Comments by "Django" (@django3422) on "Hundreds of officers should be sacked for breaking the law and misconduct, says Met Police chief" video.

Inclined to agree. Got a pretty bad problem with a small group of aggressive drug addicts in my neighbourhood. At this point, I know them all by face, some even by name. I've had to deal directly with them several times, including when one attacked me and forced his way into our apartment building (not the flat itself, thankfully) earlier this year. The police don't do a damn thing about them. In the case of the forced entry, I even called the police after fending the man off, to get backup. Didn't even get an answer.
5
@songsmith31a You're totally missing the point, Mark. The reality is that we have a situation wherein police corruption is being investigated and judged by corrupt police. Clearly this cannot work.
5
@random6809 I think we've found a copper in fear of getting the sack. XD
5
@CoremanitetheNeko Citizens absolutely shouldn't. If they were, the intruder who attacked me would likely have been carrying and I'd probably be dead. It's bad enough dealing with escalating knife crime and you want to throw guns into that mix?
4
@newblackdog7827 Hang on, your statement doesn't quite line up with your previous one. Are you saying that you'd worry how a cop with a revulsion to homosexuality would treat Christians or how a cop who DIDN'T have a revulsion to homosexuality would treat Christians? Being Christian is a choice, being gay is not. It's a false equivalency. ANY person who wants to serve as a police officer needs to serve ALL people, not just the ones they like or who's lifestyle they approve of.
2
@Mangraper Sure you are, cupcake. They may be but they certainly ain't common, what with them being illegal and all. Make them available to any citizen, like they do in the States, and then it's no longer a question of IF.
1
@songsmith31a You know what irony is, right? That aside, not sure how you can look at events of the last couple decades, at the findings of reports into police conduct, and be surprised that people tend towards not trusting police.
1
@songsmith31a You use a lot of words to say nothing of substance. It doesn't matter that the police draw on the public to fill their ranks. Most members of the public aren't violent or hateful. The issue is with the screening of recruits, of how reports of misconduct and outright law breaking are handled. Nothing that you've said addresses that very simple fact. No, you seem to be attributing failings to "knee-bending"... just say "woke ideology", I know that's what you mean. So you seem less concerned with matters like Cressida Dick's complete botching of the investigation into Jean Charles de Menezes, which put numerous lives at needless risk and ended with an innocent man dead. Or the rape and murder of Sarah Everard by an officer who was known to his friends as "the rapist". Their negligence in the case of Stephen Lawrence, because he was black, or failing to take Stephen Porter's case seriously, resulting in murders of young gay men, because they were homophobic. So don't give me this "agendas" nonsense because the police agenda has been clear for a long, long time. Maybe include that in your history lesson, might give it some value.
1
@songsmith31a No, they're not one and the same. For a start, you never mentioned "the selection process", you just said "The society that has been created supplies the members of the police service". Meaning that if we have a violent, hateful society then we get violent, hateful police officers. My point is that since not all of society is violent and hateful, by a considerable margin, then your explanation for why we have bad police officers doesn't hold any water. What it in fact points to is failings in the screening of new recruits, which is not the same as simply who applies. Yes, the cases I cite are historically recent, within the last two decades. Which is why I said earlier that I'm "not sure how you can look at events of the last couple decades, at the findings of reports into police conduct, and be surprised that people tend towards not trusting police". Are you keeping up so far, Mark? Because you seem to think we're having a different conversation. Unfortunately for you, there is a record of it that we can consult. Officers murdered in those years are irrelevant when it comes to judging how police corruption has eroded public trust. It's not like you can cash in a murdered cop for a corrupt one. For the same reason, it doesn't matter that there is daily unreported good work done by police officers, that's their JOB. It's the bare minimum. You don't get a medal for NOT being a rapist and murderer. Are you starting to get this now? Do you even understand what this conversation is actually about?
1
@songsmith31a Oh, you mean that comment where you used a lot of words to say absolutely nothing? For example, "in flux" means constantly changing. So writing a sentence like "a society in flux which was itself changing" tells me that you don't know what the words you're using actually mean. So can you see why I overlooked it? It's because while you did, admittedly, use those three words in a reply to me, you threw it in the middle of a word salad and gave no information about why it was relevant. You said nothing ABOUT the changes to the selection process, nor on the role it played. And that seems par for the course. You claim I fail to grasp the relevance of murdered coppers while making no effort to explain the point you're supposedly trying to make. If I'm being generous, I'd say you're too focused on being a smartarse to be saying anything useful. If I'm not, I'd say you don't have anything useful to say and the smartarse facade is just obfuscation. And I'm not feeling very generous today. I suggest you sit these discussions out. Doesn't seem like you have anything worth saying.
1
@songsmith31a You should admit to nonsense, that's all you've got.
1