BF2S Forums Muslims could get own police

AussieReaper wrote:

lowing wrote:

You are full of absolute bullshit.

If I got on here and and even remotely suggested ( before this thread ever appeared) that I think white people should be assigned white cops because I thought they better could understand what white people go through, YOU!!! ESPECIALLY YOU!!!, would be ripping me a new ass and calling me a racist so much I probably would start to fuckin believe it!!. and you damn well know you would

So don't for one second try and pass this along as different, or benign, because it is horseshit

By the way, IF they had conformed like you suggest then there wouldn't be any need for any fuckin' interpreters either.

As I said:

"If it were a religious based crime, or ethnic based crime, in let's say..... China, where the offenders were Christian, the witnesses Christian, the victims Christian, and all of which were white and spoke Mandarin poorly, I would have no problem whatsoever with a white Christian investigating the crime along with the typical officers as they act as liaison.

Of course the laws of the Chinese would not change, as in with the OP case. But you probably can tell that, right?"

The laws aren't changing. It happens in Sikh communities. Why the hate against Muslims?

and like I said, these are not weary travellers, they are supposed to be citizens of the nation they are in and conformed as such. They are not visiting. they livethere, so stop with that bullshit comparison.

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

lowing wrote:

By the way, IF they had conformed like you suggest then there wouldn't be any need for any fuckin' interpreters either.

Dude it's not a matter of conforming it's a matter of cultural and linguistic barriers. You can't change the fact that most fresh-off-the-boat (or airplane as it more likely is these days) immigrants don't always become fully assimilated with the culture of their adoptive country (I did, but then again I'm pretty much white and lived in very American-populated areas as opposed to immigrant-populated) nor do they always have the best grasp of a language.

bullshit, you are trying to argue thsat a cop, sensative to their religious needs and understands honor killings is needed to investigate, talk to, arrest people etc assoiciated with that fucked up religion. NO OTHER religious group has such considerations made.

Also, they seem to be assimulated enough to be comfortable breaking the laws of their adoptive country.

I will ask you since Aussie WILL NOT answer it, am I to assume that I could suggest I need a white cop to talk to me since I am white and he would be the only one that could or would understand my murderous deeds? YOu would not be jumping all over my ass for such bullshit??

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

As I said:

"If it were a religious based crime, or ethnic based crime, in let's say..... China, where the offenders were Christian, the witnesses Christian, the victims Christian, and all of which were white and spoke Mandarin poorly, I would have no problem whatsoever with a white Christian investigating the crime along with the typical officers as they act as liaison.

Of course the laws of the Chinese would not change, as in with the OP case. But you probably can tell that, right?"

The laws aren't changing. It happens in Sikh communities. Why the hate against Muslims?

and like I said, these are not weary travellers, they are supposed to be citizens of the nation they are in and conformed as such. They are not visiting. they livethere, so stop with that bullshit comparison.

Who said anything about visiting?

You've misread the analogy.

How many WHITE CHINESE DO YOU KNOW SPARK!!!

12/f/taiwan wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

So, can I have my own special police, because my religion mandates that I park in the handicapped space or face eternal damnation...

Suck it up people, If you want to live under sharia law, then stay in Saudi Arabia.   I would abide by their laws if I visited, I expect the same in return.

Hmmm, I wouldn't expect something like that from you.

Did you read the article or are you just trolling?

What did you expect? that he would jump on the PC appeasement bandwagon?

12/f/taiwan wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

So, can I have my own special police, because my religion mandates that I park in the handicapped space or face eternal damnation...

Suck it up people, If you want to live under sharia law, then stay in Saudi Arabia.   I would abide by their laws if I visited, I expect the same in return.

Hmmm, I wouldn't expect something like that from you.

Did you read the article or are you just trolling?

I read it, and I'm fully aware of the issue at hand.  I also live 15 minutes away from these people  and work with/live near/study with several fantastic Muslim people, so I've seen all sides of the issue.

Point being, Nobody, muslim, jew, christian, buddhist, or whatever, should move to a foreign country and expect them to throw out their customs and alter their laws to suit them.

FatherTed wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

12/f/taiwan wrote:

Hmmm, I wouldn't expect something like that from you.

Did you read the article or are you just trolling?

I read it, and I'm fully aware of the issue at hand.  I also live 15 minutes away from these people  and work with/live near/study with several fantastic Muslim people, so I've seen all sides of the issue.

Point being, Nobody, muslim, jew, christian, buddhist, or whatever, should move to a foreign country and expect them to throw out their customs and alter their laws to suit them.

but this isn't happening

But it does seem to be a recurring issue, no group should get special treatment

FatherTed wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

but this isn't happening

But it does seem to be a recurring issue, no group should get special treatment

Groups already get 'special' (using that lightly) treatment from the police force over here. As mentioned in the OP, Sikh's already have liason officers. As ive said earlier, women already have liason officers.

Providing different groups of people with the means to better associate themselves with a police force is no bad thing. If it increases communication, understanding et al between the police and the people, i can see no logical reason why we shouldn't have these liason officers. They do not alter how the law is undertaken, or the interpration of it, so our justice system is not being skewed towards preferential treatment to anyone.

The problem with this thread is many people saw 'U.K' + 'Muslims', and did a simple 2+2=5, and came up with 'appeasement'.

But how to decide who gets a liaison officer and who doesn't?  There are too many groups present to please everyone, and the state governments here are already billions in the red.  I don't get any atheist officers, or swedish-irish-american officers, or disgruntled college student officers.  I'm happy with our American officers, whether they're black, white, or purple, as long as they follow the laws we voted on for them.

FatherTed wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

Groups already get 'special' (using that lightly) treatment from the police force over here. As mentioned in the OP, Sikh's already have liason officers. As ive said earlier, women already have liason officers.

Providing different groups of people with the means to better associate themselves with a police force is no bad thing. If it increases communication, understanding et al between the police and the people, i can see no logical reason why we shouldn't have these liason officers. They do not alter how the law is undertaken, or the interpration of it, so our justice system is not being skewed towards preferential treatment to anyone.

The problem with this thread is many people saw 'U.K' + 'Muslims', and did a simple 2+2=5, and came up with 'appeasement'.

But how to decide who gets a liaison officer and who doesn't?  There are too many groups present to please everyone, and the state governments here are already billions in the red.  I don't get any atheist officers, or swedish-irish-american officers, or disgruntled college student officers.  I'm happy with our American officers, whether they're black, white, or purple, as long as they follow the laws we voted on for them.

lol i see where you are coming from I reckon it could be done on a a)request basis (though this has some big flaws), or on a higher decision, i.e if the matter is pretty sensitive, or it is just decided a certain officer would have a better effect than another on the situation.

With regards to where they're going to come from, the U.K has been multicultural for centuries, we've no shortage of people who could be retrained at little extra cost in liasons.



All in all it's a very nice idea i think. Sadly though, our government being mostly useless will no doubt run this like a company, and not a service.

lol, Illinois takes useless government to all new lows, Louisiana took our "most corrupt" badge, but we've got the Silver...

Anyway, I understand that some groups feel marginalized by society, but that is in many cases self inflicted.  If you refuse to cooperate with anyone but your own, don't expect to become an accepted member of society.

In the end, it's really a matter of how "british" or "american" we expect our immigrants to behave

Just to try and kill off this stupid thread:

a) This is in effect for Sikhs and will only extended to other groups if it is successful.

b) It means people can request that "an" officer from their religion can be involved in the case. All the rest will be whoever the police force think will be best.

c) There is no mention at all of people having different laws. If you break a British law then you break a British law. The closest anyone comes is things like the Jewish courts that people can mutually decide to abide by if they want but are at all times secondary to British laws of the land.

d) If you request a white officer to investigate your case then your are indeed a racist, this is about religion, so you should be allowed to ask for a single (whatever your religion is assuming there is one available) officer to be involved in your major crime case.

e) Does anyone think that this type of action isn't inherent in the way police investigate crimes? I'd guess that people are likely to react better to a police officer who has a local accent and a background that is more farmiliar with that of the people involved in the case.

Nic wrote:

But Palbinder Singh, chairman of the Metropolitan Police Sikh Association, said: “I don’t believe a white officer is ever going to be fully conversant with a Sikh.”

he mentions a white cop, not christian cop here, is he racist?

Slightly. Chances are that most Sikhs are not white, but it doesn't mean that all are. He should know that.

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

How many WHITE CHINESE DO YOU KNOW SPARK!!!

Try business people?

VISITERS ya mean?

You've never heard of businessmen staying, making a family in a new country?

Look out your window.

lowing wrote:

Well, is anyone going to answer my question if Aussie or Hurricane refuse to?

Can I get away with such bullshit requests that a white officer handle my investigation, because he understands what it means to be white? Can I really get away saying something like that with out being ripped apart in this forum?

I know Aussie's and Hurricanes answer and it would be no I couldn't, ya know how I know it? They either refuse to answer it, or redirect it.

We have answered it.

You know what happens when a foreign person without a permanent residence is accused of murder, rape, etc?

They are given consular assistance.

You know, so that they have a representative who is better able to discuss legalese with them and relate exactly what is happening.

I suppose you feel that if an American is accused of breaking the law in France, you would want them denied consular assistance because the officers are white, so why does the American need an American to discuss the charges?