Police on horseback charge at protesters

gnomeking said:
(i will not be baited... i work maintaining the woods and hedgerows you doubtless love charging around in)
Click to expand...

Hmmm... troll in the camp me thinks?
So because we're horsey we love "charging around woods and hedgerows"?
Akin to - shouldn't be on the roads, should be able to afford their own fields to ride in, etc etc

There is no excuse for the outrageous behaviour that went on at the protests, I do wonder if some of them had a huge lack of discipline as small children so have the misguided belief that stamping their feet and having a temper tantrum will get them what they want?
Life ain't fair - get over it!

Ironically, if the feeling on here is a good representation of the feeling across the country they've done themselves no favours and many people will have lost any sympathy they had.
 
skewbald_again said:
Are you serious? If you took a show of hands down the average pub/in Tescos what do you think would win the day?

a) allow a horse to get hurt, so as not to upset the little darlings.
b) shower the workshy scumbags with rubber bullets and let them take their chances.

Someone will now pop up and go 'oh but they're *Sun Readers*' or some such. So what? Democracy is a numbers game.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that if the headline in The Times said "Police fire rubber bullets at student protesters" that there wouldn't be uproar (Sun readers or no Sun readers).
I'm sorry to say thay the majority of the country are not horse lovers so wouldn't be thinking "it's ok - we spared a horse getting hurt" they'd be thinking that rubber bullets was a step too far.

Personally I believe a water canon would have been useful and acceptable but rubber bullets would have been over the top.
 
lctrouble said:
Do you really think that if the headline in The Times said "Police fire rubber bullets at student protesters" that there wouldn't be uproar (Sun readers or no Sun readers).
I'm sorry to say thay the majority of the country are not horse lovers so wouldn't be thinking "it's ok - we spared a horse getting hurt" they'd be thinking that rubber bullets was a step too far.

Personally I believe a water canon would have been useful and acceptable but rubber bullets would have been over the top.
Click to expand...

Well actually, I agree about water cannon, but I think the majority of the country are - sometimes disproportionately, ill advisedly and plain ignorantly 'animal lovers' as witness the idiot who fed a pony dry sugar beet without its owner's knowledge.

I think the vocal minority we get to hear on the radio and tv, the headline grabbing 'actorvists' and 'human rights popstars' would have made a fist of convincing us that rubber bullets were way over the top. I'm not convinced Joe the Plumber after four pints would agree, to be honest.
 
QR - Speaking as the friend of someone who's ear was taken off by a rubber bullet while he was walking PAST an area where a riot was taking place and not even taking part in it, I think some of you should read up about these weapons.

From someone who has actually been at and witnessed violent disorder, not just watching from the comfort of their armchair. It's not actually as cut and dried as some people might think.

There were no horses used in Belfast.
 
maggiesmum said:
Hmmm... troll in the camp me thinks?
So because we're horsey we love "charging around woods and hedgerows"?
Akin to - shouldn't be on the roads, should be able to afford their own fields to ride in, etc etc

There is no excuse for the outrageous behaviour that went on at the protests, I do wonder if some of them had a huge lack of discipline as small children so have the misguided belief that stamping their feet and having a temper tantrum will get them what they want?
Life ain't fair - get over it!

Ironically, if the feeling on here is a good representation of the feeling across the country they've done themselves no favours and many people will have lost any sympathy they had.
Click to expand...

Good post.

Personally "my opinion" (as I don't buy "any" papers or magazines and have a mind of my own) is, if you go protesting with missiles flares fireworks etc etc and are causing criminal damage to others property, blatantly in front of police officers, a rubber bullet up the arse is fair game, and I wouldn't give a toss, if it was my property being damaged I would be happy to shoot the tossers and not with rubber bullets.

I think you may find your car/house insurance doesn't cover you for this sort of thing, how would you feel standing there watching your property being destroyed, while some fluffy bunny is whining, oh mustn't send in horsies, oh mustn't use a water cannon, oh mustn't use rubber bullets, let's all sit and drink camomile tea, yea right.
 
lctrouble said:
Do you really think that if the headline in The Times said "Police fire rubber bullets at student protesters" that there wouldn't be uproar (Sun readers or no Sun readers).
I'm sorry to say thay the majority of the country are not horse lovers so wouldn't be thinking "it's ok - we spared a horse getting hurt" they'd be thinking that rubber bullets was a step too far.

Personally I believe a water canon would have been useful and acceptable but rubber bullets would have been over the top.
Click to expand...
Im not sure the papers speak for the majority on a lot of issues but im sure a headline about rubber bullets being fired at a load of spoilt brats and assorted crustys rampaging and ransacking would do anything other than reasure the law abiding populus that the police were doing there job and at last had a grip on the situation..
 
Last edited:
perfect11s said:
Im not sure the papers speak for the majority on a lot of issues but im sure a headline about rubber bullets being fired at a load of spoilt brats and assorted crustys rampaging and ransacking would do anything other than reasure the law abiding populus that the police were doing there job and at last had a grip on the situation..
Click to expand...

And so say all of us, couldn't agree more. Ummn yes, think I'll just go outside, smash up my neighbours car & march around with a placard to protest that my recycling bin hasn't been emptied, then all my other neighbours could join in & smash up my car, isn't this the same sort of thing & if this were your car/property wouldn't you want the police to protect it & you/your family??
 
Pedantic said:
Good post.

Personally "my opinion" (as I don't buy "any" papers or magazines and have a mind of my own) is, if you go protesting with missiles flares fireworks etc etc and are causing criminal damage to others property, blatantly in front of police officers, a rubber bullet up the arse is fair game, and I wouldn't give a toss, if it was my property being damaged I would be happy to shoot the tossers and not with rubber bullets.

I think you may find your car/house insurance doesn't cover you for this sort of thing, how would you feel standing there watching your property being destroyed, while some fluffy bunny is whining, oh mustn't send in horsies, oh mustn't use a water cannon, oh mustn't use rubber bullets, let's all sit and drink camomile tea, yea right.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and I think that's how most people feel. We've put up with all this PC, bless them they had a bad start in life, crap for long enough.

Likewise, I don't understand the uproar that those who attacked HRHs car might have been shot. Why weren't they? What is his armed guard for? OK, this time, it panned out alright, but again as above, you attack the car of the heir to the throne, which is under armed guard, at your own peril, surely?

As for that spoilt prat Gilmour. I'm still thinking up suitable punishments for him. A night on Salisbury Plain is my favourite so far. Not on his own.
 
I have no issue with water cannon (with dye in :p), horses and I wish to God the cops would send in some lit-up dogs :p hard to throw anything when you have a Malinois hanging off your arm, so I am not a fluffy bunny, I just know, from actual, you know, 'being there' experience, that rubber/plastic bullets are not a good idea and they are no longer used for a reason.

Also, sending the Royals to the Variety Show in a big wide-open car with picture windows for them to wave out of, with the Royal Crest plonked on top, during civil disorder was, you know, a bit dumb.
 
CaveCanem said:
Also, sending the Royals to the Variety Show in a big wide-open car with picture windows for them to wave out of, with the Royal Crest plonked on top, during civil disorder was, you know, a bit dumb.
Click to expand...

Yes, It was, but there they were.
As it happened, it was a good call, they didn't get hurt.
But I'm just interested, really.
How far do you go before you get shot at?
 
CaveCanem said:
Me personally?! No idea. I observe.

But please, no shooting live rounds at unarmed civilians by hyped-up armed responders, if only to save the taxpayer a £188m inquiry.
Click to expand...

So what's the point of an armed guard, if, when the car is attacked by a mob, who have already proved themselves violent, they must not under any circumstances, shoot?

What if one of those hunks of concrete had gone through a window and hit HRH on the head? OK, it didn't, but if it had, would we be saying, where were the armed guard?
 
Oh in that instance with the Royal car, yeah, if warning shots had been fired, I would not have an issue, I mean generally, when there is a melee, and you fire into it, it will end in tears. History has taught us that.

Personally I think Cam would have been well able to take them all on, she's a double-hard bird!
 
Double_choc_lab said:
I mean with the new Bill courses such as medicine will attract the higher cap ie £9k per year and this would mean a medicine course costing £45K - (before any living expenses)therefore this would deter many less wealthy students from applying and this is wrong. People of all social class should aspire to further their education and not be deterred by cost. The £21K earnings cap mean that anyone earning an average wage or above will be paying back the fees
Click to expand...

Right...but they do not have to stump it up from their own pocket before getting their books out.
Perhaps,given a few years,if the higher fee's reduce th numbers at uni there will be plenty of graduate jobs for graduates and enough money in the pot to give a little more help to the very bright but very poor.

As asked on another thread,because I really do not understand it- why is it fine to take on IRO 250k debt to buy a house,but evil to be expected to pay IRO 40k for the educaiton that will alow you to live the life you want?
 
Wow, incredible how quickly people get out of the way... Can see plainly how effect horses are in battle. So much respect for those animals and the sheer trust they have in their riders. No doubt most of the people protesting are vegetarians yet still find it acceptable to throw wood at the animals.
 
vegetarianism speaks much about non-violence yes.

@(previous poster)troll is it? - don't need anybody to do your weeding, cut your hedges, maintain your tracks and paths do you?....that makes some kind of money hating communist peasant does it?....my views illegitimate are they?.... well perhaps i'd be right if that your attitude!!! Snob.

Yes i struggle at times to keep smiling when in close proximity blatant wealth when i have so little - - try it sometime . its hard work.


I am glad that somebody here at least is not so rabid that they realise that going to extremes like using rubber bullets on (mainly peaceful) protesters is NOT going to be accepted by the populace, nor the Lawyers and Accountants.

Water cannons are not exactly risk free in this regard also.

do people really think measures were justified?
the media is full of stories about how crowds of peaceful people became increasingly disorders after various attempts to 'Kettle' ad refusal to let people leave.

Questions are being asked over police brutality, missing ID badges, poor organisation etc etc - same after all recent demonstrations >> when will ANYBODY learn?

Questions are being asked as to the necessity of several police horse actions throughout the day > were they necessary?did they just make situations worse?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0vlPWl02E4

as a person with an interest in animal welfare, i have questioned this also from an animal care point of view.

do the risks (injury and distress to horse, and potential lose of control) outweigh the gains?

many protesters are saying specifically the horse inflamed situations - and that groups of people appeared to be intimated with horses for no good reason.

while a horse is a powerfully ally, should it be used in these apparently unnecessary ways, when all it does is create bad feeling to horse (and rider) from large crowds?

(ps lets stop all the silly talk about brutalising demonstrators shall we? it really doesn't look too good)
 
Police were missing one thing in that charge...........lances.
I find it digusting that people were ripping the flags off the cenotaph,an defacing churchill,as for attacking HRH,bang out of order.The fox hunt bill wasent anywhere near this yet the police cracked on in there.
Should sent out over loudhailers. "There will be a horse charge followed by dog handlers and tsg.All peacful protesters leave by this area,anyone left will be deemed as violent an will be treated as such"
Dont know why we dont use water cannon TBH.Allthough expect they would put water rates up to compensate.:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top