment, and the riots of 2011. I remember them very well as they occurred around the time my mother passed away, so what was already a strange time for me, became even more confusing. Coping with a changing world around you is hard enough, even harder when the social fabric around you is tearing and burning.
The explosion of anger, violence and destruction on the streets of London, and then other cities was maybe ignited by the shooting of Mark Duggan, but the actual fuel for the continuation of the unrest was 90% based on the sheer lack of respect some generations have for the law, the police, and society as a whole. Most people running around smashing things up and stealing had NO idea about the shooting in Tottenham, let alone the circumstances. And of course the reports had not even been submitted by the SO19 officers at that point, let alone become public.
Still, all the while, whilst these mindless little thugs ran around causing terror and distress, the police, the exact people the protest was about, the people who's behaviour was in question, were out on the streets, protecting the wellbeing and the property of the members of public. Like many things in life, we are keen to forget the good and focus on the few small bad things that happen. You only have to check an online review website to find this. Sites such as TripAdvisor are full of negative comments about hotels, carriers and other holiday based reviews, but very few take the time to compliment a service provider for something good they did. Its the same in all walks of life. Now I know the Met and other police forces are hardly tour operators or McDonalds servers, but the principal is the same. We LOVE to moan, and shout names loudly, but it seems we are too shy to say nice things.
Now so far I have focused on the public and the police, but there is a third party here, and that is the media. Like the fire triangle, it is quite apt that this story which also results it high temperatures and explosive events should have 3 also. The oxygen, like the public is all around us, lots of it, found everywhere, then there is the fuel, in this case the police, not everywhere, but usually found in areas where fire is possible. But it seems that both can exist, albeit in a volatile environment, but they can exist without the fire. Friction causes unrest, unrest which attracts heat, aka the media, and the rest is history. Like the public, the media sometimes seem hellbent on causing a bigger and bigger story, taking what is a small smouldering mess, and fanning it, publicising it, and giving it more and more attention, until there is fire.
The events in Tottenham after Mark Duggan's shooting would more than likely have remained 'quite low key' or lets say local, had the media not decided to sensationalise, and hype the situation to a point where it was almost sold to the bored and angry younger generations as the right thing to do to vent their anger and pass some time. Looting, violence, life changing destruction of property, all apparently in the name of a man very few knew, and with facts that were at this point still very cloudy. Something even his family seem keen in public to distance themselves from. But thanks to the media, the death of Mark Duggan and the riots of 2011 will forever be entwined in history together. Regardless of what the family or police would like.
This of course is not the first time that this has happened. A few years prior we had the 'anti capitalist' marches in London which were later to be known as the MayDay Riots which gained a reputation for themselves, and all future May Day protests were tarnished with the same brush, and then of course we cannot forget the G20 protest / riots which unfortunately will always be remembered more for the sad death of Ian Tomlinson rather than the behaviour and actions of masked cowards which created the stage for the interaction in the first place. That's not to take away from what happened in the incident, but just to put it into perspective.
There have been many occasions in which the police's behaviour has been called into question, usually when someone from the public has fallen victim to the actions of someone in uniform. But its strange how those who call for action, those who demand the police are reeled in react when the scene changes slightly.
All matters above have referred to incidents where the police have in some way instigated an interaction with an individual, and their subsequent actions have been somehow questionable in the eyes of the public and of course the media.
So lets switch to the case of Drummer Lee Rigby, and his brutal and public murder. The police were called to attend a fluid event, and one which had many many permutations of how it could end up. With the police receiving radio updates as they sped to the scene, SO19 officers arrived on scene, and within seconds of doing so were set upon by one of the killers. Running towards the car with a meat cleaver, he was gunned down by the passenger of one of the SO19 vehicles in order to protect the driver of the vehicle.
The officers then switched roles to care givers and approached the man who was laying on the floor, as the officer approached he noticed a handgun and fired at the man again. No shots that day were fatal, but both suspects were taken to ground following being hit by shots from the SO19 officers.
Amazingly, the reaction from the majority of the public is that these two men should have been killed on the spot, that the SO19 officers in the blink of an eye should have played judge and jury and sentenced both men to immediate execution by firing squad. Judge Dredd springs to mind here. It is all very well to suggest such a thing, but one thing is always overlooked in situations like this.
Lets look at SO19 for a minute and see what they do as a day to day role. This is far from a complete duty list, but I want to focus on two of them.
There are planned operations, where they support other groups and offer firearms protection to all officers involved. Close attention is paid to detail, information is gathered and studied about the location. All officers go in with a good understanding of the situation they may face. The outcome of the operation will be considered a 'success' if it ends in a way which was foreseen during planning, I am pretty sure this involves the consideration that the target person / persons may be shot in the process. The aim is to not have anything happen outside the parameters of the plan.
Then there are unplanned and dynamic situations. These are the sort of operations called in by the public or officers requesting support. SO19 officers are required to attend a location they may have little or no knowledge of, and have an effective impact in ending the situation in a way which remains within guidelines. Sadly this may sometimes involve firing lethal rounds and killing someone.
In the latter type of call, which the Woolwich murder resulted in two people being shot but not killed, much to the public's dismay, there is actually a good lesson here. The officers do a lot of training for many situations, but as anyone knows, life is NOT a rehearsal, and you only get one go at it. With most people believing the 2 men should have simply been executed, it shows our primeval thought process that says fight or flight, kill or be killed, and in this case for some reason we accept it.
The reason we the public accept it is simple, hindsight! When making these judgements and decisions we are armed with the plain and simple facts, these two men had just run someone over, then brutally tried to hack his head from his body. We saw it reported over and over in the media, we were told graphic detail.
The officers however would have received a call to an armed assault, possibly a murder, with the suspects still armed and posing a threat to the public, their job is to apprehend the person, NOT execute them.
On their arrival, even after the threat of a machete attack, and then having a gun pointed at them, the officers were able to avoid killing these men, but instead subdue them and apprehend them. Their principal role.
When Mark Duggan was shot, the same rules of engagement would have existed, the same goal would have been in sight. Unfortunately, no matter how good a shot, no matter how much practise on the range, or how good the weapon, the result of a gunshot is never a certain thing, especially when taken at any range further than point blank. Numerous people have been shot multiple times, some through vital organs, but lived to tell the tale. Others have been shot in seemingly 'harmless' places such as the leg, and the bullet has ricochet and travelled through the body causing death. Of course the officers are trained to practise lethal and non-lethal shots, but even some of the best shots in the world cant guarantee the outcome, unless of course its a glass bottle or a clay pigeon.
I guess what I am trying to get at here comes down to the following.
1/Regardless of belief, 99.9% of people who sign up to become police officers do not do it with the dream of hurting people, causing upset, and ruining peoples lives. A small percentage might have a bit of an ego trip going on early days, but generally those people leave the job after a short while, once they realise how challenging and horrible the job can be.
2/ Racial hatred is a nasty thing, and very much a two way path. The hatred aimed at, and received by both sides of the walls does nothing to help relationships, and as it perpetuates from generation to generation it gets deeper and angrier. Once it just led to vocal exchanges, and the occasional physical incident. Nowadays it is something that can arise from the smallest of interactions, with the race card being played all too often, and frequently unnecessarily. One that the media love to sink their teeth into, as if there is a race related incident involving the police, there is potential for a far bigger story.
3/ All police are not corrupt liars. The media would sometimes like to you to believe they are, as I said previously, keen to dig up all the dirt but not so keen to highlight some of the amazing acts of bravery from officers of the police forces up and down the country. Examples like these Police Bravery Awards
Finally, its quite simple, without the police, regardless of what the hardnuts of the Manchester estates would have you believe, or the anti capitalists, anti-authoritarians and all the mindless people who would love a police-less society, without the police, without law and order the UK would fall into genuine anarchy. Anyone who believes the country would be a better place without police is sadly misguided.
There is a lot of work to be done out there, relationships will never be perfect, the crime someone commits will always be petty, and the officers should focus on someone else. Speeding will always be trivial, anti social behaviour will be present until families re-take responsibility of their kids... And so on.
But the big issue out there, for me, is the way these things are perceived by the public, and sadly the main perception of the police is provided by the story hungry media. Its a vicious circle, and one that wont improve any time soon. As the police increase their attempts at public interactions with open days and events, the public seem to just shy away from these attempts. David Cameron once coined the phrase 'hug a hoodie' well maybe its time to roll out 'cuddle a copper' and break the barriers down once and for all.
If you have got to the end of this blog / rant, I congratulate you. I didn't think I ever would!
PS, I want to add a big fat thank you to all the police officers out there, putting their lives on the line day after day, and making London a safer place.
Hats off to all those who use Twitter as a medium to break the barriers down, and encourage conversation and interaction with the otherwise shy public. Shouts out to.
@mpsinthesky
@mpsfaradaysgt
@mpsbrockleysgt
@mpssydenhamsgt
@mpsinthewater
@mpslewisham
@mpssouthwark
There are many more, but this is a handful that I follow day to day, and enjoy interacting with.
I think it is fair to say one thing for sure, the reputation and trust in the police is something that has always been a talking point in society. Minority groups, ethnic groups, immigrants, people of certain social stature are just a few of the areas that relationships with the police not only have 'room for improvement' but also ones that are unlikely to ever really see huge changes in perception, both ways in some cases.
The most recent case to really blow up was of course the conclusion of the Mark Duggan inquest, where it was ruled as 'unarmed and lawful killing'. Accepting that Mr Duggan was indeed unarmed at the moment he was struck by bullets fired by SO19 officers. However the report is keen to impress upon people that he was 'at some point' in possession of a firearm, and one the officers were informed he would have in his possession.
I'm not going to go into the ins and outs of the case itself, it is a very controversial case to say the least. I have my own personal opinions on what happened, having sifted through a bit of the evidence which has reached the public domain. However will be keen to see the full and official report whenever that becomes available.
But one of the most focused upon issues in the Duggan case is of course the belief that the officers colluded with each other before making their official reports. Reports that would be later called into question. 'Facts' such as all the reports apparently referring to a gold vehicle, when the vehicle was in fact silver, point to the fact that all the officers based their reports from a similar pool of information. The likelyhood of all the officers independently mistakenly noting it as a gold vehicle is pretty slim. The is IF indeed these 'facts' reported by the media are found to be true. Or if it is another example of the media short quoting in order to get a sensational story.
Speaking of the media and their reporting of the case, when the verdict was given, watching all media outlets, I could not help but feel the sensational and aggressive way the story was being reported was in some way almost insighting a violent and explosive reaction, maybe hoping for something again on par with the riots of 2011.
The next story involving the police which made big headlines at the time, and has come back in to the public's crosshairs this morning is the Andrew Mitchell 'Plebgate' affair. With one of the officer's, PC Wallis, who was claiming to have witnessed the events, having now resigned, adding more fuel to the fire of why people should trust the police.
One of the things that really bites for me is my previous application to join the Met about 5 years ago, and having been refused based on a minor criminal conviction I received some 17 years prior to applying. While on the one hand I can understand the Police stance on the matter, that their name should not be able to be questioned should a serving officer be required to give evidence. With the word of someone with a criminal record being far easier to call into question, than that of someone with no record.
But on the other hand when you read stories in the media (true or hyped) of officers being charged with offences but kept in service, or other officers like Wallis who dare to lie on such a high and public level, when already given so much trust and serving in SO16, DPG. Sometimes I see these things, and it for a moment trivialises my 'offence' and I feel cheated from not being allowed to serve. Especially given how much involvement I have had with the police since then, with a lot of assistance being given.
Anyway, this is about the police, not me, so onwards and upwards as they say.
Growing up as a kid back in the 80's, The days of wooden truncheons, big helmets, and very little PPE being worn. The thought of calling a copper a name was bad enough, but god forbid considering laying hands on one. Respect for the police was inbred, knowing that they had the power to make life a little miserable for you, knew the people on their patch, and kept a close eye on anyone they knew had been released from prison following one of their arrests. In the social groups I grew up in from hitting my teens, I have crystal clear recollections of some of the encounters of my friends and the officers. But as much as some wanted to avoid coming into contact with the police, the respect was always there in one way or another.
In the current day and age, the last couple of generations have somehow turned that message around, and it seems that there are huge social groups of people out there who have an unsubstantiated hatred for the police, just for merely existing. No interactions, no run ins, just life long taught messages of 'hate the police, they are bad'. For some I can start to understand why this may happen. If someone close to you has been affected by corruption of some form from within the police force, a victim of racial hatred on one of its rare occasions from within the force, or any other sort of hard hitting miscarriage of justice, then it is only natural to in some way preach hatred of the establishment. But the masses who claim to hate the police, and want anarchy, are just opportunist little thugs riding on the wave of social disruption for pleasure or gain.
Going back to Mark Duggan for a moment, and the riots of 2011. I remember them very well as they occurred around the time my mother passed away, so what was already a strange time for me, became even more confusing. Coping with a changing world around you is hard enough, even harder when the social fabric around you is tearing and burning.
The explosion of anger, violence and destruction on the streets of London, and then other cities was maybe ignited by the shooting of Mark Duggan, but the actual fuel for the continuation of the unrest was 90% based on the sheer lack of respect some generations have for the law, the police, and society as a whole. Most people running around smashing things up and stealing had NO idea about the shooting in Tottenham, let alone the circumstances. And of course the reports had not even been submitted by the SO19 officers at that point, let alone become public.
Still, all the while, whilst these mindless little thugs ran around causing terror and distress, the police, the exact people the protest was about, the people who's behaviour was in question, were out on the streets, protecting the wellbeing and the property of the members of public. Like many things in life, we are keen to forget the good and focus on the few small bad things that happen. You only have to check an online review website to find this. Sites such as TripAdvisor are full of negative comments about hotels, carriers and other holiday based reviews, but very few take the time to compliment a service provider for something good they did. Its the same in all walks of life. Now I know the Met and other police forces are hardly tour operators or McDonalds servers, but the principal is the same. We LOVE to moan, and shout names loudly, but it seems we are too shy to say nice things.
Now so far I have focused on the public and the police, but there is a third party here, and that is the media. Like the fire triangle, it is quite apt that this story which also results it high temperatures and explosive events should have 3 also. The oxygen, like the public is all around us, lots of it, found everywhere, then there is the fuel, in this case the police, not everywhere, but usually found in areas where fire is possible. But it seems that both can exist, albeit in a volatile environment, but they can exist without the fire. Friction causes unrest, unrest which attracts heat, aka the media, and the rest is history. Like the public, the media sometimes seem hellbent on causing a bigger and bigger story, taking what is a small smouldering mess, and fanning it, publicising it, and giving it more and more attention, until there is fire.
The events in Tottenham after Mark Duggan's shooting would more than likely have remained 'quite low key' or lets say local, had the media not decided to sensationalise, and hype the situation to a point where it was almost sold to the bored and angry younger generations as the right thing to do to vent their anger and pass some time. Looting, violence, life changing destruction of property, all apparently in the name of a man very few knew, and with facts that were at this point still very cloudy. Something even his family seem keen in public to distance themselves from. But thanks to the media, the death of Mark Duggan and the riots of 2011 will forever be entwined in history together. Regardless of what the family or police would like.
This of course is not the first time that this has happened. A few years prior we had the 'anti capitalist' marches in London which were later to be known as the MayDay Riots which gained a reputation for themselves, and all future May Day protests were tarnished with the same brush, and then of course we cannot forget the G20 protest / riots which unfortunately will always be remembered more for the sad death of Ian Tomlinson rather than the behaviour and actions of masked cowards which created the stage for the interaction in the first place. That's not to take away from what happened in the incident, but just to put it into perspective.
There have been many occasions in which the police's behaviour has been called into question, usually when someone from the public has fallen victim to the actions of someone in uniform. But its strange how those who call for action, those who demand the police are reeled in react when the scene changes slightly.
All matters above have referred to incidents where the police have in some way instigated an interaction with an individual, and their subsequent actions have been somehow questionable in the eyes of the public and of course the media.
So lets switch to the case of Drummer Lee Rigby, and his brutal and public murder. The police were called to attend a fluid event, and one which had many many permutations of how it could end up. With the police receiving radio updates as they sped to the scene, SO19 officers arrived on scene, and within seconds of doing so were set upon by one of the killers. Running towards the car with a meat cleaver, he was gunned down by the passenger of one of the SO19 vehicles in order to protect the driver of the vehicle.
The officers then switched roles to care givers and approached the man who was laying on the floor, as the officer approached he noticed a handgun and fired at the man again. No shots that day were fatal, but both suspects were taken to ground following being hit by shots from the SO19 officers.
Amazingly, the reaction from the majority of the public is that these two men should have been killed on the spot, that the SO19 officers in the blink of an eye should have played judge and jury and sentenced both men to immediate execution by firing squad. Judge Dredd springs to mind here. It is all very well to suggest such a thing, but one thing is always overlooked in situations like this.
Lets look at SO19 for a minute and see what they do as a day to day role. This is far from a complete duty list, but I want to focus on two of them.
There are planned operations, where they support other groups and offer firearms protection to all officers involved. Close attention is paid to detail, information is gathered and studied about the location. All officers go in with a good understanding of the situation they may face. The outcome of the operation will be considered a 'success' if it ends in a way which was foreseen during planning, I am pretty sure this involves the consideration that the target person / persons may be shot in the process. The aim is to not have anything happen outside the parameters of the plan.
Then there are unplanned and dynamic situations. These are the sort of operations called in by the public or officers requesting support. SO19 officers are required to attend a location they may have little or no knowledge of, and have an effective impact in ending the situation in a way which remains within guidelines. Sadly this may sometimes involve firing lethal rounds and killing someone.
In the latter type of call, which the Woolwich murder resulted in two people being shot but not killed, much to the public's dismay, there is actually a good lesson here. The officers do a lot of training for many situations, but as anyone knows, life is NOT a rehearsal, and you only get one go at it. With most people believing the 2 men should have simply been executed, it shows our primeval thought process that says fight or flight, kill or be killed, and in this case for some reason we accept it.
The reason we the public accept it is simple, hindsight! When making these judgements and decisions we are armed with the plain and simple facts, these two men had just run someone over, then brutally tried to hack his head from his body. We saw it reported over and over in the media, we were told graphic detail.
The officers however would have received a call to an armed assault, possibly a murder, with the suspects still armed and posing a threat to the public, their job is to apprehend the person, NOT execute them.
On their arrival, even after the threat of a machete attack, and then having a gun pointed at them, the officers were able to avoid killing these men, but instead subdue them and apprehend them. Their principal role.
When Mark Duggan was shot, the same rules of engagement would have existed, the same goal would have been in sight. Unfortunately, no matter how good a shot, no matter how much practise on the range, or how good the weapon, the result of a gunshot is never a certain thing, especially when taken at any range further than point blank. Numerous people have been shot multiple times, some through vital organs, but lived to tell the tale. Others have been shot in seemingly 'harmless' places such as the leg, and the bullet has ricochet and travelled through the body causing death. Of course the officers are trained to practise lethal and non-lethal shots, but even some of the best shots in the world cant guarantee the outcome, unless of course its a glass bottle or a clay pigeon.
I guess what I am trying to get at here comes down to the following.
1/Regardless of belief, 99.9% of people who sign up to become police officers do not do it with the dream of hurting people, causing upset, and ruining peoples lives. A small percentage might have a bit of an ego trip going on early days, but generally those people leave the job after a short while, once they realise how challenging and horrible the job can be.
2/ Racial hatred is a nasty thing, and very much a two way path. The hatred aimed at, and received by both sides of the walls does nothing to help relationships, and as it perpetuates from generation to generation it gets deeper and angrier. Once it just led to vocal exchanges, and the occasional physical incident. Nowadays it is something that can arise from the smallest of interactions, with the race card being played all too often, and frequently unnecessarily. One that the media love to sink their teeth into, as if there is a race related incident involving the police, there is potential for a far bigger story.
3/ All police are not corrupt liars. The media would sometimes like to you to believe they are, as I said previously, keen to dig up all the dirt but not so keen to highlight some of the amazing acts of bravery from officers of the police forces up and down the country. Examples like these Police Bravery Awards
Finally, its quite simple, without the police, regardless of what the hardnuts of the Manchester estates would have you believe, or the anti capitalists, anti-authoritarians and all the mindless people who would love a police-less society, without the police, without law and order the UK would fall into genuine anarchy. Anyone who believes the country would be a better place without police is sadly misguided.
There is a lot of work to be done out there, relationships will never be perfect, the crime someone commits will always be petty, and the officers should focus on someone else. Speeding will always be trivial, anti social behaviour will be present until families re-take responsibility of their kids... And so on.
But the big issue out there, for me, is the way these things are perceived by the public, and sadly the main perception of the police is provided by the story hungry media. Its a vicious circle, and one that wont improve any time soon. As the police increase their attempts at public interactions with open days and events, the public seem to just shy away from these attempts. David Cameron once coined the phrase 'hug a hoodie' well maybe its time to roll out 'cuddle a copper' and break the barriers down once and for all.
If you have got to the end of this blog / rant, I congratulate you. I didn't think I ever would!
PS, I want to add a big fat thank you to all the police officers out there, putting their lives on the line day after day, and making London a safer place.
Hats off to all those who use Twitter as a medium to break the barriers down, and encourage conversation and interaction with the otherwise shy public. Shouts out to.
@mpsinthesky
@mpsfaradaysgt
@mpsbrockleysgt
@mpssydenhamsgt
@mpsinthewater
@mpslewisham
@mpssouthwark
There are many more, but this is a handful that I follow day to day, and enjoy interacting with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)