Comments:Rioting develops throughout England

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
feistiness111:32, 10 August 2011
Some issues011:21, 10 August 2011
Comments from feedback form - "There was evidenced a Gun foun..."004:30, 10 August 2011


Last time I was in London, there were demonstrations that shut down a few streets, subway stations, and bus lines. Perhaps this indicates a higher degree of feistiness among Brits compared to Americans?

Ragettho (talk)04:21, 10 August 2011

These riots are not directly politically motivated so it would be unfair to compare them to protests, for example, by tea-partyers in the US (which also span a broader range of ages). It is questionable also that the majority of the violent protest by students in the UK was done in the name of the cause now that we see there is an undercurrent of youth in cities that have now worries about smashing shit up.

Having never visited any part of the US the impression is that there is greater patriotism (even in more deprived areas) that could reflect a greater respect for the more local area that US kids live in. That patriotism is not felt the same in the UK and as we can see, kids already living in deprived areas dont care about fucking it up just that little bit more.

This theory is based on absolutely nothing (talk)11:32, 10 August 2011

Some issues

Regarding the shooting of Mark Duggan there are still many unanswered questions. However we do known that the firearms officers did not explicitly claim they were shot at but claimed their lives were threatened. We know that a loaded gun was at the scene. we know that at this stage there is no evidence the pistol at the scene was fired.

This leaves the very real possibility that the gun was still being used in a threatening manner - Firearms officers are not obliged to wait until they are shot upon in order for themselves to open fire.

The IPCC are, as the name suggests, and independent entity from the police. The tone of this article is tending towards an attempt to cover something up for the police - use of the word "admitted" suggests an attempt to initially conceal the information which seems unnecessarily inflammatory to me.

I also take issue with the way the shooting is described as sparking the riots in this articles and indeed in other reports in the mainstream media. I would argue that the shooting sparked a riot in Tottenham on saturday. It is this riot that then set precedent for other riots to take place. By wording it this way I think that the subsequent riots seen this week are more suitably distanced from the shooting of Mark Duggan, which most people seem to aggree but some of the media seem slow to pick up on (calling the riotors protesters etc). (talk)11:21, 10 August 2011

Comments from feedback form - "There was evidenced a Gun foun..."

There was evidenced a Gun found not Duggans, a bullet in a police radio was identified as a police type. Facts reported in daily broadsheets not here qujoted? Suspected police snow job.

Robbygay (talk)04:30, 10 August 2011