The end of policing by consent?
The unrest on the streets of Britain was fuelled by a multitude of issues - but would the situation have been improved with the introduction of water cannons, rubber bullets and live ammunition being used by the police?
What about other protests the government might find embarrassing? Could protestors demonstrating against Israeli action in Gaza fall foul of these potential new rules as the authorities seek to silence them? Well, Sir Denis O'Connor, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary seems to think new powers of force are just what the police in the UK needs. The worrying thing for many would-be protestors is Sir Denis is not alone.
There is yet to be an outpouring of outrage from the Coalition government. Immediately after the summer's disturbance, PM David Cameron advocated the use of water cannons on those on the streets and did not rule out rubber bullets.
Whilst people burning and looting should not expect much support from the general public, what of legitimate demonstrators who might feel threatened by this shift in tactics from the police? Would this change in direction - if implemented by the police- scare those with genuine grievances away from the streets?
Will this shift not just serve to inflame tensions, not help the public's confidence in the forces of law and order? The Met Police has already been accused of kittling in protestors and using horses and dogs to intimidate and bully demonstrators - surely live ammunition would simply be asking for trouble.
The report's recommendations have already been condemned by rights group who say the police already have authority to quell violence or threats to life by using necessary force. A widespread adoption of more draconian methods in sometimes poorly trained hands will only cause chaos and bloodshed. And what of authorities who will discriminate when using these potential powers?
The Big Story investigates this potential shift in police tactics and ask - is this the end of true protest in Britain?
