what sort of government uses water cannon on protestors?

Sapphire

ninky wrote: »

a deeply unpopular one perhaps?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/12/13/theresa-may-gives-police-green-light-to-use-water-cannon-against-protesters-115875-22780038/

Many governments do, including that of the generally law-abiding Germany.

WhiteHorse

olly300 wrote: »

People choosing people like them and setting entrance criteria to ensure that people like them can get in more easily.

A good point, clearly expressed.

It applies in all sorts of situations and across the whole spectrum.

Generali

ninky wrote: »

a deeply unpopular one perhaps?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/12/13/theresa-may-gives-police-green-light-to-use-water-cannon-against-protesters-115875-22780038/

Your OP is very badly put. You ask what sort of Government uses water canon on protestors and give an example of rioters, a very different thing.

People have the right to protest under UK law and rightly so. They do not have the right to damage property while protesting.

Cleaver

ninky wrote: »

i believe football matches have a history of violence among supporters. does that mean everyone who goes to a football match deserves to be injured or hosed with water cannon if scuffles break out? did the hillsborough victims deserve their fate?

I think you know you're doomed in a debate when you're trying to discuss and justify the use of water cannons in the situation of violent protest and the person you're debtaing with suggests that because of this you somehow might think the Hillsborough victims 'deserved their fate'.

For this reason I'm not sure it's worth us discussing this any further.

Malcolm.

Police and protestors are being hurt, there's a minority of bad elements in both camps.

In the main, people are good.

Should things get out of control, and if they're not used disproportionatly, I think the use of water cannons is justified.

I think I'd prefer pressurised water to a truncheon to the head.

Cleaver

chucky wrote: »

there were thousands if not tens of thousands of people on these protests.
the behaviour of a couple of hundred (if that) of these is a small proportion to what was actually happening and has been magnified by the media.

You're correct. The vast, vast majorty of people on these protests have a right to protest and are doing so in an exmplorary way.

The news showed that, unfortunately, there were a significant minority of people who were hell bent on causing criminal damage. So it doesn't matter whether there were 100, 1,000, 100,000 or 1,000,000 peaceful protesters, the police still have to deal with the ones who were throwing bricks, breaking windows and generally causing criminal damage.

I think all Graham and I were saying was that a water cannon would seem a justified way of dealing with this minority. I don't really see what the media has to do with that? Or what Graham living in Devon has to do with that? I live in Manchester though, so maybe I'm not qualified to give a view on this either.

Cleaver

Malcolm. wrote: »

Police and protestors are being hurt, there's a minority of bad elements in both camps.

In the main, people are good.

Should things get out of control, and if they're not used disproportionatly, I think the use of water cannons is justified.

I think I'd prefer a pressurised water to a truncheon to the head.

Four incredibly sensible and simple statements that sum up the whole situation very well for me.

chucky

Cleaver wrote: »

You're correct. The vast, vast majorty of people on these protests have a right to protest and are doing so in an exmplorary way.

The news showed that, unfortunately, there were a significant minority of people who were hell bent on causing criminal damage. So it doesn't matter whether there were 100, 1,000, 100,000 or 1,000,000 peaceful protesters, the police still have to deal with the ones who were throwing bricks, breaking windows and generally causing criminal damage.

I think all Graham and I were saying was that a water cannon would seem a justified way of dealing with this minority. I don't really see what the media has to do with that? Or what Graham living in Devon has to do with that? I live in Manchester though, so maybe I'm not qualified to give a view on this either.

i don't really have an issue with use of water cannon. i believe all of this can be dealt with better though.

i have an issue of people exagerating what they believe happened because they claimed they watched on BBC News.

i have an issue that the fundamental issue behind it all (university education) is not at the top of the agenda for the media - they prefer to focus on the violence of the minority instead of addressing what the current government is implementing.

this all suits the government.

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

i have an issue of people exagerating what they believe happened because they claimed they watched on BBC News.

I saw what happened.

It's not exagerating. I've reported what we can all see, and nothing else. If I'd made up stuff, fair enough, but I haven't, so not sure what your beef is.

Really2

Cleaver wrote: »

I think you know you're doomed in a debate when you're trying to discuss and justify the use of water cannons in the situation of violent protest and the person you're debtaing with suggests that because of this you somehow might think the Hillsborough victims 'deserved their fate'.

For this reason I'm not sure it's worth us discussing this any further.

I missed that post by ninky thank god I did. It takes some kind of twisted idiot to come up with that.
Hillsborough was caused by a crush, people (children and adults) literally had theirs lives crushed out of them and died standing.

Only a moron who knows nothing about it and cares not about the people involved then links that to football violence.

It is the fictional ramblings of someone with a desperate political agenda.
PS for those that don't know I am a Liverpool supporter.