Police causing the maximum inconvenience, M4 closure Options

[gel]

Why are Police causing massive inconvenience to thousands and not bringing incident to swift end by intervention; presume a jumper or the like?

http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article...articleID=14702


Almost certainly this will result in more accidents due to overloaded local roads, whilst police never seem to have in mind rapid reopening of this major artery.

[Iommi]

No more so than those supporting/sympathising this person.

But no one is claiming the other posts are. OTE considered your post balanced and rational because he agrees with you, not because it was. Your opinion was assumptive and one sided; that is neither balanced nor rational. Whether anyone else's point was is immaterial, but at least they might be compassionate.

Sorry, just don't understand this response.

That explains a lot, but I can't see there is anything difficult to understand in it. I'm explaining that with any incident, consideration for welfare extends beyond the protagonist. There are a number of issues that are being ignorantly over looked by the 'let him jump', or 'he doesn't mean it' club.

I think you know full-well what I mean and you are just being deliberately obtuse.

There is no doubt that some people use attempted suicide as a cry for help. But in some cases people actually do want to end their lives. I'd like to think if it was anyone I knew on that bridge, people would do everything they could to stop the situation ending in death.

Exactly, and the police did everything they could to ensure that outcome. It is just regrettable that with have some people with such a narrow minded attitude about matter like these.

[On the edge]

But no one is claiming the other posts are. OTE considered your post balanced and rational because he agrees with you, not because it was. Your opinion was assumptive and one sided; that is neither balanced nor rational. Whether anyone else's point was is immaterial, but at least they might be compassionate.


That explains a lot, but I can't see there is anything difficult to understand in it. I'm explaining that with any incident, consideration for welfare extends beyond the protagonist. There are a number of issues that are being ignorantly over looked by the 'let him jump', or 'he doesn't mean it' club.

I think you know full-well what I mean and you are just being deliberately obtuse.


Exactly, and the police did everything they could to ensure that outcome. It is just regrettable that with have some people with such a narrow minded attitude about matter like these.

Have you any other mode than boorish? Isn't anyone able to have a different view point to yours? Are contributors here meant only to subscribe to your own understandings? Makes coherent debate impossible.

I agreed with DrPepper because I thought he was right and his points were grounded. Unlike the attached which is just emotional.

[Iommi]

Have you any other mode than boorish?

That depends on who you are, but more importantly: what you say.

Isn't anyone able to have a different view point to yours?

Where have a said people shouldn't post contrary opinion?

Are contributors here meant only to subscribe to your own understandings?

I don't know if they are meant to or not; I couldn't care less. As you imply, this is a forum for debate and opinion, so is likely to have contrasting points of view, so when people do that I will sometimes reciprocate.

Makes coherent debate impossible.

Perhaps it makes coherent debate impossible when one subscribes to a weak argument?

I agreed with DrPepper because I thought he was right and his points were grounded. Unlike the attached which is just emotional.

And I think you are wrong that his argument was B&R; it was not. Had you said 'I agree', I couldn't have argued that you were wrong, but you offered an argument that I think was. As for emotional; that plays a part, but it is feeble of you to say it is just emotional. DrPepper had a view that we were 'bleeding hearts' and you agreed, so that must mean I am entitled to reply, does it not?

I have posted opinion fortified with arguments. I am happy to engage in sensible debate, but frankly some people on here seem incapable of that. I know you are a bright bloke, but to just post 'sorry, just don't understand this response', is, as I said, feeble in my view.

PS - While I am boorish on occasion, I think it is unfair to accuse me of being boorish on the post you quoted. I will, however, apologise for any rudeness, but I think you are being deliberately obtuse when you say you don't understand my points.

People are focusing on the individual (who we assume threatened to attempt to commit suicide), but I think that is being ignorant of other people's feelings in this matter.

[On the edge]

That depends on who you are, but more importantly......people are focusing on the individual (who we assume threatened to attempt to commit suicide), but I think that is being ignorant of other people's feelings in this matter.

You are quite right my original response was feeble and yes, of course I understood. Was in the heat of the moment - simply I think this thread is about too things - 1) the Police shutting down trunk roads. and 2) suicides and mental health. We've been concentrating on just the second part. I suspect that's what you've been saying.

Anyway - I'm sorry too and will try not to be obtuse in future!