Tuesday, August 29, 2006

"Revellers"

BBC :

One reveller told BBC News: "They came and surrounded the first sound system and then got closer and closer until it turned into a proper confrontation and they started beating people."

Essex Police said any complaints would be taken seriously and thoroughly investigated.


Police Oracle Forum
:

We were about to move in to break up the rave when the decisions were changed. We went into an illegal rave - just as night fell (in the middle of a slippery, recently dug up field - there were a lot more than 600 people there!!!!!) The decision was made that we would go in with CUSTODIAL HELMETS - no shields and no batons - as we didn't want to appear confrontational!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

God I was shi**ting myself!!

As soon as we got in there we got hammered - there must have been about 50 Essex officers at this stage!! The crowd were throwing missiles, broken bottles and large planks of wood, pushing, shoving, using dogs and using violence towards us - it was horrendous! We had to withdraw to the carrier to get our protective equipment and then it all began! (Did we honestly expect a huge crowd of people who had organised an illegal event on someone else's land and refused to comply with police requests to pack up and leave without any problems?)

At one stage I thought we were going to get the kicking of our lives! We had to rapidly withdraw several times, then had to contain the area until other officers from other forces arrived - 4 forces in all.

26 comments:

Verity said...

I have the perfect solution to "revellers" on other people's property: shoot them.

Why not? They won't be missed.

Anonymous said...

Obviously the commander in charge of this operation was a total idiot who cared only about media criticism of any police action, and not the welfare of his men.

Verity said...

Quite. Otherwise he would have given orders to shoot the "revellers".

Joe90 said...

If someone shot my son dead for dancing in a field then I would shoot them.

I mean it.

Who would miss you, verity?

PL said...

I'd miss verity for her honestly stated comments for sure.

I'd shoot your son. Not dead though.

:-P

Verity said...

Guns solve a lot of problems. And fast, too.

Joe90 said...

You make guns sound like Nurofen.

Maybe not a good idea to get the two things muddled up.

Although in your case it won't make a lot of difference.

Verity said...

joe90 writes - "You make guns sound like Nurofen." (A very strange fantasy indeed.)

"Maybe not a good idea to get the two things muddled up." I agree. It wouldn't cross my mind in a million years to get a gun muddled up with Nurofen. Perhaps you've been round too much Nurofen and you've become confused.

Guns make you angry do they, Joe90? Why?

Stuart said...

"If someone shot my son dead for dancing in a field....."

Not A field, SOMEONE ELSE'S field.
This shouldn't even be left up to the bumbling Plod (most of whom can't be trusted with firearms anyway), but the farmer and a whiff of 12 gauge buckshot.

Presumably Joe90 wouldn't mind if verity invited a few hundred friends around to 'dance' and take drugs on his front lawn.....

JuliaM said...

"This shouldn't even be left up to the bumbling Plod (most of whom can't be trusted with firearms anyway), but the farmer and a whiff of 12 gauge buckshot."

A nice idea, 40-50 years ago it might have worked. Now, the 'revellers' are likely to be better armed than the farmer. And of course, absolutely NOT afraid to use violence to get their way.

Why not? It isn't as if the threat of punishement is real, for their kind. But any hard-pressed farmer who went out with his 12 bore would be in police custody faster than he could blink. So much easier for the police to deal with.....

Joe90 said...

"Guns make you angry do they, Joe90?"

No.

It is vicious-minded snobs like you who make me angry.

Stuart: "but the farmer and a whiff of 12 gauge buckshot."

A bit more than a few pellets embedded in the backside was being urged in the opening post: "Why not? They won't be missed."

Pretty clear that, eh?

My son is too young go to such events, and I don't want him going either, full stop.

One of my nephews in Cambridgeshire is a bit older, and he does go.

Him and his pals could of course content themselves with a night down the local pub. But this is a bit boring and they run the risk of encountering ahem 'travellers'. You may recall the case of the village postman murdered by travellers outside the Chequers pub in Cottenham a few years ago. So they prefer to avoid travellers and their likely haunts.

They could go to some nightclub in Cambridge, like The Junction. Then they have to spend the evening looking over their shoulders in case they get picked on by a gang of louts from Arbury.

So instead they like to avoid the unpredictable violence of pubs and town centres when they can, and they set up a rave, although they just call it a 'party'.

This involves hauling a sound system into a disused quarry or old clunch pit, and spending the night there, with about a hundred other partygoers

I imagine someone owns the land in which the quarry or clunch pit sits.

So according to the original post by our resident Myra Hindley wannabe, these English youngsters are to be treated like vermin. Not just shot in the backside with buckshot or rock salt, but killed.

"They won't be missed."

Verity said...

Joe90, you are a vicious person and should be twitted for referring to me as a Myra Hyndley wannabee.

Yes, I am sure "someone" (i.e., the registered owner who bought and paid for it and pays taxes on it) owns the quarry where your nephew and his smart-arse, drug sodden friends disturb the neighbourhood, trespassing and thinking it is his god-given right to utilise other people's property and disturb people who wish to sleep and not be assaulted by teenage "music".

If these feral young would not move on - and bloody lucky to have the choice of vacating the property without being arrested - I would advise the police to shoot some of them. They're vicious, violent, self-regarding and believe they have rights elevated above property owners and surrounding people who obey the law.

Besides comparing me to the torturer and murderer of innocent little children, Myra Hyndley (may she roast in hell), Joe throws in the "insult" that I'm a "snob". I don't know where that came from. Gun owners are across all society in most countries. In Texas, New Hampshire, Colorado and other civilised states in the US (which I am sure you loathe; spare us the bile), rednecks carry guns, little old ladies pack heat in their handbags and $5,000 an hour lawyers carry guns. Most will never shoot in anger. Just at the shooting range. But if they need to defend themselves, they can, do and will not be charged. Oddly enough, in those states, few people get shot. Why? "An armed society is a polite society". Geddit?

Snob? Sam Colt's slogan was The Equalizer. Rich or poor, weak or strong, if you have a gun, you're equal in strength to the other fellow. As far as you can get from snobbery. Democracy in action.

Why is Britain the only country in the world where the citizens aren't "allowed" guns? As though this natural right was in the gift of Tony Blair.

Joe90 said...

Actually I quite like America, old allies and all that.

But you are bonkers.

Charles Martel said...

hmmm... youngsters wanting to avoid the violence of town centres - so therefore they setup an illegal party out in a field in the middle of nowhere...

as long as they arent bothering anyone, whats wrong with that?

Verity said...

charles martel - But they *are* bothering people. That's why people call the police. They are also trashing someone's property on which the owners are obliged to pay property tax. Six hundred young people dancing, churning up the field, with illegal electricty run in, is a gross invasion of private property.

Where is the illegal electricity run in from, by the way? Someone's house? I doubt it. Off the public wires paid for by householders?

Joe90 - If you like the US so much, you will have noticed on one of your many lengthy visits that there are no raves. This is a slag English habit.

Anonymous said...

"the unpredictable violence of pubs and town centres"

Which is where the real problem lies. The Plod have been morphed into political stormtroopers and as a result not only lost all public respect and co-operation, but the diplomatic skills to deal with public order problems.

They have been given stasi-like powers to infringe on people's liberties for an ever growing list of new offences - many of them 'thought crimes' that require little investigative work - and have found it easier (and safer) to meet their political targets than to tackle street crime and burglaries which could involve ethnic minorities and the dreaded charges of racism. Hence their 'them and us' fortress mentality. The local Bobby who was someone you knew by name and sight is as long gone as the Bow Street Runner; by the same token, residents on a beat area have become faceless 'customers' or entries on a database of potential suspects.

Had this 'rave' been set up on one of the farms where I now live (rural US), no-one would have been shot. Householder and landowners have the right and the means to protect their property and everyone knows where they stand. If you enter someone else's property you'd better have permission or a damn good reason to be there, otherwise your next stop will be the Pearly Gates.

In town, the same applies, if you are attacked and cannot reasonably retreat, you are authorised to use lethal force. Everyone knows this, hence our town centre is safer than anywhere in the UK.

Ironically, this is because our state laws are drived directly from English Common Law

Charles Martel said...

"That's why people call the police. "

wrong... nobody needs to call the police.
even if the rave is halfway up a mountain, and the nearest village is 50 miles away, the cops can still break it up.

have a look at the Criminal Justice and Public order act of 1994, section 63


and who exactly was being disturbed by this rave held in the welsh mountains?

"with illegal electricty run in,"

huh? dont you realise that they use their own generators?

you need to get out more matey -like , err, an illegal rave maybe.

Charles Martel said...

"If you enter someone else's property you'd better have permission or a damn good reason to be there, otherwise your next stop will be the Pearly Gates."

fair enough - i cant argue with that. so is it legal to hold an open air rave in the U.S. if you have the property owners permission, and the rave is suitably isolated, so as not to disturb townsfolk?

and believe me - British town centres on a Saturday night have a well deserved reputation for random , alchohol fuelled violence. in my own town, i havent visited the town centre on a saturday night for over 5 years now. and many other people are like me.

by contrast, going to an illegal rave is probably the safest, option out there for the youngsters.

Verity said...

anonymous 4:42 - You are absolutely correct that no one would have been shot in a similar circumstance in the US, because there would not have been one. Six hundred young people would not have been motivated to invade someone's private property and give a party on it. They, too, are aware of the law and property-owners' rights.

There is more respect for the law in the United States by both the citizenry and the police. British crime control is in rags and tatters - largely because of the causes you enumerate. The British need to take the law back into their own hands if the police won't handle it.

It is harder to control - if that is your wish - a population that is armed. That is why the vile Blair disarmed an entire country, who should have risen up in a revolution at the temerity of the mere thought.

My own experience of the US is, the police encourage gun ownership. When I had an intruder, late at night, in my garden, the police were there within five minutes and their first question was, "Where do you keep your gun?" I showed them that it was in the drawer in the bedside table, and they told me to take it out and leave it on the top of the table so it would be even handier.

There is an assumption in the US that the police are there to protect the law-abiding, not to police thoughts.

Verity said...

Charles Martell - So they churn up other people's property bringing generators in. How cool.

Charles Martell says: "you need to get out more matey". I would get out an run a mile to avoid people who address one another as "matey".

England is a violent, lumpen society. Why? How did it degenerate so quickly from being kindly, considerate and law-abiding? Of course, Blair willed it so, to make people more dependent on the government and less on themselves.

Charles Martel said...

good god Verity - you really need to lighten up. that was me being sarcastic.

i dont think you quite get the point of the illegal rave scene - its actually an escape from the violent,lumpen society that you speak of. Go to any British town centre on a Saturday night, and you'll see it.

Charles Martel said...

"So they churn up other people's property bringing generators in. How cool."

a small ,portable, petrol driven generator is all you need to power some decks, a computer and a modest sound system. it fits quite easily into the back of a transit van.

so no - there's no churning up of property.

Charles Martel said...

verity -> 3000 new criminal offenses since 1997

Verity said...

Re your link, Charles Martell - Yes, I'm aware of this. Tony Blair is so obviously, so patently unhinged that I cannot believe he has managed to hang on for nine years. It's so obvious he's a megalomaniac.

It baffles me that the British could vote such a confidence trickster in three times in a row.

Of course that is the great strength of the confidence trickster: not his cleverness, which is often, as in the case of Blair, barely evident, but the sheer willingness of people to abandon rational thought and be deceived.

Verity said...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403005&in_page_id=1770

"Revellers" have taken over a £5m house in Primrose Hill and are holding an ongoing rave.

The good news is, it belongs to a Russian "businessman", who doubtless has some acquaintances familiar with effective eviction methods.

Anonymous said...

I dont think Tony Blair is fully to blame.

The rot set in years ago, we are just seeing it more clearly now.