They're fighting back now that the city is burning. These kids are used to facing people who don't fight back. That's why it's such a shock for them to finally get that reaction. Why weren't people standing up to them previously? Because the government was prosecuting the people who use violence against these kids in self defense. The law was previously operating under the idea that victims are supposed to basically shut up & take it, and then go to the police after the fact. The concept of using violence in self defense has been under attack in some parts of Europe and the US for well over a decade. These are some of the consequences of that failed ideology.

Doesn't it make you curious that until the immigrant hot spots like the Turk districts started fighting back, the English were standing by and letting it happen? It's cultural differences in action.

Bloody do-gooders! Just like that Jesus chap!

It's a sad day when brainless thugs like the ones doing all of this cannot be stopped... I agree with the person who started the Facebook group... "bring our soldiers home and send the rioters to Afghanistan".

There has been some damage near me... they smashed a sports shop and also a Maplins (they deal with electronics). Also a shop that sells bicycles (and has done for decades) was vandalised... so pointless

I even removed anything of value from inside my car earlier, just in case something happens to it!

I have no sympathy for any one of the rioters... and I'd love to see them arrested and charged. I'd also love to see National Service brought back and anyone caught doing shit like this gets a minimum sentence of one years' service in the Army... see how the cowardly punks deal with fighting people that fight back!! (Bit of a difference between an empty shop selling shoes and armed members of the Taliban!)

I found it quite amusing that a Waterstones employee said, "We're staying open. If they steal some books, they might learn something." Apparently Waterstones and Rymans were left untouched.

If something like this were to happen where I live, I know that I don't possess the physical strength to fight back and protect myself and the ones I love. And that's why I have seriously considered purchasing a gun -- and going to the local gun range to get properly trained in its use. I've actually looked into it, and was surprised to discover how strict New York State gun laws are.



Perdita, that's priceless!

Minty, that's so scary that the rioting was going on right where you live! Be safe!

-- Nephele

Lol, yeah, I'm betting that the WHSmith round my area won't get touched either. Not that I expect much violence- it's only a town after all, not a city.

Personally, I think that the police should have acted more in London, rather than just standing there. Send the army in to scatter the rioters- worked before in other countries. The rioting kicking off in other parts of the country is just for the sake of violence. There is no reason behind it, they're just jumping on the band wagon, so to speak- just using the London riots as an excuse.

This is just like the g20 in Toronto, just on a much larger scale.

If they were left untouched, it is because there is nothing the youth wanted there. They don't want to read...and this is a symptom of the "instant satisfaction" mentality so many possess today from youth into the 30 and 40-somethings (i.e., the parents of these youths). Why read a book when they will make it into a movie or miniseries on TV within a year or two? They don't care that the movie or what not rarely holds true to the book...they just want the instant satisfaction of spending 2 hours to get the whole story instead of spending a week or more reading a book!

This instant satisfaction is also seen in how people eat. Why take the time to cook a meal when you can pop some processed crap in a microwave or run through a drive thru?

The instant satisfaction factor added to the "what's in it for me" thinking has created a generation of youths who don't care about anyone but themselves...all they seem to care about is partying and having cool stuff...forget working for any of it. Again, I do understand that there are some responsible ones out there, but it seems that the responsible group is becoming more the minority every day!

Then you have the media glorifying this behavior! Anyone remember when MTV's "Real World" first came out? Back then, I actually enjoyed watching it...arguments in the house were based on real issues, such as racism, struggling with ones sexual orientation, etc. People on the show back then actually acted, for the most part, as if they had a brain! They could hold serious conversations about serious things. As time went on, the show became about 7 people who were only interested in partying, getting drunk, and hooking up! This evolution is a perfect example of the progression of our youth and young adults over the same period of time. As time passed, you get shows like "Jersey Shore", "My Super Sweet 16", etc. which basically reward these people for acting like jerks and spoiled rotten brats!

It is no wonder the youth here and abroad are acting as such! Between the media and parents who don't parent their kids, the kids are getting out of control! And you think the riots in London would wake some of these parents up? Highly unlikely! The parents of these kids are probably saying things like, "Not my problem!" or "There's nothing I can do about it!" They turn away because they, too, only think about themselves, and actually parenting their spawn is just too difficult!

I feel this is not that, concerning not attacking a library, in fact I bet they would keep libraries and civic facilities and get rid of commercialization. The group in the g20 was understood to be anti globalization, notably acting more like thugs than people who have opinions. But I bet they respect authority apart from the punitive sort. Not saying I am right, just providing an alternative perspective on the issue.

Most of what you said I agree with, above post.

Personally I think that the government should announce that anyone caught looting will be introduced to Mr SA80 at short range.

Last I heard the person who's shooting sparked this all off seems to have been cleared of gun charges. Looks like the powers that be are taking a gentle approach to this to avoid looking too heavy handed.

Those fuckers keep doing that. Why do we let them?

I love how she failed to spell "innit" correctly....

I can't imagine what this would be like in the US with all the guns, several people would have been killed by now. A guy in NC was killed last week because another guy didn't like that he dropped a few peanut shells on the street, imagine that sort of person during a riot, the body count could be very high.

It is scary how people are reacting to this there are extreems everywhere, it is bringing out the best in some who are helping and taking care of each other, and the worst in others who are reinacting the devil may care attitude that saturates young adult media and joining the"party". The really scary part is these people are proud of what they are doing! How can you be proud that you are picking on people who have done nothing to you?

Also a question if I may, a few people in the US have been saying to me that it started as a black/white race issue, I haven't seen anything about this on the news and a many people in the US are a little to prone to chalking things up to race so is there any truth to that?
Wishing all of you who are over there safety and a swift end to this.

-Morwynn

There's some truth to it in that it was a black man who was shot by police a few days ago. The more accurate truth is that the culture of the chav has been allowed spread too far.

A friend of mine lives near where the riots started in Tottenham...he's ok, but man, this whole thing is way worse than I first thought. According to him, his street is still closed down and a shopping mall type shopping center was completely emptied!

I think that it is pretty clear by now that if it weren't for the UK's gun policies, these riots would have left a body count comparable to LA '92 by now. However, that being said policies as strict as theirs unavoidably put the weakest members of the community at the mercy of the criminals. The elderly and weak simply won't be able to get a fair fight when facing a young teen or 20-something thug. Even if the honest member of society were an able-bodied, fit individual that's not going to help when confronting enough criminals at once [for example when you have a dozen thugs teaming up on a victim; Sophie Lancaster & her BF come to mind here, they were quite outnumbered; imagine if they had been seniors instead of young healthy adults].

That's why governments that are against gun rights are usually the first to take such hardline positions against using violence for self defense. The theory is that if the victims just shut up & take it, then the legal system can catch & rehabilitate the criminal & everyone goes home alive to see another day. That's great when rehabilitation works [or when the criminals are out to steal from you instead of something against your body like killing or raping you], but in a place like Philly or London it clearly isn't working and the criminals are not being discouraged from simply taking what they want, when they want, from whomever they want.



New York City, which is where you're from IIRC, is one of the worst places in the country for gun rights. Until recently only DC, Chicago, and CA were worse [in that order]. Philly until recently closely followed NYC. Those places don't want people to have guns, and they especially don't want them to have side arms. Philly has been forced to get better in recent years due to court cases & state wide reforms,[1] so city leaders try to make up for it by prosecuting anyone who uses a gun in self defense within the city whether they're someone being robbed, or raped. I actually have a story about this from a city not too far from Philly: a guy was being attacked by a pitbull that had been made aggressive by its deadbeat wanna-be gangsta owner. The police came and eventually caught the dog and were going to bring it to the pound. Somewhere along the line the dog broke out and ran back to the neighborhood and started attacking a bunch of kids near where the original attack took place. The first victim at this point said "to hell with this nonsense" and grabbed his legally owned firearm and shot the dog dead [without hurting anyone]. The cops & DA react by trying to send him to prison for shooting a dog. Replace "dog" with armed gang member and he probably would have done significant time. If he hadn't been able to make bail he would have been in prison until the system found him not guilty.

The immigrant hot spots in London aren't pacified by being brought up under this kind of oppression [and it is oppression to be unable to defend your body from harm without risk of prison], so they didn't think twice about bashing some heads when the looters started coming to their streets. The looters, who had grown up under this system of failed policies, weren't used to this reaction and were so shocked by it that they simply ran away and didn't come back.



Wasn't Operation Trident [the team that shot him] particularly aimed at disarming minorities in the impoverished districts?


[1] One of these reforms was to redo the statute on when lethal violence in self defense can be used. Previously everyone was required by law to retreat if they have the option, try to retreat if they don't, prior to using a lethal response. So let's say you're in bed asleep and someone breaks in intending to kill you. You could not shoot the person without first trying to flee into another room or out a window [depending on the layout of your bedroom]. And then if the person were stupid enough to follow you, only then could you fight back. If you were truly cornered then you could immediately react with a firearm.

You know society's gone to the shitter when a teacher appears in court charged with looting.