By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
You're just repeating what we've all seen. You don't know what was said... or what happened before the man was standing there with his arms down. You can threaten someone with words.
Starmer has to suspend the MP pending an investigation - there would be uproar (including from you) if he didn't.
I repeat, people don't usually lamp someone for no reason.
There is no coming back from this as an MP. That person could have said something pretty appalling but an MP can't smack him in the face multiple times for it. You have to have .ore self control than that. It's a pretty disgusting attack on someone with their arms down.
Almost certainly both drunk. If the MP isn't drunk he's a true oddball in the way he speaks and carries himself. This is essentially a drunken assault even if provoked with words. It's unacceptable.
MPs I'm sure have to put up with a lot they shouldn't verbally. But quite clearly you can't condone ABH as it shown in this video.
Disagree. If someone, for example, threatened to harm a member of your family, I think you could fully expect a fist coming your way and have little complaint.
you would need a credible belief that by committing an assault you were reducing that threat in some way. it needs ti be quite a high bar to justify street violence
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
0
A distraction from the football on 09:41 - Oct 28 with 1662 views
It's interesting... but I was already thinking the same about you - that you're all over this because it's a Labour MP.
I waited for the full information before wading in on the Manchester Airport scuffle and I'd be the same if Rees Mogg, or anyone, did it.
If memory serves, when footage of Tory MP mark Field grabbing a female Greenpeace protester by the neck and pinning her against the wall was released, I called him a thug.
A distraction from the football on 09:38 - Oct 28 by Nutkins_Return
There is no coming back from this as an MP. That person could have said something pretty appalling but an MP can't smack him in the face multiple times for it. You have to have .ore self control than that. It's a pretty disgusting attack on someone with their arms down.
Almost certainly both drunk. If the MP isn't drunk he's a true oddball in the way he speaks and carries himself. This is essentially a drunken assault even if provoked with words. It's unacceptable.
MPs I'm sure have to put up with a lot they shouldn't verbally. But quite clearly you can't condone ABH as it shown in this video.
[Post edited 28 Oct 2024 16:52]
I've not condoned it, I'm not sure anyone has.
But what if the person said, "I have a knife". Given there's a story of this MP being stalked and what happened to Jo Cox, would that not be just grounds for a preemptive strike?
Again, I'm not defending him - I'm making the point that we don't fully know what happened yet. If it is just a drunken altercation then he'll rightly have the book thrown at him.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 09:52 - Oct 28 with 1625 views
A distraction from the football on 09:38 - Oct 28 by lowhouseblue
you would need a credible belief that by committing an assault you were reducing that threat in some way. it needs ti be quite a high bar to justify street violence
Indeed. My point is we don't know.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 09:55 - Oct 28 with 1619 views
A distraction from the football on 09:41 - Oct 28 by GlasgowBlue
If memory serves, when footage of Tory MP mark Field grabbing a female Greenpeace protester by the neck and pinning her against the wall was released, I called him a thug.
I don't remember, but regardless - a man grabbing a woman by the throat and pinning her against a wall is very different to this. Any kind of violence against women is very different to this.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 10:04 - Oct 28 with 1587 views
I don't remember, but regardless - a man grabbing a woman by the throat and pinning her against a wall is very different to this. Any kind of violence against women is very different to this.
He didn’t grab her by the throat he grabbed the back of her neck.
It was thuggish behaviour but nowhere near in the same level as punching a man in the street then continuing to punch him on numerous occasions when he is laying helplessly in the floor.
My point is, I’m not condemning this latest incident because he is a Labour MP. I similarly condemned the Tory MP.
I don't think there's a lot to make of it personally. Would anticipate a charge of battery or ABH and that he'll lose his job. It may be interesting to hear if the victim was known to him, given the stalker backdrop and claims of threatening behaviour, but the video footage renders a successful self-defence argument highly improbable in my view, no matter what is claimed was said. He appears to be drunk as well, which is unhelpful for him.
My guess is he isn't well-known for this behaviour, so there's no impending fallout for Labour re vetting of candidates.
I don't remember, but regardless - a man grabbing a woman by the throat and pinning her against a wall is very different to this. Any kind of violence against women is very different to this.
It really isnt.
-1
A distraction from the football on 14:33 - Oct 28 with 1444 views
A distraction from the football on 10:04 - Oct 28 by GlasgowBlue
He didn’t grab her by the throat he grabbed the back of her neck.
It was thuggish behaviour but nowhere near in the same level as punching a man in the street then continuing to punch him on numerous occasions when he is laying helplessly in the floor.
My point is, I’m not condemning this latest incident because he is a Labour MP. I similarly condemned the Tory MP.
In that instance it was much easier to condemn the MP because she was merely a protestor at an official event (and it was a man manhandling a woman). And you knew all the context.
This is a stranger coming up and threatening an MP in the street, at night, and we don't know the context. Hugely different.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 14:34 - Oct 28 with 1443 views
In that instance it was much easier to condemn the MP because she was merely a protestor at an official event (and it was a man manhandling a woman). And you knew all the context.
This is a stranger coming up and threatening an MP in the street, at night, and we don't know the context. Hugely different.
Is there evidence that a stranger threatened the MP in the street? Bear in mind that he has form for being economical with the truth.
A distraction from the football on 08:41 - Oct 28 by GlasgowBlue
The first video only showed what happened after the incident, although from the way is is moving and talking, it’s not unreasonable to conclude the MP is pissed. It was also reasonable for CB to say there was no context.
Later in the evening a video was released that showed the MP punching a man whose hands were by his side for several seconds before the MP punched him once the proceeded to punch him several more times whilst he was lying helpless in the ground. So I listed that to add some context.
What what we have seen, the MP was not under any threat as he has claimed. Keir Starmer, after viewing the footage, has suspended the MP from the Labour Party and removed the whip.
Exactly, the man may have said some awful things to him but whatever is said does not justify that response. The man still has his hands by his sides and is clearly not about to strike the mp ( or expecting to be struck).
0
A distraction from the football on 15:42 - Oct 28 with 1337 views
A distraction from the football on 15:16 - Oct 28 by leitrimblue
Exactly, the man may have said some awful things to him but whatever is said does not justify that response. The man still has his hands by his sides and is clearly not about to strike the mp ( or expecting to be struck).
As I said earlier, what if he said, "I have a knife". What if he said "I'm going to hurt your wife/son"?
Is there really no reason that would justify this? This is an MP who has a restraining order on a member of the public who stalked and harassed him last year.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 16:20 - Oct 28 with 1300 views
As I said earlier, what if he said, "I have a knife". What if he said "I'm going to hurt your wife/son"?
Is there really no reason that would justify this? This is an MP who has a restraining order on a member of the public who stalked and harassed him last year.
In my 20,s I would have probably slapped him for being stupid enough to say something so backward. I'd like to think age and life as taught me not to be such a tw4t.
0
A distraction from the football on 16:25 - Oct 28 with 1289 views
A distraction from the football on 11:29 - Oct 27 by Swansea_Blue
No idea. Sounds like a bit of a Prescott incident with someone being a tvvat to him and getting back what they deserved, but hard to tell from that. Not that an MP should be hitting back of course.
Why not? If he was threatening him, fair game to give him a good smacking.
0
A distraction from the football on 16:37 - Oct 28 with 1263 views
As I said earlier, what if he said, "I have a knife". What if he said "I'm going to hurt your wife/son"?
Is there really no reason that would justify this? This is an MP who has a restraining order on a member of the public who stalked and harassed him last year.
In those two hypotheticals.
The first, we need to break down into two scenarios. He did or didn’t have a knife.
1.A Pre-emptive strike, follow-up until feel safe, take knife from attacker, call police. Show police knife. 1.B Pre-emptive strike, follow-up until feel safe. Call police, explain why you had to hit the person whilst on the ground, e.g. you were acting under the belief they had a knife.
2. Check surroundings for wife/son. Since they are not there, follow the process you had successfully done to obtain a restraining order.
In either hypothetical scenario, punching a person repeatedly on the ground and then walking away whilst being a bit shouty and pointy doesn’t seem an optimal self-defence strategy.
2
A distraction from the football on 16:56 - Oct 28 with 1240 views
But what if the person said, "I have a knife". Given there's a story of this MP being stalked and what happened to Jo Cox, would that not be just grounds for a preemptive strike?
Again, I'm not defending him - I'm making the point that we don't fully know what happened yet. If it is just a drunken altercation then he'll rightly have the book thrown at him.
I know you are not condoning it for the record. But you are suggesting some words whilst his arms are down could have warranted the response. Don't see that. The knife thing is a non starter as not consistent with what happened (I know you are saying that as a hypothetical). You would more like push away then go for multiple punches on the back of that. Also we know from the aftermath he is simply saying "you won't threaten an MP". And keeps going back to him (not something you do when a knife involved.
It's just words he didn't like. Could be super unpleasant but dealing with that as an MP is commonplace (of course it shouldn't be). He's had a few drinks (no crime) and he's massively let himself down and committed a crime. It's pretty clear.
(I appreciate there might be some additional context but just can't see anything there than can forgive that response in that moment where he has basically sucker punched him).
A distraction from the football on 16:56 - Oct 28 by Nutkins_Return
I know you are not condoning it for the record. But you are suggesting some words whilst his arms are down could have warranted the response. Don't see that. The knife thing is a non starter as not consistent with what happened (I know you are saying that as a hypothetical). You would more like push away then go for multiple punches on the back of that. Also we know from the aftermath he is simply saying "you won't threaten an MP". And keeps going back to him (not something you do when a knife involved.
It's just words he didn't like. Could be super unpleasant but dealing with that as an MP is commonplace (of course it shouldn't be). He's had a few drinks (no crime) and he's massively let himself down and committed a crime. It's pretty clear.
(I appreciate there might be some additional context but just can't see anything there than can forgive that response in that moment where he has basically sucker punched him).
Time will tell on that one, I think a lot of people were surprised when Ben Stokes got off
I can remember paper's laying it on thick with that one, suggesting it was an Afghan veteran etc
They could deal with the Taliban but not an England cricketer, seemingly
Alcohol is the answer but I can't remember the question!
A distraction from the football on 16:37 - Oct 28 by eireblue
In those two hypotheticals.
The first, we need to break down into two scenarios. He did or didn’t have a knife.
1.A Pre-emptive strike, follow-up until feel safe, take knife from attacker, call police. Show police knife. 1.B Pre-emptive strike, follow-up until feel safe. Call police, explain why you had to hit the person whilst on the ground, e.g. you were acting under the belief they had a knife.
2. Check surroundings for wife/son. Since they are not there, follow the process you had successfully done to obtain a restraining order.
In either hypothetical scenario, punching a person repeatedly on the ground and then walking away whilst being a bit shouty and pointy doesn’t seem an optimal self-defence strategy.
You're spelling out a perfect world. The world isn't perfect and who knows how any of us would react in such a situation.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 18:20 - Oct 28 with 1128 views
A distraction from the football on 16:56 - Oct 28 by Nutkins_Return
I know you are not condoning it for the record. But you are suggesting some words whilst his arms are down could have warranted the response. Don't see that. The knife thing is a non starter as not consistent with what happened (I know you are saying that as a hypothetical). You would more like push away then go for multiple punches on the back of that. Also we know from the aftermath he is simply saying "you won't threaten an MP". And keeps going back to him (not something you do when a knife involved.
It's just words he didn't like. Could be super unpleasant but dealing with that as an MP is commonplace (of course it shouldn't be). He's had a few drinks (no crime) and he's massively let himself down and committed a crime. It's pretty clear.
(I appreciate there might be some additional context but just can't see anything there than can forgive that response in that moment where he has basically sucker punched him).
I understand your position and it's probably right. But it's very easy to say how we'd react without actually being there and knowing what was said (or what happened before the clip we've seen).
Glassers asked for our thoughts in his OP and I just think it's fair and reasonable to wait and see what led to this. People are acting like an MP has just lamped an innocent member of the public - many of them I think rubbing their hands with glee because it's a current (Labour) MP.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
1
A distraction from the football on 18:58 - Oct 28 with 1107 views
A distraction from the football on 18:58 - Oct 28 by eireblue
Hey you posed the what ifs, I think everyone understands the world isn’t perfect.
Yeah I was just speculating on what might have caused this, and now I'm saying that your calm and measured answers are the ideal rather than what might reasonably happen in the thick of a real situation, at night, on the street.
This is my point, it's very easy to post what should happen on a football messagboard (and judgement on what actually happened) sat in a comfy room behind a laptop.
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
A distraction from the football on 19:47 - Oct 28 with 1075 views
Yeah I was just speculating on what might have caused this, and now I'm saying that your calm and measured answers are the ideal rather than what might reasonably happen in the thick of a real situation, at night, on the street.
This is my point, it's very easy to post what should happen on a football messagboard (and judgement on what actually happened) sat in a comfy room behind a laptop.
The ideal, is to walk away from someone giving you verbal abuse, and not punch them.
I was just running with your hypothetical about there being a reason for repeatedly punching him.
Your hypothetical was the MP could be justified in his action because of his belief that the attacker had a knife, therefore your hypothetical needs the MP to be acting with justified purpose and intent, and the ideal option of walking away was not appropriate, and he didn’t just simply hit a guy whilst he was…tired and emotional.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
