another nail in our liberty's coffin or

Police have been granted stop and search rights in certain areas... Innocent people who live in an area of the governments choosing can be searched at random and at the whim of the police officer, without due cause..

The police and supporters would claim this is the only effective way to reduce knife crime. It would invariably help detect other crimes too but the premise is the reduction of knife crime by removing knives off the street..


Opponents of this "scattergun" approach claim this will alienate young black men who would be the officers victim of choice, driving a bigger wedge between the police and the communities involved... They also claim that fewer than 4 in 100 searches lead to an arrest and seldom are these for knife crimes...

Is this another step towards a police state or a necessary tool to combat our ever violent society.....



bbc

metropolitan police

This post has been edited by bigbaldybloke: Aug 28 2008, 08:26 PM

We've had this before. It used to be called the SUS law, named because police could stop and search you if they had a suspicion that a crime was being committed. It was then abolished after the Scarman Report into the Riots that took place as a result of the Sus laws being used in a swamping operation that consisted of police swamping an area (Brixton) and searching everyone who was young male and black.

Like corrupt elite plainclothes units this is a cyclical thing in policing. The downside of the cycle involves more police being recruited and extra powers being given to them. The upside is when a number of high-profile incidents highlight abuses of powers and some units are found to be on the take or institutionally racist. Powers are stripped back and half the bods recruited in a hurry on the downside of the cycle are found to be not ideal police material. Then there are scare stories in the press about how a certain type of crime is creating no go areas (mugging in Brixton in the late seventies, knife crime now), police are understaffed and don't have the powers to do the job.... and this is where we came in.

So it's neither police state in the making nor a necessary tool, it's a periodic displacement activity that the police, media and politicians engage in rather than tackling the underlying problems.

Yesssssssss nothing like the upside of high profile abuse of power, now stfu and bend over take your search like a man pip pip, cheerio, stiff upper lip and all, it's just a cycle nothing to see here move along as long as it isn't you you can buy into this bollox.

I wonder what could increase the amplitude and duration of these "cycles"?

24/7/365 surveillance?

So would the simple translation of your post be "hey they are getting out of hand hire some thugs, teach them up right, then back off when people complain to loudly"?

Rhetorical question.

They could search me as often as they like, I've got nothing to hide. If it helps keep people safer so be it.

They could but won't because you're not a young, black male.

I used to work in the City of London at the time that they erected the "Ring of Steel" to combat terrorism. This thing was nicknamed the "Ring of Rubber" as it consisted mainly of knee high rubber barriers that made most of the road impassable. There were also clear booths like telephone boxes where the City of London Police could watch over entry to the city. It became apparent a little while after its implementation that the Police had a strong tipoff that the IRA were expected to strike by sending in teams of black men in BMW's.

Wow, so if I don't want that intrusion then I must have something to hide?

Rise up against this type of thinking.

But... but... mr f33dback sir, you said revolution wouldn't work.

I remember the 70's when young WHITE men were strip searched in the middle of the street in Belfast and other towns on the suspicion of terrorism.... These were INNOCENT I got nothing to hide types bullied by Fascist Bastards... I am a protestant and was largely oblivious to all this at the time but now my Catholic friends tell me about incidents in their lives which still leave them with a morbid hatred for the police... These are guys who's parents at the time were middle class..One friend was harassed because his name was Murphy "aye mate you must be IRA with a name like that".

The difference now is the police are supposed to be a little more polite and the victims of this removal of their civil liberties is young black men.....Oh and strip searches have probably been changed to a body grope.. What for example if someone doesn't like being touched, to be groped by a total stranger against their will must be very uncomfortable...

Being searched say once a year in the interest of a safer society and some ppl like f33dback may say thats part of society now... The point is some of these kids are going to be searched once a week or more for no other reason than the police have the power to search them....

F33dback you say you've nothing to hide, I assume you in no way break the law and are a model citizen "with nothing to hide" Say for example you are searched with some software you've dl'd or some music on cd'rs and from search that leads to your procecusion. I am assuming that you fileshare because you're on this site I apologise if you don't......

What if you were found with forged money on you given to you as change, or for a cash payment for something sold on ebay....

Or a little bit of grass...I'm not suggesting you smoke but some of us do and don't need the hassle.....

And what if you were stopped every Saturday night on the way to the pub "just routine Sir" After a while you would start to quote the mantra..." For fucks sake I haven't done anything wrong, why do you keep picking on me". Then arrested for obstructing an officer, taking another dangerous back talking thug off the street for processing..



At what point are they going to realise that victimisation, segregation, and bullying doesn't work.....

This post has been edited by bigbaldybloke: Aug 29 2008, 09:09 AM

I don't think they are going to realise that.

We both have memories of certain groups being victimised in the 70's, I'm sure that Catholics in Kilburn and Harlesden suffered much the same tactics as you describe in Belfast. In '77 when people round my way went punk then they were harassed and moved on by police. In areas like Notting Hill and Brixton it was Afro-Carribs. Now when the stop and search comes in I would expect it will be young Muslim blokes that bear the brunt.

In fact they already are, 'cause in practice your rights are whatever the police say they are at the time. You don't want to turn your pockets out or take your shoes off in the street? Fine we'll arrest you and take you down the station for a strip search. Stop and Search never went away.

Thing is that the underlying causes of things are complex not simple, and by the time a copper has enough experience to figure that out he's either climbing a career ladder where he's bound by politics or on his way to a new career.

As for the politicians and senior policemen, victimisation, segregation, and bullying kinda does work for them...

btw feedback was agreeing with you it's Mr. M1shun who is taking the "nothing to hide" line.

Young black males may well be the majority targets in this case, and rightly so. A lot of the poor young lads that have been murdered due to escalating knife crime were young black men, who live on estates and in areas populated mainly by black families. It's hardly apartheid is it? The Police aren't doing it to just throw a handful of sand into their vaseline, they're doing it to try and prevent their kids from being stabbed!

It's always the same, the Police are always bloody demonised for 'targeting minority groups', they wouldn't have to target them, if in thier cases the people involved weren't of differing ethnicity! It's as if because you hail from a different country you're immune from Police action on the grounds that 'they're just doing it because I'm Black/Asian/Eastern European/Antipodean' - it's fucking silly.

I've been searched more times than I care to remember, getting on and off trains, planes and buses. It doesn't bother me because they're doing it for public safety or because someone who looks like me has committed a crime. Sure, it can be an embuggerance when you're in a hurry but if that's the worst of your worries you're doing okay!

I won't rise up against anything that I see as in the public interest. Sure, it's a sad state of affairs that our law enforcement people are left with no feasible choices other than invasive ones like this, but what're you gonna do? Unfortunately the kind of scumbag that carries a knife with the intention of stabbing someone doesn't usually subscribe to the honour system.

This post has been edited by m15hun: Aug 29 2008, 12:39 PM

Oh dear, let me put it another way:

The police will just use this as an excuse to harass people they don't like the look of and there will be no net gain for public safety. Was that short and simple enough?

Do you think by being patronising and rude it somehow gives your dull, regurgitated Guardian reader point more gravity?

This post has been edited by m15hun: Aug 29 2008, 02:11 PM

you choose to take the train bus or plane and accept the security measures put in place. We are talking about innocent being victimised for walking down the street.....

In N Ireland everyone going into the city center got searched.... that was part of living with civil war....But to get stopped and searched for no other reason than post code or colour is obscene

I'm thankful to be free of all that crap. One of the many reasons I left the UK.

Rudeness comes in many forms. I have posted a couple of thoughful messages to this thread saying why I thought that the new powers being proposed were really old powers that had been taken away in times past and that in practicality street level policing had not changed that much as there is always other legislation that gives either the power for street searches or the plausible threat of worse treatment if you don't succumb voluntarily. I also gave examples from history, both from my own experience and from events that happened during my youth that were widely reported.

My point was not that black people were put upon, even though in many cases they were. My point was that the powers of the police to stop and search people would be used against whichever minorities the individual policeman had it in for because they always have and always will. I am sure that somewhere there is a policeman with a pathological hatred of fat people. Guess who he is going to stop and search? That's right, he will be checking salad dodgers for concealed doughnuts.

You chose to take from my thoughtful posts a case of special pleading for blacks not to be searched under any circumstances.

I thought you had missed the point, and frankly I considered it a discourtesy for you to not read what I had written closely enough and then to misrepresent what I had said. However there was the possibility that my previous posts were to long and windy or perhaps too complex so I decided to explain to you once again, as if to a child who had wandered into a roomful of grownups and was attempting to join in based on something he had read, on a tattered piece of newsprint as it might be, or something he'd seen on Crimewatch UK.

Myself I don't read any papers as they are all far too misleading.

No, I didn't.

I chose to air my own opinions on the subject, regarding the use of prejudice by some groups as something of a 'get out of jail free card'. I, personally, wouldn't worry if someone stopped and searched me based upon the knowledge that someone of my height, appearance or indeed cultural background had committed a crime. I would just be glad that someone was trying to catch that person.

It seems clear to me that people will never be satisfied. If authorities do nothing to catch criminals they are criticised as lazy good-for-nothings who drain tax money, if they get strict they are vilified for daring to infringe on liberty, and as has been said there will always be a group that takes exception and cries foul.

Are you not aware of the world we live in? Do you think there's a better way of tackling violent crime? Strikes me as the usual wind from people who have nothing better to do than criticise those that are actually doing rather than procrastinating.



Someone not agreeing with you constitutes discourtesy, does it? Just because I didn't put my hands up and heap praise upon your statement you automatically assume that 'I had not read it closely enough'?

Fucking outrageous.


This post has been edited by m15hun: Aug 29 2008, 10:33 PM

Aaaaaaaaaand once again:
I don't consider disagreeing with me a discourtesy.
I considered misunderstanding my argument through either ignorance or laziness, constructing a straw man argument out of what you thought I meant and then attempting to ridicule same straw man argument while pretending it is what I said, a discourtesy.

I put it to you that all of your protestations about how frequently you would be willing to be searched are irrellevant because you and I both know that you are unlikely to be subjected to the same frequency of searches as any of the minority groups that have already been mentioned. It's like you standing there saying that you would be willing to have periods twice a month for the priviledge of being able to carry children or so that your wife wouldn't have to. It's a pious sentiment but it aint ever going to happen.

And how do you know I don't belong to a minority group?

.

Perhaps I should try telling you again, see if you get it..I took your statement in and didn't agree. I've heard the same bullshit time and time again.



I never said I liked the thought of it, I said I accept it as a means to an end. If it's going to help stop knife crime, let's take it like men and not moan.

This post has been edited by m15hun: Aug 29 2008, 11:08 PM

I do not know that you do not belong to a minority group. I do know that you don't belong to one of the minority groups mentioned, in the time and place where they were unfairly targeted, which is my point: the minorities that are unfairly targeted change according to what populist agenda is being pushed, by the tabloids, by cable tv news and talkshows.

I find it hard to believe that you have taken in my point and disagreed with it seeing as you are still presenting arguments that counter a different position to that which I am adopting.

Why do you think the 'minority' groups that get targeted are? Because they are the same colour, creed, age, weight etc. as people that are wanted for committing crime. It isn't unfair, it's just one of those things.

The point you made was that groups of people come unfairly under scrutiny when the Police are in possession of a stop and search mandate. I disagreed, and put across my point that the people that come under scrutiny may be innocent of a crime but if they fit a demographic that has been heavily involved in crime in a particular area they must accept that the Police have a job to do and take in on the chin.

You cited Brixton as an example, saying: '..Riots that took place as a result of the Sus laws being used in a swamping operation that consisted of police swamping an area (Brixton) and searching everyone who was young male and black.' As Brixton is a predominantly Black area, is this really a valid reference point? I'm sure if there was an outbreak of crime in Esher the majority of the people caught up in the vicious dragnet would be white over 40's.

It's just a paleoliberal stance taken against the authorities. You haven't even said how you would do things differently. Come on, instead of moaning for moaning's sake put across a better option for tackling crime. It isn't an invention of the media, or the Police, there is a growing trend for carrying blades and it isn't good. Stop and search is a clumsy approach at remedying the situation but at least it's an approach.