24 Oct
3:46pm, 24 Oct 2024
46,514 posts
|
SPR
Presumably the pursuit was only authorised with armed police because the car had been involved in shooting and therefore the driver could be armed and it wouldn't be standard practice to approve a pursuit of someone known to be unarmed with armed officers. This certainly suggests that's the case: college.police.uk |
24 Oct
4:02pm, 24 Oct 2024
25,902 posts
|
larkim
That's how I've seen it presented in the media. The police had an ANPR alert set up on the vehicle because of its alleged previous involvement with an armed issue, so it stands to reason that if they were going to engage with it they might choose to do so with an armed unit.
|
24 Oct
5:16pm, 24 Oct 2024
23,287 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Reeves has confirmed expected change in fiscal rules to allow for borrowing for investment and infrastructure. Which is eminently sensible. |
24 Oct
5:27pm, 24 Oct 2024
22,295 posts
|
Chrisull
Yeah Labour have quietly started doing one or two half decent things. Budget will be the hard test. @larkim - you better read this thread for how it's viewed from the victim's eyes. This is a pretty scary account of a different police incident, and you can imagine it could have gone way differently. x.com |
|
24 Oct
7:28pm, 24 Oct 2024
25,903 posts
|
larkim
Funnily enough I was just coming back on here to post that thread which describes the experience very clearly. Like I've tried to say clearly, the point the protestors were making was 100% unarguably correct (imho). But the difficulty now is that the "man on the street" who thinks the police can do no wrong can point to this incident and say "look everyone knew he was a wrong un and it wasn't because he was black that he was stopped and killed, it was because he was a known gang and gun criminal". And to a degree he'd be right. |
|
24 Oct
7:36pm, 24 Oct 2024
23,288 posts
|
rf_fozzy
With regards the US election and the claim regarding "R polls flooding the zone" - 538 podcast covered that this week. As an exercise, they took out all partisan (D & R) polls and it shifted the polling ave in Harris' favour by 0.3% I think. Given the margain of errror on a single poll is about 3-5% (depending on what you're looking at), a 0.3% shift is nothing. Nate Silver (with a grotesquely stupid cartoon at the top of his column) makes the same points. He also, rightly, says there's no point in obsessing about the cross tabs in the sample of polls, because the margain of error there is huge; and again rightly that we shouldn't be taking heed of any of the noise around early voting numbers or similar. And as much as it pains me, I agree with him. It's a coin flip election. Could genuinely go either way. |
|
24 Oct
7:40pm, 24 Oct 2024
23,289 posts
|
rf_fozzy
For those needing some copium, Silver offers some respite in that he rightly points out that we aren't seeing many outlier polls, which suggests some herding may be going on. And of course, the polls could be weighting their models incorrectly in order to try and account for the Trump polling misses in 2016 and 2020, and thus may be over (or under!) exaggerating his numbers by a systematic error. However, given the closeness of all the polls, you'd need the pollsters to all be making the same error more or less... But then herding might account for that...maybe. I think Trump is probably going to win now. I'm mentally preparing myself for it. |
24 Oct
8:31pm, 24 Oct 2024
5,664 posts
|
J2R
The trouble is that Harris really has to win comfortably, otherwise there will very likely be an armed insurrection from the MAGAs. In 2020 Trump made his followers all believe, in the run-up to the election, that if he were to lose it would be because the election was 'stolen', and of course that is how they reacted. But it's been ramped up tenfold this time. (Of course, a comfortable victory for Harris might just prove even more how it was rigged, as far as they're concerned).
|
|
24 Oct
8:43pm, 24 Oct 2024
23,290 posts
|
rf_fozzy
J2R wrote: The trouble is that Harris really has to win comfortably, otherwise there will very likely be an armed insurrection from the MAGAs. In 2020 Trump made his followers all believe, in the run-up to the election, that if he were to lose it would be because the election was 'stolen', and of course that is how they reacted. But it's been ramped up tenfold this time. (Of course, a comfortable victory for Harris might just prove even more how it was rigged, as far as they're concerned). I don't think another Jan 6th is likely (may be wrong of course). Harris is not going to win "comfortably" - the polls tell us that. Even if she gets popular vote +4 (assume polling errors) and 306 EV, it's not going to be "comfortable" - it's going to be tight right up to and beyond election day. |
24 Oct
9:34pm, 24 Oct 2024
33,301 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
We don't know that. Not for sure. There is hope.
|
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Oct 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
