Slashdot Mirror
Technology Blamed For Helping UK Rioters
Hugh Pickens writes "The WSJ reports that following three nights of rioting and looting in London, Blackberry's messaging network and social networking sites are being blamed by police, politicians and media organizations for helping rioters in London spread word about the next hot spot . It's an 'encrypted, very secure, safe, fast, cheap, free, easy way for disaffected urban youth to spread messages for the next targets,' says Mike Butcher, editor of TechCrunch Europe and digital advisor to the Mayor of London. But Ian Maude, an analyst at Enders Analysis, said it's unfair to lay the blame on technology. 'Certainly, it's a lot easier for people to communicate with each other in real time via some of these services but that's a fact of life. They're not good or evil in themselves, its the purposes for which people use them.' The Metropolitan Police, known as Scotland Yard, say they are monitoring social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. Research In Motion Ltd. (RIMM), the maker of Blackberry smartphones, says it has 'engaged with the authorities to assist in any way we can.'" An anonymous reader points out that the rioters aren't the only ones using technology. London police have begun posting pictures on Flikr of people they'd like to interview following the riots over the last few days.
And technology was equally blamed for helping UK police.
Just another example where technology changes nothing. It just enables all the good and bad impulses inherent in humanity.
Blaming technology for the rioting is bullshit. You have to have people willing to riot and loot in the first place, this just helps them group together....
But more than that, the real bullshit is that in any group that size, there's no way the communication is "secure", in fact it MUST be broadcast (by tweet or whatever) where anyone could see it. Yes that lets rioters group but it also SHOULD give police a heads-up where to be. If technology is to blame for the riots then the police are almost as much to blame for allowed the riots to occur when the targets are handed to them on a digital platter beforehand.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Send fake messages about the next location and be there waiting...
A few months ago the western world wailed loudly when some arab countries terminated internet and mobile phone connections because it was thought to be assisting their local rioters. Here we have a supposedly democratic country where, at the first sign of trouble, government officials are suggesting exactly the same thing.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
But Ian Maude, an analyst at Enders Analysis, said it's unfair to lay the blame on technology. 'Certainly, it's a lot easier for people to communicate with each other in real time via some of these services but that's a fact of life. They're not good or evil in themselves, its the purposes for which people use them.'
How dare he bring logic and reason into the argument! Who does this guy think he is?!?
20 years ago the same area erupted in rioting.. Those rioters used social networking rather than social media, they knocked on doors, chatted in groups, and then went off to find trouble. None of them had mobiles then.. didn't stop the riots. Political action and talking did that.
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
I was under the impression that RIM gave full access to their network to any government that asked.
http://www.indianweekender.co.nz/Pages/ArticleDetails/10/1434/India/RIM-gives-in-to-Indias-concern-on-security
"Disaffected urban youth" in England are toting around Blackberries? Thatâ(TM)s not very hip and edgy.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Guns blamed for helping gunmen shoot people.
Bombs blamed for helping suicide bomber blow up.
Planes blamed for helping people crash planes.
Fire blamed for helping people start fires.
Phones blamed for helping people coordinate bad things.
Internet blamed for child pornography proliferation.
How about this?
Sensationalist media blamed for making everything a scandal or a controversy!
People wanting to ignore and pass off responsibility just fire the blame cannon everywhere. Why are they rioting? Why is there so much civil unrest in England? Are the English that repressed that this is a cry-out for help? Or is this all being blown out of proportion, and the riots are really just a couple of small groups causing trouble. Personally, I think the PoliceState in that country has spiraled out of control, and now there is a growing underground movement with there backs to the wall, so we are seeing the rebellion swell as more and more dissenters act out the only way they personally feel they can. How about looking at the fundamental causes for societal unrest, lets analyze the sociology of the The Land of the Panopticon Complex.
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
With a weakened social safety net, rampant unemployment, eastern-european migrants taking over the few remaining jobs and the super-rich from abroad (mostly the middle east) causing housing prices to skyrocket...
It also has nothing to do with the looting of the public done by the banksters and their enablers, the politicians.
Finally, the Met police are trusted and can't be blamed for the vandals and looter's complete despise for the actions of the law enforcement... it's not the fault of the police that they are unaccountable.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
If someone is shot, do you blame the gun or the shooter?
Blame the idiots who used the tool, not the tool itself.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Or lose....But actually, i like loose better.
Today has been a rather different story - Twitter has been used to organise a community-driven clean-up process, with large numbers of people gathering in the damaged areas of London to help fix things and tidy up. #riotcleanup is still trending worldwide, and has been for most of the day, #riotwombles (a wonderful tag) has been used for organising people on the streets, and @riotcleanup has picked up over 70,000 followers today. There's also a sort of website running now.
Social media, the Internet and technology in general are just tools - it's how people use them that matters; and today we've definitely seen them being used for good.
It's totally not your ineptitude at being police, or the social wrongs that are driving people to riot, it's clearly their ability to communicate with each other which is to blame! Also, people don't kill people, bullets do, and car accidents are always 100% the vehicle's fault.
If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
How long before "democratic countries" start talking about phones like they talk about guns? Will we have to listen to chants like, "Phones don't kill people. People kill people." and "Phones don't piss people off enough to kill people. People piss off people enough to kill people."
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Give law-abiding Britains their gun rights back and let them use them in public when attacked by people who clearly intend to render substantial harm to life, limb or property.
Liberals were predicting that the "make my day" self-defense statutes Florida and Georgia have would result in a bloodbath because recipients of violence could not only stand their ground (by abolishing the "duty to retreat") but also lowered the threshold for using a weapon in self-defense.
Instead, a lot of criminals suddenly realized it would be open season on them.
Of course, you're well within your right to lecture these "redneck states" on how uncivilized their behavior is--even as your city is struggling with outright barbarism in its midst.
I've followed the BBC feed on the riots, and I can't say I've heard anyone, including the police, "blame" the technology, as much as simply acknowledging that the rioters use it to organize. That's it. Nobody is screaming "remove technology from the premises".
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
How did they miss the chance?
How about blaming themselves for their ham-fisted police action for sparking the riots in the first place?
No? Funny that...
They'll forgive technology once they remember how well it helps them track down those who rioted. And then help them prosecute. And then help them build profiling and monitoring software for riot prevention. And....
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
These smart people are simply getting out of hand. We need dumb people because they are easier to manage.
causing riots. stopping riots. identifying rioters. cleaning up after riots. social media, is there anything they can't do?
Soon, They'll make bigger boards and bigger nails, and soon, they will make a board with a nail so big, it will destroy them all!
We are having these problems in Illinois and Wisconsin as well. Illinois has no concealed carry law, and Wisconsin's doesnt take effect until Nov 1.
We are not seeing destructive flash mobs in Houston. It's won't happen there because both the organizers and participants know that lots of Texans walk around armed all the time. So, the concealed carry law it's self PREVENTS violence because these hooligans don't want to try something that will lead to them being shot dead.
So, the UK can watch and spy, and listen all they want and it will have no effect on what is happening.
* Carthago Delenda Est *
Really this is nothing more then the 21st century equivalent of the printing press. People are going to use it to communicate both good and bad things more efficiently then they were before.. this is both obvious and meaningless. I'm sure that both the automobile and public transport both factored into the riots and the only reason there aren't stories about that is that old people understand those technologies.
They said it... disaffected youth, why is the public so angry at the police that it spills over into riots?
Not being from the UK, but I believe the police over there have more liberties with people, which opens up their ability to harass people, while police in the US can be dicks, we're talking about ALL of the police in the UK.
With all the surveillance cameras in London one would thought that is has to be the most secure city in the world.
Oh the irony.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
Decry. I do not think that word means what you think it means. Or would you care to rephrase that first sentence?
... endlessly cutting back on government services so that people can pay less taxes ...
Er, you're talking about the UK here right? This isn't the US, we don't do tax cuts anymore - we pay MORE tax (VAT up to 20% for a top-of-the-head example) AND get cuts in services. Everyone's a winner!
You seem to be missing the point that the UK is both a democracy and a monarchy... it's a constitutional monarchy.
We won't really know until the aftermath, but if the riots in London are at all similar to the Vancouver Stanley Cup riots, most of the 'disaffected youth" were middle class, teens and young men from the suburbs, spurred on by a handful of professional anarchists. The same black masked anarchists tried to get something going during the opening ceremonies for the Olympics, but fortunately, due to the enormous good will in the city at the time, the crowd turned on the small handful of rioters and shut them down really quickly. After losing the Stanley Cup final - the good will was absent and it took very little to get the crowd going. One thing that was common to both incidents in Vancouver was that early in the day, long before the events, the police began detaining people who were bringing cans of gasoline and weapons into the downtown core.
If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
Hoodies and scarves allow these people to do things in plain view without being identified.
If they want to point fingers at technology enabling these riots, then they should indict public transportation as well. Given many statements to the press that the people participating in these riots seem to have come from all over London, I seriously doubt they all walked or drove to Tottenham or whatever riot spot was on schedule. Odds are great many rode public transportation to get there.
They make it seem so sophisticated, "It's an 'encrypted, very secure..." I bet I could have made an account and figured out where they were going. People are now willing to post where they are going to strike next, open for anyone to see, and the police want to shut it down? Lets just face it, when even the rioters tipping off police ahead of time isnt helpful enough to do anything about the riot then you need to re-evaluate your law enforcement.
Living in London, and seeing the chaos first hand, I find the millions of ignorant teenage American basement dwellers posting here, with their stupid, teenage libertarian logic highly offensive. Britain is a different country, with different traditions, and different laws to the US.
IF these gangs of hoodlums were all packing .45s, then hundreds of innocent people would likely be dead.
There is NO government conspiracy to start riots as a pretext to limit our civil liberties
CCTV does work -- ask all the homie-g gangbangers being busted right now, where the evidence that put them behind bars came from
Grow up, and kindly refrain from commenting on things you obviously know nothing about. Ignoramuses.
"The Congress's Blackberry messaging network and uncritical mainstream media outlets are being blamed by peace activists, security analysts, and anyone with a shred of common sense for George Bush spreading word about the next hot spot, Iraq . It's an 'encrypted, very secure, safe, fast, cheap, free, easy way for arrogant politicians to spread messages for the next targets'
Tell me a time when technology in some form has NOT helped Rioters....
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
like every other group? the deuce you say.
Here is one, how about you drop the ideology and actually stop disenfranchising the youth?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
every 'revolution' may have legitimate reasons, but rioting and arson are their own animals, and often attract people whose main purpose in life is to loot and pillage... nobody 'needs' a Wii.
thats one reason the civil rights groups in the South had training for their protest marchers, to keep out these types.
and its why governments often try to infiltrate false-flaggers into these groups.
When a young man was asked by a reporter, if he thought rioting was the correct way to express disconsent, he answered with
"Yes," said the young man. "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you?"
The TV reporter from Britain's ITV had no response. So the young man pressed his advantage. "Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press. Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you."
http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/08/07/7292281-the-sad-truth-behind-london-riot
The tens of thousands of public and private security cameras must be capturing much of the action. Many of the 7/7 subway terorists were caught this way.
I remember when there a spate of riots in Boulder Colorado a few years back the police posted suspect pictures on the web with modest anonymous rewards. And got good responses too. All this in is a laid-back, progressive city.
...it's the knife's fault that it keeps stabbing people.
Collector's Edition
BBC news ran a story last night that basically blamed Twitter and Blackberry. When I logged onto Twitter - I would say approximately 95% of the posts that were rioting related were outright condemning the riots - and I could see no signs at all of this "organisation" that the BBC article claimed. It seems to me that journalists are just blaming the technology with no real evidence to back up these claims - apart from the fact that many of the rioters are using mobile phones.
No, it's not.
It would be like saying " The CIA, known as Langley...". And guess what... that's done too, though it's not as coloquel(sp?) as Scotland Yard.
Oh dear. So they are saying that technology that is designed to facility easy communications between people can be used for exactly that purpose but with evil intent. Well of course and what is the problem with that exactly? Maybe UK should try to consider what the underlying problem is for the riots. Can it be that most of these people are unemployed? Maybe these morons in the UK government should consider that the solution is not to turn the country into a police state but to actually help people with social issues, like jobs, education and health care.
This is one of the more insightful postings here.
Elsewhere I read a comment along the lines of "poor brits having no guns to defend themselves" - completely missing the point that aggressors would also have guns and know where you lived.
Benjfowler -- I hope that you and your neighbours are safe and that the after effects of the riots aren't too severe; from the relative peace of a town outside London it looked bad. Good luck.
Obviously violent video games are to blame as well as violence in the media. Lets get all the standard scapegoats of modern society and blame them. You know, besides what's really to blame in this case: criminals, society, police.
30 years of conservative rule is the source of the problem. Why are these urban youth disaffected? It's not their fault they were born without opportunity. It's the state's fault for not providing that opportunity.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The trigger for all this may have been a hijacked peaceful protest but I think the sheer number of people involved in the rioting and looting shows a deep-running undercurrent of disaffection and disenfranchisement of a significant portion of the population. That kind of thing doesn't happen quickly, I think this situation has taken decades to develop and stems from the false capitalist assertions of trickle-down benefits and the redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich over the last 30+ years. The poor get poorer and have no opportunities to better themselves anymore. In the meantime, turn on the news and you'll see all kinds of rich people getting richer, government bailouts for bankers when they screw up so badly the world almost comes crashing to a halt. Maybe I'm just saying that because I'm looking to blame anything I can on neoconservatism and ubercapitalists, but if the shoe fits...
I hate what these violent thugs are doing but by god do I sympathise with them.
Sure it is.
If you put a bunch of people who have no way to make a living in a city, because their government is as crooked at the Thames, I am sure taking away technology from them will make them cope better with no food, place to stay or any hope for the future.
Yeah sure it is technology to blame. Everyone knows technology is very bad for society and creates misery for everyone.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
Actually, the Metropolitan Police are sometimes referred to as "Scotland Yard", a textbook case of metonymy.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Blackberry messenger doesn't loot shops, people do.
Politically biased and frankly ignorant of reality much? Knew it wouldn't be long before someone became an apologist for criminals and instead tried to score cheap political points out of it.
It seems to me that democracy is necessary not because it necessarily makes the right decisions, but because it acts as a negative feedback mechanism to ensure that the governors at least approximately act in the interests of the population. Without it, the only way of getting rid of a bad government is through violence.
Colloquial*
You know what's really to blame here? The English language.
How dare schools teach such a dangerous communication tool that lets these criminals and hooligans do such nefarious acts!?!!?
We must halt this terrifying communication at the source. Only when everyone is reduced to pointing and grunting will we be safe!!!!
Weren't some throwing bricks? Bricks were once a new technology. Jus' sayin'.
Do you deny that government policy has a part to play in the people's willingness to riot? I'm not saying these are great people here. I'm saying they haven't been governed well. The proof is right outside your window.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
And I don't see a counter argument how else one could stop a rogue flash mob.
A shotgun under the counter tends to discourage robbery.
But, of course, that's not possible in the UK so a police state will be required instead.
Blaming the Messanger.
Posit: The rich abuse their wealth to gain political and economic control of a country.
Consequence: Wealth is concentrated towards the powerful, the poor become poorer.
Result: Over time a politically, economically and morally disenfranchised underclass is created.
Conclusion: Democracy cannot survive when run exclusively for the benefit of the top 1%.
Obviously, I meant to write 'Merganser'.
And THAT is exactly the point. That is the key to the rioting and looting this time around. I've posted this in two place now, but here's goes again: The London riots cannot be divorced from the recent political and financial scandals in the UK and beyond.
In the last few years, the general public has been made privy to the monumental failure of ethics and responsibility in institutions both public and private. Bankers and financiers have been seen publicly seen to profit enormously from feckless and irresponsible behaviour. Politicians and civil servants have been shown to be inept at best, and in collusion at worst. And--in particular in the UK--the media and police force have been found to be involved in the most scandalous, unscrupulous and unethical behaviour of recent times.
We are living in an age of irresponsibility.
It's interesting to see that many of the rioters are expressing no political, social, or ideological motivations. They are either engaged in arson or larceny. It is simple opportunism. But this behaviour not a random incident; it is an inevitable consequence of our times. I would hold that these rioters across the UK, discontented from the effects of austerity and unemployment, and cynicised by the endless stream of unresolved scandals, have simply decided to have their own slice of the rotten pie.
If bankers can loot the nation without consequence, if the media can destroy lives with impunity, and politicians lie without consequence, then why should a young unemployed man with few prospects turn up what may be his only opportunity to own a big flatscreen TV, or some designer clothes, or to vent his rage at the state? Because it would be "wrong"? Because it is "immoral", "unethical"? But for his entire life this young man has been shown by example that crime pays, that ruthlessness and wrongdoing pays, that rage and emotion pay.
I don't wish to sound like a religious reactionary, bemoaning the loss of public morality. But what kind of ethics have these young men learned from their leaders and public and private institutions? In the UK and beyond. Where are the ethical pillars of our society who lead by example? In politics? In the church? In the media? In private industry? I see none such. And moreover, I see those in such influential positions profiting from their poor examples.
Remember to these young people, the state over the last 10 years is all they have ever known. A state that has lied and warred. A media that has colluded and harassed. Public institutions who have lost all sense of civic duty. Industries that have profited from the most wanton recklessness and greed. And everywhere, none have been held to account.
There are other underlying causes such as deprivation, unemployment, and hooliganism. But such things have always existed in the UK and elsewhere, but I see this spontaneous outbreak of criminal opportunism first and foremost as a sign of our times. These opportunist rioters have been lead by example by our corrupted ruling classes. As the saying goes, "As above, so below".
May the Maths Be with you!
Except the age of majority in the UK is 18...
People below the age of 18 aren't entering into legally binding contracts with the cellular providers, including RIM, so they are either cast-offs or they are otherwise cheap devices, on pay-as-you-go plans. Or the phones actually still belong to the parents. Or they're stolen, or grey-market, which would make them black-listed to the network as soon as the theft was discovered.
People aged 18 or older are going to be able to enter into the necessary contracts to obtain the phones in the first place, but they'd be legally liable as adults for participating in the rioting.
I think the articles pegging them as disaffected youth are probably the most likely to be correct.
Given the problems in Greece and elsewhere in Europe, and the US unwillingness to do what any normal human being do when their income goes down, and freaking spend less, I imagine being disaffected that the nominal adults are mortgaging your future might piss some people off.
American Revolutionary War soldiers were as young as 7. One Congressional Medal of Honor recipient was 11.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 38, which only came into being in 1989 puts a cut-off limit of 15. but allows people 15-17 to voluntarily take the part of a soldier on the battlefield.
The US in large part today owes its existence to disaffected youth and some rabble-rousing "old" men -- the Boston Tea Party, which could not be said to be other than rioting, from the British perspective, was largely laid at the feet of several people, including the then-27 year old Benjamin Rush (1773). Other "founding fathers" were younger than that; Alexander Hamilton was 18 at the time.
I'm not saying that this is happening again, but the British have some track record here, and with communications blackouts being threatened, or at least the communications anonymity that was afforded the authors of the Federalist Papers, which shielded them from retaliation by the British crown at the time, it's unlikely that the real story has made it outside Great Britain.
I'm sure we'll have more information as the situation continues to develop (or not develop).
-- Terry
I really have to challenge you on this point.
If nothing else, conservative government is surely characterised by its approach to law and order.
And yet, right now, we see a huge amount of both crime and disorder which the authorities appear to be unable to control. This suggests that they may not actually be conservative at all
This becomes even clearer if we look deeper, because when we ask why the police are not engaging the rioters, we find that they are afraid to do so, knowing that if someone is hurt, they will be blamed for it and hung out to dry by their superiors. They seek a guarantee from the top that officers will not be blamed if someone is injured. Example.
It seems to me that if the government is truly conservative, then it would provide that guarantee in a heartbeat. But perhaps you can provide some other explanation as to why it has not and will not.
By the way, you are right when you say that these people have not been governed well. You are simply mistaken about the way in which they have been misgoverned.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
Do you deny that government policy has a part to play in the people's willingness to riot? I'm not saying these are great people here. I'm saying they haven't been governed well.
But you blamed "thirty years of conservative rule", which means you either don't realise that Labour were running the country for about half that time, or just refuse to accept that their policies are even more responsible for the feral underclass than the conservatives. Both have been useless, but if we'd had a conservative government since the 50s, you wouldn't be seeing these problems because you wouldn't have had the bloated welfare state and destruction of effective deterrents which has allowed it to come about.
There was plenty of looting during the Egyptian unrest. And in Syria. And in Libya. You better believe there was looting when Iraq was invaded. Looters gonna loot!
Blar.
I used a small 'c'. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were conservatives by any meaningful sense of the term. The USA has also suffered under 30 years of conservative rule, even though we've had 2 Democratic presidents in that time.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
You Do Not Point Guns At LEOs (unless you really mean to shoot) it is an automatic response for that officer (and any nearby officers) to shoot if they think you are going to pull the trigger.
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
I used a small 'c'. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were conservatives by any meaningful sense of the term.
LOL.
Really, that's the funniest thing I've read on Slashdot in weeks.
Well, you have to understand that this is being framed in terms of the gun control debate. Nobody -- not even the British -- has a problem with hunting rifles. You can get hunting rifles easily enough anywhere in the world. Part of the reason why they're so unregulated is because they're really not very good at doing anything but shooting deer.
That is an ill-informed opinion. For example a popular bolt action hunting rifle with a 5 round magazine, the Remington 700, has literally been quite successfully as a sniper rifle in the US military.
Which brings us to semi-automatic weapons (scary), automatic weapons (very scary), and military-grade hardware (panic-inducing).
That is an insightful statement, but not in the way you intend. Note your use of the word of "scary". Military rifles look scary. In truth to a mechanical engineer the differences between civilian hunting rifle and a military rifle is largely cosmetic. Replace wood with composites, replace shiny "blued" metals with matte black, replace a low capacity magazine (a simple sheet metal box) with a high capacity magazine, ...
Regarding automatic weapons vs bolt actions rifles, the differences may not be as great as you believe. A trivially simple (yet still ingenious) device was developed during WW2 to convert WW1 era bolt action rifles to fully automatic.
Now consider hunting ammunition. It is far more deadly than military ammunition. It is literally a war crime for a soldier to use hunting ammunition.
Facing down a psychopath with an assault weapon seems terribly unfair, and, even if you've got your own assault rifle, he's fucking crazy -- he's got less to lose than you do.
And yet history shows sane police and soldiers defeating heavily armed zealots/fanatics on a regular basis. Enthusiasm nearly always loses to training.
Again, I am not advocating what should or should not be legal. I am merely arguing that claiming that hunting rifles are benign compared to military rifles is silly. The differences are largely cosmetic or mechanically minor.
Again, we're talking small c conservative. More British citizens identify Blair as right wing than left wing. Brown was supposedly left of Blair, but that doesn't hold up on analysis.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Be it as it may, and be it as it is, what matters is how they perceive it. That's pretty much what motivates people. Not reality. Perception. And if they feel they're treated unfairly, and feel strongly enough to toss aside the fear of prison and everything commonly held up as decent behaviour, they will act accordingly.
Reality or not.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If nothing else, conservative government is surely characterised by its approach to law and order.
And yet, right now, we see a huge amount of both crime and disorder which the authorities appear to be unable to control. This suggests that they may not actually be conservative at all
Not at all. What it suggests is that the traditional conservative approach to law and order is counter productive.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Yeah, and I bet you think Obama is a socialist too. None of these people come close to being leftists. Some of them, on some issues, might be slightly left of where the established power structure would prefer, but that doesn't make them leftists by any stretch of the imagination. When it comes down to it, they will fight to preserve the status quo and that's what makes a conservative conservative.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Speak for yourself. I suspect I'm not alone in being outside the set of total and utter morons who are obsessed with new shiny shit.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I always ask for respect by stealing television sets and burning down the stores that decided to take a risk setting up shop in my area.
But the traditional approach is not being tried. As I explained.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
These reatards don't know what real discrimination (South Africa pre 1994, USA in the 50s) is. I bet they can't spell it.
Retards is spelled with only one a.
Do you really want law enforcement monitoring your personal device and delaying messages being sent?
No, I want them monitoring trending tags like #letslootwestlodon that ANYONE CAN FUCKING SEE.
Is that so evil? To actually read what you have CHOSEN TO PUBLISH TO THE WORLD???????
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
But the traditional approach is not being tried. As I explained.
The "traditional" approach, that is murder innocent people for no particular reason was tried before and Ian Tomlinson was the unfortunate victim. It turns out that simply murdering innocent people doesn't do much to keep the peace.
Hyporbole aside, there is a very fine line between cracking down on the rioters to protect innocent people and cracking down on innocent people who happen to be too close to the rioters. If you are suggestion that the police should be given immunity from the latter then it is entirely pointless to have the police since they are no longer keeping civil order and protecting people.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
You can wish for situations like this to be resolved without violence, but your wish won't be granted. Would you prefer to have the small chance that some innocent person will be wrongly attacked by the police? Or the very real certainty that innocent people will be attacked in their homes and businesses by rioters and looters? That fireman and ambulances will be attacked? That people will be robbed and assaulted in the streets by thugs?
That is the reality here. You either trust the police, or you let the gangs run amok.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
This is completely untrue. I'm from UK, on holiday from work at the moment and following the news all day on numerous formats.
It is true that technology, particularly social networks and Blackberry messenger are being cited as a reason why pockets are able to spring up and move around quickly (hence being difficult for the police to respond to). It is an explanation - an absolutely valid explanation - but an explanation for a phenomenon is quite different from assigning it blame.
Frankly local MPs and suchlike have come across as surprisingly knowledgeable. I got a schooling on Blackberries from a 50-something female MP from a fairly posh London borough this morning. I'd wager she knew more about these things and why they're popular amongst London youths than RIM's marketing department, she might be deserving of a commission on my next phone.
I find it rather odd that /. posts a link to a tiny article (apologies if my adblock etc is cutting things out) on an American newspaper's site when there is a detailed discussion on the London-based BBC. I'll note the BBC carefully states "A number of politicians, media commentators and members of the police force have suggested that Twitter and BlackBerry Messenger, in particular, had a role to play." Again, having "a role to play" is quite different to being culpable or responsible, my impression is the BBC is responding to those misunderstanding the frequent references.
Oh yeah and technology is also being mentioned with the likes of "Twitter and Facebook users plan clean-up" (again, not social media being credited but noted as a tool used for people worthy of praise).
"In the early months of 1811 the first threatening letters from General Ned Ludd and the Army of Redressers, were sent to employers in Nottingham. Workers, upset by wage reductions and the use of unapprenticed workmen, began to break into factories at night to destroy the new machines that the employers were using." - The Luddites, http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRluddites.htm "I say Edward, if it wasn't for these 'paper and quill' contraptions these Luddites would not be able to organise such thugery. They should close those so called 'stationary shops' before it is too late!"
It can't make me a damned cup of tea.
The monarchy's been stripped of any real power, though. If they tried to use the nominal duties they still have to actually affect policy, those would be removed very quickly.
You bastard! You've made me piss myself laughing.
(At you, not with you.)
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
David Cameron is Prime Minister, not just an MP
He's the head of the executive branch of England's government.
-- Terry
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2377712&cid=37079276 - incorrect capitalization.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2377712&cid=37079248 - incorrect use of semicolon.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2377712&cid=37079224 - fucked up quoting
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2377076&cid=37079168 - "capricious" - that word does not mean what you think it does (though etymologically it may once have done so).
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2376000&cid=37079138 - multiple incorrect semicolons.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."