Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Bro_Straight_Path

The British Police

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

A small portrait of the need for the average person to take life into their own hands and to open their eyes to the world around them. The British authorities have degenerated into nothing more than beasts without empathy or any sense of responsibility to the world around them.

Students leap into river to save drowning woman - after British police REFUSE to rescue her

UK Daily Mail

Tue, 11 May 2010 18:47 EDT

Three students risked their lives by jumping into a river to save a drowning woman - after police refused to rescue her as it was not their 'responsibility'.

The 18-year-olds took action after spotting the victim shouting for help and struggling to keep her head above the water level.

Police were at the scene, but said it was up to the Fire and Rescue Service to save the 37-year-old. Instead, officers held back the crowd from the edge of the River Clyde's bank - lifebelts were being thrown into the water, but they were out of the woman's reach.

Graham McGrath, Rosie Lucey and Reece Black, who were walking along the Clyde towards Glasgow Green, jumped into the river near Albert Bridge after it became apparent the officers were not going to.

After dragging the unconscious woman to the bank, Miss Lucey carried out CPR on the victim - whose lips were blue. They were told the woman was close to death and that they had saved her life.

Mr McGrath said: 'There was a woman in the water shouting for help. There was somebody throwing lifebelts to her, but she couldn't get to them.

'The police were holding people back from the edge of the bridge. It became apparent nobody was doing anything else. She was getting lower and lower in the water.'

Miss Lucey said: 'We realised we were watching someone drown.'

Mr McGrath and Miss Lucey jumped in and pulled her to the bank. Mr Black then waded in and dragged all three ashore.

The trio, who are all first-year students at Glasgow University, yesterday recalled the rescue, which happened at around 1.30pm on Saturday.

Mr Black said: 'She was gone. She'd been under the water for two minutes. Her lips were blue and her tongue was white. She was frothing at the mouth.

'We couldn't find a pulse anywhere but we kept on going. She eventually started gurgling and a lot of water came out her mouth.

'I'm still shaken up. We were told she would have almost definitely died but we gave her a 50/50 chance.'

A police spokesman said: 'A 37-year old woman jumped into the Clyde and was rescued by a member of the public prior to the arrival of the emergency services.

'As a matter of procedure it's not the responsibility of the police to go in the water, it's the Fire and Rescue service.'

George Parsonage of Glasgow Humane Society described the efforts of the students as 'wonderful'.

He told the Scottish Herald: 'It was heroic. It was really remarkable for three youngsters to do that. I though it was wonderful.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1277480/Three-students-hailed-heroes-rescuing-drowning-woman-helping.html

Edited by Bro_Straight_Path

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw another video recently where a girl of about 15 was beaten up quite badly within a meter or two (at most) of security guards who did NOTHING to intervene...as it was not their mandate. So, these people hired to protect us would literally watch us die in front of them. If their only duty is to call someone who does have the mandate - why hire these people at all. Just install lots of security cameras and have the people who man them send out the appropriate service...probably would be quicker and more efficient and not lull one into a false sense of security.

I just cant get over the fact that they let that woman drown as they watched.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can say from my own personal experince with Britains "finest," that this doesn't surprise me. Bunch of slack-jawed idiots with badges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was another incident I don't remember if it was in Britain or not but a boy was drowning in the water and the police I think did nothing to save him because it wasn't in their job description! How cold- hearted can a person get!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to understand the context here.

The UK has followed the US into a more lawyer-based culture. If you can sue someone for compensation, then go for it. Law firms have taken up the new culture with gusto.

These officers may not necessarily have had the right "training" for this work. If they had jumped in and failed, they could have been sued by the family of the drowning person. If they had jumped in (without the right training) and hurt themselves, they could have sued their employer. So their employer may have given them strict instructions to only do what they were fully equipped and trained to.

We end up with the sort of society we work for. If people sued less, then there would be more risk taking by public services. If people sue more, they will become more Health & Safety conscious.

In the light of the above, I am editing the thread title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to understand the context here.

The UK has followed the US into a more lawyer-based culture. If you can sue someone for compensation, then go for it. Law firms have taken up the new culture with gusto.

These officers may not necessarily have had the right "training" for this work. If they had jumped in and failed, they could have been sued by the family of the drowning person. If they had jumped in (without the right training) and hurt themselves, they could have sued their employer. So their employer may have given them strict instructions to only do what they were fully equipped and trained to.

We end up with the sort of society we work for. If people sued less, then there would be more risk taking by public services. If people sue more, they will become more Health & Safety conscious.

In the light of the above, I am editing the thread title.

British culture is a very individualistic and selfish one. People generally do not go out of their way to help others, and putting your life on the line for a stranger is too much for most people. To me this scenario is inconceivable in a place like Iraq, Iran or south east Asia. People would be thronging to help. It's not just a lack of fear of being sued, it's a cultural difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to understand the context here.

The UK has followed the US into a more lawyer-based culture. If you can sue someone for compensation, then go for it. Law firms have taken up the new culture with gusto.

These officers may not necessarily have had the right "training" for this work. If they had jumped in and failed, they could have been sued by the family of the drowning person. If they had jumped in (without the right training) and hurt themselves, they could have sued their employer. So their employer may have given them strict instructions to only do what they were fully equipped and trained to.

We end up with the sort of society we work for. If people sued less, then there would be more risk taking by public services. If people sue more, they will become more Health & Safety conscious.

This is a good point and probably the reason for their non action. I don’t think you can ignore the pervasive litigious nature of western culture. People will sue for anything. Medical professionals are hesitant to help in accidents as they can be legally held accountable for any action they take. Also, as most professionals carry litigation insurance, it is considered common sense practice to sue regardless of the intent of the intervention….as you are suing the “insurance company” not the individual. So, of course it makes sense that these people are told not to intervene.

Even though British culture is probably, outwardly, the most seemingly cold and indifferent culture of people that I have come across, I don’t think they would watch someone die and not help. After all, Brits did jump in the water, with no safety equipment, and save her.

I often read stories, here, of people risking their life to save another from drowning in a swift current (often losing their own lives in the process), or pulling someone from a burning car, all the while sustaining severe painful burns to their hands, chest and face, etc.

It is human nature to help another. To not help is unnatural, regardless of culture or race.

The problem is the mandate of the protective services, not with the individuals involved. This mandate is most likely due to possible litigation, as Haji 2003 has pointed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me this scenario is inconceivable in a place like Iraq, Iran or south east Asia. People would be thronging to help. It's not just a lack of fear of being sued, it's a cultural difference.

Iraq and Iran I dunno.

Pakistan, India Bangladesh? It's more than likely that the very people jumping in to save this person were the ones who'd stolen the barriers that would have prevented them from falling in in the first place!

And what about the Qurbani waste that every Paki household seems to want to dump on the public highway, in order to keep their own property pristine? How public spirited is that?

Edited by Haji 2003

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iraq and Iran I dunno.

Pakistan, India Bangladesh? It's more than likely that the very people jumping in to save this person were the ones who'd stolen the barriers that would have prevented them from falling in in the first place!

And what about the Qurbani waste that every Paki household seems to want to dump on the public highway, in order to keep their own property pristine? How public spirited is that?

Wait, are you telling me that they would have those barriers in the first place!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good point and probably the reason for their non action. I don’t think you can ignore the pervasive litigious nature of western culture. People will sue for anything. Medical professionals are hesitant to help in accidents as they can be legally held accountable for any action they take. Also, as most professionals carry litigation insurance, it is considered common sense practice to sue regardless of the intent of the intervention….as you are suing the “insurance company” not the individual. So, of course it makes sense that these people are told not to intervene.

Even though British culture is probably, outwardly, the most seemingly cold and indifferent culture of people that I have come across, I don’t think they would watch someone die and not help. After all, Brits did jump in the water, with no safety equipment, and save her.

I often read stories, here, of people risking their life to save another from drowning in a swift current (often losing their own lives in the process), or pulling someone from a burning car, all the while sustaining severe painful burns to their hands, chest and face, etc.

It is human nature to help another. To not help is unnatural, regardless of culture or race.

The problem is the mandate of the protective services, not with the individuals involved. This mandate is most likely due to possible litigation, as Haji 2003 has pointed out.

That's a kind explanation Maryaam, but I'm not really buying it. US-style litigation culture is something relatively new, but what I've seen through the late 80s and 90s, up until the present day is a a general atomisation of society, selfishness and individualism in South East England, less so in the West and North. Litigation has made it worse, no doubt, but it has always been here. You notice it in subtle and nuanced way, from the cold, expressionless face of the anonymous person who does not return your smile at the isle in the supermarket, to the b*tching, back-stabbing and two-faced behaviour that is seen as an asset in the corporate rat race.

Yes, some people, in their youthful naivety did what should have been done well before they got there, to their credit, but I notice one of them was ginger. In anycase, they made the front pages of a newspaper, they are heros; unusual - stupid - but valiant.

I should state that I'm not saying that our cultures are better than yours, nor tarring them all with the same brush; British culture is heavily different to a southern American state, for example, and in my naivity, I romanticise the notion of a redneck taking off his cow boy boots and rescuin' fair damsel in distress (this could be a confluence with medieval english fairy tales, by this point I've confused myself).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though British culture is probably, outwardly, the most seemingly cold and indifferent culture of people that I have come across

We're just reserved. Alright? ^_^

Sometimes I come across strangers who say "hello", unless they speak with an American or Australian accent, it's obvious that they've just been released from the lunatic asylum and should be avoided at all costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a kind explanation Maryaam, but I'm not really buying it. US-style litigation culture is something relatively new, but what I've seen through the late 80s and 90s, up until the present day is a a general atomisation of society, selfishness and individualism in South East England, less so in the West and North. Litigation has made it worse, no doubt, but it has always been here. You notice it in subtle and nuanced way, from the cold, expressionless face of the anonymous person who does not return your smile at the isle in the supermarket, to the b*tching, back-stabbing and two-faced behaviour that is seen as an asset in the corporate rat race.

Yes, some people, in their youthful naivety did what should have been done well before they got there, to their credit, but I notice one of them was ginger. In anycase, they made the front pages of a newspaper, they are heros; unusual - stupid - but valiant.

I should state that I'm not saying that our cultures are better than yours, nor tarring them all with the same brush; British culture is heavily different to a southern American state, for example, and in my naivity, I romanticise the notion of a redneck taking off his cow boy boots and rescuin' fair damsel in distress (this could be a confluence with medieval english fairy tales, by this point I've confused myself).

You live in a large city and in a culture that is cold - I have been there and I have seen it. I dont know about this ours vs yours business as we have both been brought up in Western culture with Eastern parents. I just dont like the simplistic ethno-centric approach to complex societal problems. And romanticizing the culture of countries that I could not travel alone in as a woman is bizarre. World society has huge issues with roles and mandates and the legal holds and dictates have come into place through an even more complex process. Dont dumb it down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You live in a large city and in a culture that is cold - I have been there and I have seen it. I dont know about this ours vs yours business as we have both been brought up in Western culture with Eastern parents. I just dont like the simplistic ethno-centric approach to complex societal problems. And romanticizing the culture of countries that I could not travel alone in as a woman is bizarre. World society has huge issues with roles and mandates and the legal holds and dictates have come into place through an even more complex process. Dont dumb it down.

Yes of course it's complex. Our cultures are a fuction of their histories, which are long and rich. But what stands at the end of the day, is the cultures are different, some better than others in various ways, as a function of their histories, not necessarily their genes (which whould not be discounted).

I know, amongst the enlightened people of shiachat, it is fashionable to lament the problems and backwardness of our own selves. Self-reflection is always good, but that does not stop me calling it as I see it - British culture is dreadful when it comes to community and society. This is a big topic in our papers, the phrase "broken Britain" is very common in our media, because it is a real problem that a lot of people can see, but not know how to fix. What they do is exercise another great English institution - blaming others, in this case, the government (not like their attrocious upbringing in single-parent households endemic in the South East might be part of the problem, no! it's that Scott'sman Gordon Brown's fault).

Now a woman is drowning, and you are telling me that legal issues stopped people from saving her, until a group of young people took it upon themselves to do so? I don't know, that says a lot about the society they have built up.

So lets not be politically correct, societies are different, some better than others in different ways. For example, in the UK, they value science - big plus., better than Iraq with it's backward attitude to science for science's sake (as opposed to getting-a-job's-sake). Let me just wait for the enlightened Shiachatters to tell me its all wrong to say this - they won't because they have no trouble "self-reflecting" (self loathing), but the flip side, where we excel them, nope, every explanation other than the most fundamental one - that they have become selfish and individualistic, is brought to the table. Want an explanation for why they have become selfish? Sure, that is complicated, but the fact that they have become selfish is not. It's an observation, which you would pick up quite quickly if you moved here even from Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes of course it's complex. Our cultures are a fuction of their histories, which are long and rich. But what stands at the end of the day, is the cultures are different, some better than others in various ways, as a function of their histories, not necessarily their genes (which whould not be discounted).

I know, amongst the enlightened people of shiachat, it is fashionable to lament the problems and backwardness of our own selves. Self-reflection is always good, but that does not stop me calling it as I see it - British culture is dreadful when it comes to community and society. This is a big topic in our papers, the phrase "broken Britain" is very common in our media, because it is a real problem that a lot of people can see, but not know how to fix. What they do is exercise another great English institution - blaming others, in this case, the government (not like their attrocious upbringing in single-parent households endemic in the South East might be part of the problem, no! it's that Scott'sman Gordon Brown's fault).

Now a woman is drowning, and you are telling me that legal issues stopped people from saving her, until a group of young people took it upon themselves to do so? I don't know, that says a lot about the society they have built up.

So lets not be politically correct, societies are different, some better than others in different ways. For example, in the UK, they value science - big plus., better than Iraq with it's backward attitude to science for science's sake (as opposed to getting-a-job's-sake). Let me just wait for the enlightened Shiachatters to tell me its all wrong to say this - they won't because they have no trouble "self-reflecting" (self loathing), but the flip side, where we excel them, nope, every explanation other than the most fundamental one - that they have become selfish and individualistic, is brought to the table. Want an explanation for why they have become selfish? Sure, that is complicated, but the fact that they have become selfish is not. It's an observation, which you would pick up quite quickly if you moved here even from Canada.

I am not in disagreement as to how pathetic it is. But...legal mandate most probably is the reason these paid public servants did not intervene. I am not justifying it - I am just attempting to understand it.

Of course, it is the sign of a society in serious trouble that there is a actually a legal mandate not to assist the most vulnerable - in this case someone close to death. The woman was saved though, and you cannot ignore the fact that people risked their lives to do so. So, it is human nature to save another. Most "heroes" interviewed after the fact, say they did not have time to think - they just acted. So I would take that as innate.

As for culture difference, I have lived in other countries. Not in Britain , but have travelled through London lots (literally) and have visited in the Bournemouth area. I dont know much about the rest of it, but will take your word for it. I think that any overcrowded (my Cdn perspective) country with economic and immigration difficulties is going to be harsh. And the reason for this is the complicated issues that emerge from this.

Canada is not overcrowded, polluted or in need of resources. It is a rich country with a high standard of living in general. I dont find the people selfish - very much the opposite - and I am sure they have similiar ethnicities and cultural backgrounds to those in Britain - just a much different human environment - spacious and clean and open. But they are not in need nor is their lifestyle being threatened. In fact, my biggest issue with born Canadians is that they take their lifestyle for granted to such a degree that they are complacent and apathetic, with no real awareness that this kind of life is not a given in most areas of the world. And, the RCMP throw themselves in harms way to rescue people...so maybe, at present, we are too left wing to sue - I dont know.

Edited by Maryaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not in disagreement as to how pathetic it is. But...legal mandate most probably is the reason these paid public servants did not intervene. I am not justifying it - I am just attempting to understand it.

Of course, it is the sign of a society in serious trouble that there is a actually a legal mandate not to assist the most vulnerable - in this case someone close to death. The woman was saved though, and you cannot ignore the fact that people risked their lives to do so. So, it is human nature to save another. Most "heroes" interviewed after the fact, say they did not have time to think - they just acted. So I would take that as innate.

As for culture difference, I have lived in other countries. Not in Britain , but have travelled through London lots (literally) and have visited in the Bournemouth area. I dont know much about the rest of it, but will take your word for it. I think that any overcrowded (my Cdn perspective) country with economic and immigration difficulties is going to be harsh. And the reason for this is the complicated issues that emerge from this.

Canada is not overcrowded, polluted or in need of resources. It is a rich country with a high standard of living in general. I dont find the people selfish - very much the opposite - and I am sure they have similiar ethnicities and cultural backgrounds to those in Britain - just a much different human environment - spacious and clean and open. But they are not in need nor is their lifestyle being threatened. In fact, my biggest issue with born Canadians is that they take their lifestyle for granted to such a degree that they are complacent and apathetic, with no real awareness that this kind of life is not a given in most areas of the world. And, the RCMP throw themselves in harms way to rescue people...so maybe, at present, we are too left wing to sue - I dont know.

I agree, it is human nature to help others, so it is that much worse when that nature is diminished. Again, I emphasis, I am not alluding to an innate diffiernce between Esterners and Westerners, rather, I am talking about the British in particular. The only reason I mentioned Iraq, Iran, and Asia as contrasting examples is that I am familiar enough with these cultures to predict with confidence what those people would do in this situation.

I sincerely hope Canada doesn't go our way.

Edited by Dirac Delta function

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...