Words fail me . . .

The civil rights lawyers will have a field day when this is over..

Just kids having a bit of fun, we were all like that when we were younger. Kids, eh?

[quote="Stephen Lock"]Speaking of revolutions....what the hell is going on in Tottingham???

That reminds me of a famous quote from a Robin Hood movie.

Says Liam Neeson to Morgan Freeman as they land on the Kent coast, (In his best medieval American English).

"Tonight we dine with my father in Tottingham" !

brum wrote:

"Tonight we dine with my father in Tottingham" !

That Midlands city which hi-jacked Robin & his lads from 30 miles further North,
was always renowned for its good looking Totty, so maybe Liam Neeson wasn't so wrong. There again , maybe it was another ploy by the citizens to lure the tourist trade from more interesting localities.........

Without condoning their methods, it's granted that the Tottenham lot might have had a point when one of their associates was shot, but isn't it likely that the urge for the mob of hangers-on to have a bit of fun by breaking into shops, nicking stuff and torching surplus goods wouldn't have spread northwards if the TV coverage had been more restrained ?

OK........ Free speech & being able to spread the news are recognized as being desirable factors in a society which prides itself on being democratic. But so is social responsibility and, when moral discipline is lacking, there's case for some restriction on reporting.

Fair enough Cartav.but with the speed it spread and half the government out of the country and the other half keeping a low profile,who was going to autherise it?.

Take your point Gordon, but I was thinking of more general, legal measures, not just something for a one off situation. Difficult I know with the screams about Yuman Rights & the Right to Know that would be heard, and I bet the media moguls rub their hands when there's a disaster........... the prospect of selling the footage world wide of some poor sod having his head kicked in, or a family being ruined & tearful, when their means of living go up in smoke, must bring in a shekel or two.

I despise all those photographers that lie in wait for someone they have built up as a"celebrity", hoping for a pic that will bring in another payday. And the popularity of mags such as "Hello" makes me fear for the intelligence of the readers........mumble, mumble, mumble.

Grumpy old codger? Yeah, sure ! But there's one bonus this week. All the rioting has given us a break from more & more excited prattle about the Olympics. It's going to be a long year!

Sorry to be serious, it's out of character, I know !

cartav wrote:

Without condoning their methods, it's granted that the Tottenham lot might have had a point when one of their associates was shot, but isn't it likely that the urge for the mob of hangers-on to have a bit of fun by breaking into shops, nicking stuff and torching surplus goods wouldn't have spread northwards if the TV coverage had been more restrained ?

OK........ Free speech & being able to spread the news are recognized as being desirable factors in a society which prides itself on being democratic. But so is social responsibility and, when moral discipline is lacking, there's case for some restriction on reporting.

It's not only the "Meedja" coverage that's to blame for the mayhem spreading to other locations. Seems like the so-called social networking sites and the Blackberry network amongst others have been used by the hooligan element to spread the word to other criminals to use as an excuse for rioting and looting

Signed on the dotted line folks.