Andrew Mitchell MP - Should He Go

[Loose]

Agree - it is the policeman who should be moved to another role.

 

Clearly he was being a jobsworth as so many of them are.

 

I think if the copper was told that he was an idiot then it may well have been justified.

 

So no, he should not go and we should not have to listen to some union, who thinks someone has been rude to one of their members.

 

The Police Federation are not a Union RalphC, the government at the time of setting it up deliberately did not set it up as a union with like regulations.

[Big J R]

Well apparently he did apologise JR so I'm not sure what you are referring to there. As for the Police Federation I'm sure they do a lot for their members but what have Cameron's words of sympathy for the two dean police women got to do with this case? How is that playing at politics when the two are unrelated?

 

Perhaps you can come back to me on my question over why Mitchell hasn't been charged and whether or not the police officer made a judgement not to.

 

Half-Hearted apology to get himself, (temporarily), out of trouble.

 

Just phoned a mate, (senior plod), who informs me that NORMALLY, a verbal warning is given for abusive language against police officers, and then on repetition, arrest and a charge for a public order offence.

 

Wasn't like that in my day - A good smack round the ear-'ole and told to 'sling yer hook' usually worked.

 

Better still, a size 10 steel toe-capped boot, 'accidently' placed hard over a plimpsole or soft shoe usually had the same effect.

Edited September 22, 2012 by Big J R

[Loose]

Half-Hearted apology to get himself, (temporarily), out of trouble.

 

Just phone a mate, (senior plod), who informs me that NORMALLY, a warning is given for abusive language against police, and then on repetition, arrest and a charge for a public order offence.

 

Wasn't like that in my day - A good smack round the ear-'ole and told to 'sling yer hook' usually worked.

 

Better still, a size 10 steel toe-capped boot, 'accidently' placed hard over a plimpsole or soft shoe usually had the same effect.

 

So, no warning given presumably or we'd have heard about it via The Sun by now no doubt, so the police officer according to your mate wasn't doing his job correctly. Disciplinary case there too eh?

[Loose]

.... and it wasn't a dance - It was a RAFFLE !.

 

Pedestrian when pushing a bike - Road user when riding.

 

So, just to clear this one up Andrew Mitchell was riding his bike when he was told by the police officer to get off and use the pedestrian gate, so, a road user by (your) definition.

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19683692

[Big J R]

So, just to clear this one up Andrew Mitchell was riding his bike when he was told by the police officer to get off and use the pedestrian gate, so, a road user by (your) definition.

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-19683692

 

 

 

Absolutey CORRECT !

 

Half these over-payed and under-employed so-called MP's believe they are above the law.

[Loose]

Absolutey CORRECT !

 

Half these over-payed and under-employed so-called MP's believe they are above the law.

 

I can't help feeling you like the policeman involved have missed the point completely JR. If he was riding his bike then Andrew Mitchell was entirely CORRECT to use the road users gates but the numpty wooden top overstepped his authority by making him get off and use the pedestrian gate. A clear case of a police officer in the wrong and thoroughly deserving of criticism. Dear oh dear. What do they teach them at Hendon these days?

[Rhodes]

Loosely - Why are you seemingly on Andrew Mitchell's side, you're the one who is missing the point by a Country mile as whoever was right or wrong Mitchell shouldn't have used foul and abusive language to a Police Officer particularly in front of a bank of impressionable tourists standing the other side of the Downing Street gates

[Loose]

Loosely - Why are you seemingly on Andrew Mitchell's side, you're the one who is missing the point by a Country mile as whoever was right or wrong Mitchell shouldn't have used foul and abusive language to a Police Officer particularly in front of a bank of impressionable tourists standing the other side of the Downing Street gates

 

As usual you've missed the point yourself since nowhere have I said that I'm on anyone's side. If anything there seems to be a lot of dual standards going around on this one. But then we don't rely on you to get much right around here do we?

[Rhodes]

So do you agree with Mitchell's foul mouthed tirade at Police Officers then, yes or no

[Loose]

So do you agree with Mitchell's foul mouthed tirade at Police Officers then, yes or no

 

I'll start answering your questions when you pay me the courtesy of answering mine Rhodesy.

[missunderstood]

At the end of the day I would rather have an honest MP who has a bit of a foul mouth than one who breaks election promises. I believe though that the police officer in question would have been expected to put his body in front of a bullet to save Andrew Mitchell's life had the need arose, (perhaps Big JR could confirm). If my assumption is correct then IMO he should be sacked if the allegations are correct.

[Rhodes]

I'll start answering your questions when you pay me the courtesy of answering mine Rhodesy.

Loosely - A simple yes or no will do

[Loose]

Loosely - A simple yes or no will do

 

Simply answering my questions will do Rhodesy, I believe you have a few dozen outstanding but we won't hold our breath will we?

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

I think that Mr. Mitchell should apologise for his actions, but it's not a sackable offence imho.

 

Other MP's have done a lot worse than this, and yet still have jobs.

[Rhodes]

Other MP's have done a lot worse than this, and yet still have jobs.

Mmm, I'm not so sure I agree with that statement, I don't recall a Cabinet Minister openly abusing the Police in public and in front of tourists in a vile four letter tirade

[The Mayor Of Simpleton]

Rhodes,

 

Fair enough, he is in a position of responsibility and should have not used such 'industrial' language at a policeman.

 

However, I've personally known of people in senior positions of power (in local government and businesses) say worse to the police when drunk out of their skulls. They don't think straight and say and do the wrong thing.

[Rhodes]

Yes but Andrew Mitchell wasn't drunk out of his skull was he, if he had been then there may have been an excuse for his actions

[BUFC]

Mmm, I'm not so sure I agree with that statement,

 

Do you ever?

[Big J R]

At the end of the day I would rather have an honest MP who has a bit of a foul mouth than one who breaks election promises. I believe though that the police officer in question would have been expected to put his body in front of a bullet to save Andrew Mitchell's life had the need arose, (perhaps Big JR could confirm). If my assumption is correct then IMO he should be sacked if the allegations are correct.

 

All police-officers have a duty to protect the public.

 

Not sure if this covers foul-mouthed abusive MP's, though !

[Big J R]

Mondays update......

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4553515/Official-police-report-shows-Andrew-Mitchell-called-PCs-plebs.html

 

I'll leave it up to you lot to make your comments.