Are the London Riots about Class Warfare Poor vs Rich ? As a

Page 3 of 3 [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

CrinklyCrustacean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,284

17 Aug 2011, 8:29 am

Tequila wrote:
No; mostly about thugs and looters (some of whom are very middle-class, working people) deciding to tear up the town, wanting something for nothing and killing people in some instances.

Yeah, even though a few of those interviewed have taken political stances, it's just opportunists being thugs for the sake of it. If it was politically-driven, then there would probably be various groups claiming responsibility and lobbying the government, just like the IRA did when they were bombing London in the early 1990's. Gerry Adams was all over the TV, the arguments over a ceasefire raged on, and it got to the point where, even though I was knee-high to a grasshopper, I could correctly assume that any bombing was due to the IRA. It was so pointless and predictable.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,938

17 Aug 2011, 3:08 pm

A lack of centralized organization does not preclude individual political motivations. There was almost certainly a lot of mob psychology going on too, though.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,500
Location: Lancashire, UK

17 Aug 2011, 3:12 pm

CrinklyCrustacean wrote:
Tequila wrote:
No; mostly about thugs and looters (some of whom are very middle-class, working people) deciding to tear up the town, wanting something for nothing and killing people in some instances.

Yeah, even though a few of those interviewed have taken political stances, it's just opportunists being thugs for the sake of it. If it was politically-driven, then there would probably be various groups claiming responsibility and lobbying the government, just like the IRA did when they were bombing London in the early 1990's. Gerry Adams was all over the TV, the arguments over a ceasefire raged on, and it got to the point where, even though I was knee-high to a grasshopper, I could correctly assume that any bombing was due to the IRA.


Or the INLA. Or the UDA. Or the UVF.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,984
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

17 Aug 2011, 6:23 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Where did this global fear of Uzi's come from?
It's a sub-machinegun, not an epidemic and not everyone wants one.

I want one, of course. :)


I don't, the open bolt system means the thing jumps in your hand before you even get a round downrange; believe me, I know this from experience. I do like the micro version, though I'd be nearly as happy with a MAC11 for what it is.

It is funny how Uzi has become shorthand for virtually any automatic weapon regardless of class, I've seen everything from machine pistols to LMGs referred to as "Uzis". If there's any country where you can legally walk into a shop and walk out with and Uzi or any other fully automatic weapon, I'm not aware of it. Here in the states it's at least 3 months of waiting on top of a lot of paperwork and a minimum four figure investment, and that's if your state allows it and the chief law enforcement officer for your county signs off on it.


I didn’t mean an Uzi would be my first choice for an SMG but I wouldn’t mind having one since I don’t own any class 3 weapons now. I’ve experienced the open bolt issue and it does make control a little clunky but it’s still a rugged and reliable weapon for its time.
I’d rather have an M4 with a couple of different uppers, one in 5.56 and another in 9mm since there is a ton of accessories for the M16/AR15 platform (I’ve got a lot tied up in my semi-auto Bushmaster M4).

It’s true, though, about the uninformed’s limited knowledge of firearms.
If it looks dangerous it just HAS to be either an Uzi or an AK-47
Someone needs to tell them they are a generation or two behind in firearms.