to think that Labour's stance on moped ramming is stupid

[longfingernails]

The Metropolitan Police have been knocking over moped muggers with their cars, and releasing the footage as a deterrent. It's a fantastic idea which has cut moped crime dramatically.

Predictably, the Shadow Home Secretary has said 'it shouldn't be legal for anyone'.

Why is Labour's instinct always to side with the scumbag criminals over the victims, the police and the decent people?

Labour don't have a point, unless that point is to further show how out of touch they are with public opinion.

the video I saw the person went over the bonnet of the police car.

The person would have been given the opportunity to pull over. They chose not to. Therefore they have to accept the consequences.

It worries me a lot; I think it sets a dangerous precedent. Is it the first step on a slippery slope of dehumanising 'criminals'? These moped muggers have not undergone a trial, nor have they been convicted and yet they are being attacked very violently. It's like an extreme form of stop and search.

OTOH, it has cut down this kind of crime so it's working.

What sort of society do we want to live in?

@AtlasShrugged ahhh yes that same 'golden era' when the police extracted a confession from the entirely innocent Guildford 4 using torture.

The same 'golden era' when incompetent policing caused Hillsborough then used the Sun to blame the football fans.

That 'golden era' is more poo coloured, really.

“attacked very violently”. FFS.

I want to live in a society where people aren’t getting dragged to the ground and badly hurt for the contents of their handbag.

They have plenty of opportunity to pull over when requested by the police.

I've got a brilliant idea to avoid getting pushed off your moped as a last resort - don't fucking nick stuff .

For those who don't approve of this tactic, what do you suggest instead (as a way of apprehending suspects rather than long-term measures such as supporting teens)?

More coppers on the beat would be futile against violent offenders on mopeds

More police mean more intelligence gathering, more deterrent or why have we not seen this sort of crime in such numbers before? mopeds are hardly new!

Its not about compassion for criminals, its about the rule of justice, seriously injuring or killing robbers is not in the sentencing guidelines, a moped crashing at 30mph is never going to end well.

Another point is that these thugs aren't going to go away, they'll do more burglaries, car thefts, drug dealing, county lines, normal muggings.

BUT if someone has been stabbed, murdered, attacked with acid, then stopping the perpetrator by whatever means is more acceptable.

I have to say I agree with Bishop about the past.

But that doesn’t mean that knocking over suspected violent criminals who flee the police on mopeds is wrong.

Its not about compassion for criminals, its about the rule of justice

As I understand it, from what the police are saying, 'using tactical contact to terminate dangerous pursuits' was "entirely within our lawful power".

@BishopBrennansArse - crime is through the roof because lefty Guardian types and self appointed "community leaders" shriek when ever the police do their jobs. I'm glad they're finally being ignores

I'm happy they have the powers to stop these arseholes and believe me you all would be too if they ever attacked you or one of your family!
About time they started treating criminals like the scum that they are instead of them having move rights than their poor victims

BTW I hate the police for all the reasons listed itt, I've had mostly bad experiences in any contact I've had with them

But I also hate violent criminals, who prey on people they perceive as weak and vulnerable so I'm conflicted

But ultimately I'd perform the level of violence against a mugger that we're talking about here so I don't really feel like the police would be doing anything that wrong

Its not about compassion for criminals, its about the rule of justice, seriously injuring or killing robbers is not in the sentencing guidelines

I don't think many will be seriously injured or killed, if any. And if they are, well, tough. I will save my sympathy for victims of their crimes, who have been seriously injured. The justice system needs attention and sentences do need to be harsher. Seriously injuring or killing them isn't the aim clearly but the police have to be able to do their job.

easyandy101 How come so many of you have had experience with dealing with police ?

It really isn't.

It's because the police are being starved of funding at the same time community groups and other resources used to prevent criminalised behaviour are being decimated too.

Perfectly1mperfect You have to catch them first by any means available, before you can sentence them

Lefty SJWs might be happy with muggers and other criminals being able to operate with impunity, but the general public aren't, that's why this move is being applauded.

BishopBrennansArse The criminals could always just abide by the laws of the land, then we wouldn’t need many police at all

So the police get to be judge, jury and executioner imposing a penalty of permanent brain damage or disability on anyone they believe to be guilty of a particular crime?

And are all the police infallible and incapable of ever being mistaken?

Then of course I wonder how to reconcile the sentencing of further punishments - has the person with a permanent injury "suffered enough" and so escapes as tough a sentence as the person why just got a broken leg? Shall we break a leg (under surgical conditions) of anyone lucky enough to escape injury so that it's fair?

Will the police still be immune in the case of mistaken identity, the day they mistake someone who is on a moped but isn't a mugger (but maybe they are have an irregular immigration status so run from the police despite being entirely non-violent)?

Terrible idea.

It won’t affect sentencing if they are injured during a collision.

It's because the police are being starved of funding at the same time community groups and other resources used to prevent criminalised behaviour are being decimated too.

I doubt that more police funding would help with the moped menace - but it would be good for other reasons.

I’m all for spending on preventative social initiatives. IMO this is most needed in prisons.

But none of that excludes the use of reasonable force to catch violent criminals. What the police are now doing is using reasonable force.

iLevictoiChete They are only doing it with due cause, such as failure to stop etc, they are not just randomly knocking of mopped riders, where has people’s faith in the police gone, they are doing a very difficult job

So the police get to be judge, jury and executioner imposing a penalty of permanent brain damage or disability on anyone they believe to be guilty of a particular crime?

Have you actually read about this? They are not doing this as punishment but as a tactic, in specific circumstances, to reduce a risk to the safety of the public that exists at that time. What would you suggest they do instead to apprehend a dangerous, speeding offender?

PLus what of the psychology>>> This is what terrorists have done here more than once, use a car as a weapon. This is now comfirmed> the police say cars can be used as weaponns as well? NONONO a car is a form of transport we do NOT want to get into the general psyche into a densely populated area that using it as a weapon is a "thing" and a fairly normal "thing" at that after all the police do it.

This is very true. The little shits are stabbing each other on mopeds, right? So if they're seeing that the most effective way to exact revenge is to run them over in a car, they're gonna do it. And these gangs won't be specially trained, signal for anybody to pull over in case of mistaken identity or give a shit about pedestrians. Will turn London into even more of a bloody jungle.