NationStates

A 15-year-old Army cadet who was selling poppies for Remembrance Day suffered burns to his face in an attack with a lit aerosol can.

The boy, who was wearing his uniform, was at a bus stop near Manchester Art Gallery at 18:00 GMT on Saturday when he was attacked.

Police said a man lifted an aerosol can and a lighter and sprayed him with lit fumes.

The cadet suffered burns to his face and singed hairs, officers confirmed.

Greater Manchester Police said the offender, described as black or Asian, 5ft 8in tall and wearing a dark hooded top, then walked off without saying a word.

He appeared to be under the influence of alcohol and was staggering, the force added.

Det Insp Liam Boden said: "This is an absolutely appalling attack on a young man who was raising money to help remember all those who gave their lives fighting bravely for their country.

"Whatever his motivation, his violent actions could have scarred this young man for life.

"Although he has suffered some minor injuries, it is pure luck that he did not sustain more serious burns to his face and body.

"Understandably both he and his family are in a state of total shock and cannot believe someone would do this."

Patriarch wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-29870960

It seems a year can't go by without some sort of Remembrance Poppy based controversy. In the past it has at least been relegated mainly to protests or outraged groups. That I can deal with. This kind of unnecessary violence is crazy and I can only hope the perpetrator is caught and sent away for his crime. How do you lot feel about the Remembrance Poppy? Is it a good thing, a bad thing, or something that doesn't enter your mind at all? Do you wear on and, if your country doesn't use them, would you if given the chance?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy

Ifreann wrote:Maybe if you didn't jump to the conclusion that this attack had anything to do with Remembrance Poppies then you wouldn't have so much of a problem with Remembrance Poppy related controversies.

Mefpan wrote:Out of spite against Remembrance Day or not, who the fuck sprays fire into someone's face? That's...no, seriously. What the fuck.

Patriarch wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Maybe if you didn't jump to the conclusion that this attack had anything to do with Remembrance Poppies then you wouldn't have so much of a problem with Remembrance Poppy related controversies.

An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.

Patriarch wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-29870960

A 15-year-old Army cadet who was selling poppies for Remembrance Day suffered burns to his face in an attack with a lit aerosol can.

The boy, who was wearing his uniform, was at a bus stop near Manchester Art Gallery at 18:00 GMT on Saturday when he was attacked.

Police said a man lifted an aerosol can and a lighter and sprayed him with lit fumes.

The cadet suffered burns to his face and singed hairs, officers confirmed.

Greater Manchester Police said the offender, described as black or Asian, 5ft 8in tall and wearing a dark hooded top, then walked off without saying a word.

He appeared to be under the influence of alcohol and was staggering, the force added.

Det Insp Liam Boden said: "This is an absolutely appalling attack on a young man who was raising money to help remember all those who gave their lives fighting bravely for their country.

"Whatever his motivation, his violent actions could have scarred this young man for life.

"Although he has suffered some minor injuries, it is pure luck that he did not sustain more serious burns to his face and body.

"Understandably both he and his family are in a state of total shock and cannot believe someone would do this."

It seems a year can't go by without some sort of Remembrance Poppy based controversy. In the past it has at least been relegated mainly to protests or outraged groups. That I can deal with. This kind of unnecessary violence is crazy and I can only hope the perpetrator is caught and sent away for his crime. How do you lot feel about the Remembrance Poppy? Is it a good thing, a bad thing, or something that doesn't enter your mind at all? Do you wear on and, if your country doesn't use them, would you if given the chance?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy

Merizoc wrote:

Patriarch wrote:
An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.

And the fact that reports say he was drunk?

Merizoc wrote:

Patriarch wrote:
An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.

And the fact that reports say he was drunk?

Brillnuck wrote:Ethnic backgrounds have nothing to do with attacks.

Patriarch wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Maybe if you didn't jump to the conclusion that this attack had anything to do with Remembrance Poppies then you wouldn't have so much of a problem with Remembrance Poppy related controversies.

An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.

Alexanda wrote:I have a broach for Remembrance Day and the time period leading up to it: It is essential that one remembers the casualties of the war, and the servicemen who came home.
As for the attack, it is terrible, wherever it was related to the fact the man was a soldier selling the poppies or not. If it was related, then this man ought to be given a severe punishment for disgracing those who die in wars, and, if not, this still a terrible, cruel crime that ought to be punished.

Patriarch wrote:described as black or Asian,

Ifreann wrote:

Patriarch wrote:
An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.

So basically you're a racist.

described as black or Asian

Patriarch wrote:

Brillnuck wrote:Ethnic backgrounds have nothing to do with attacks.

You may want to dispute my interpretation of the events but by god don't just ignore reality. It may not have been a factor in this attack, as alcohol may not have been a factor, but ethnic background certainly has an effect on attacks.

Patriarch wrote:

Ifreann wrote:So basically you're a racist.

No. Not at all. Do you dispute that certain ethnic groups have a higher incidence of animosity towards the armed forces?

Patriarch wrote:

Brillnuck wrote:Ethnic backgrounds have nothing to do with attacks.

You may want to dispute my interpretation of the events but by god don't just ignore reality. It may not have been a factor in this attack, as alcohol may not have been a factor, but ethnic background certainly has an effect on attacks.

Patriarch wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Maybe if you didn't jump to the conclusion that this attack had anything to do with Remembrance Poppies then you wouldn't have so much of a problem with Remembrance Poppy related controversies.

An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.

Patriarch wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Maybe if you didn't jump to the conclusion that this attack had anything to do with Remembrance Poppies then you wouldn't have so much of a problem with Remembrance Poppy related controversies.

An attacker from an ethnic background which has a much higher incidence, rightly or wrongly, of animosity towards the armed forces attacks an army cadet easily identified as such but no others in a busy street. I'm happy with this initial assumption which may or may not be later disproved.