The English language is a wonderful thing is it not. A police officer who could be said to have slightly over-reacted to a situation while in an admitted “heightened state of alert” could also equally well be described as an armed thug who assaulted an innocent person after wilfully committing criminal damage to his victim’s property and who then unlawfully detained him, and even possibly maliciously prosecuted him. The former is just an over-worked well meaning country copper and the latter one of the new generation of Britain’s Finest.
- Iain, Glasgow, Scotland, 18/11/2011 0:15
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2062703/Winemaker-way-home-harvesting-grapes-wrongly-Tasered-blundering-police-smashed-van.html#ixzz1e2zawAV3
Not sure who unlawfully detained whom, as it gets a little fuzzy in spite of obvious efforts to conduct proper grammatical etiquette. This much is certain though: Any and all involved, as well as any and all with something to say need to see the film “Good Morning Vietnam!!” AGAIN; possibly several times over. And all in the same room together. And no one gets to leave, even the ones who’ve made all the obvious connections right off the git-go regarding terms such as “ethnic” VS “multi-ethnic”, “cutlural” VS “multi-cultural”, “socio-spiritiual” VS “socio-pathic” tendencies and interpretations to the extent that within certain parameters they could all agree on at least one thing: “Military Intelligence” is an oxymoron, one of many, really; like “Social Structure”.
After all, what is a ‘society” but a large group of people? What happens when you get a large group of people together, and tell them what to think say and do, to the nth degree? They become an angry string of mobs, until the biggest mob wins, and becomes the next “Society”. Of course, multiple centuries of inbreeding may or may not have been known to exacerbate the situation here and there throughout history, along with one or two drug induced “Divine Encounters” of the *Agricultural Kind…
As for the having “…possibly maliciously prosecuted him…” reference, I cannot help but wonder my glib humored Brit, if that was really an honest error…? Because if you have chosen to apply the term accurately, and the “him” to whom you refer is the thug who has simply gotten what he had coming to him… or was it them…? Anyhow, picking up where I left off: if the wretched schmuck(s?) were really getting what they deserved, that makes these cops judge, jury, and – had things gotten any further out of control – executioner.
Hence, I believe the term you meant to apply was “persecuted”, meaning tormented for some sort of self perceived morally justifiable reason. This brings us back to the initial cannundrum, I’m afraid. Who has the right to do what to whom, and when? And it’s not entirely moral in it’s “correctness” ninety percent of the time, either. It’s purely pragmatic.
Here’s a somewhat liberal example: My sister gave me static when going across the water on the ferry one day, shortly after my husband, John W Burnett, born in San Jose CA some 49 or 50 years ago, left me with an empty bank account and a six year old boy. She couldn’t believe that, my son’s birthday having recently come and gone, I said, “Oh shit, that’s right. Thank God I brought extra cash…” as he was now old enough to have to pay to cross the water. My sister once again made fun of me for the third or forth time later that day, amazed that I didn’t do like a fellow friend my age with two young girls about six inches to a foot shorter than they should be, and lie in order to go across for free. I looked at her in front of a handful of people and said, “Right, and the first time I call him out for lying, cheating or stealing? And people wonder why their kids do the things they do. Unbelievable.” She eventually apologized and said she admired me for having thought it through and stuck to a higher moral ground. It may be trivial, but think about it… how many of the people who pay thisssssssss much to cheat thissssssssssssssssssssssssss much on their taxes, and are members of the middle class or higher, wonder why their kids do some of the things they do?
Should these thugs go to jail? YES. Should the cops get their a-little-to-stuck-on themselves self-righteous British “ARSES” reamed as well? YES!! Remember: BULLIES ARE TYPICALLY PUSSY-ASS’D MAMAS-BOYS!! It means they are not dependable, either. REMEMBER THAT!!!
*My apologies to the Big M, but look at it this way: I may not have any red ink at my fingertips, but at least I capitalized it! (Don’t remember how it was referred to if at all in retrospect by God directly, come to think of it… But you get the drift!!)