UK Police Stop and Question

[AnOther]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1267646,00.html?f=rss

Good god whatever's next, Jack boots and doors kicked open in the middle of the night....a Stasi resurrection in the UK....?

And people still ask "why are you leaving UK"

*****************

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Martin Niemöller (1892—1984), Protestant Pastor and social activist. 

WAKE UP UK.......................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Russethouse]

 I saw Peter Hain talk about this with Andrew Marr this morning, he says he is keen that civil liberties are not infringed and that it will not be like the old stop and search etc - I think he is living in cloud cuckoo land...its a step back IMHO..........perhaps some of these more unsavoury measures are being rushed through in Blairs dog days so that Brown can distance himself later...........[8-)]

[MrCanary]

This Labour government has made the UK into more of a 'big brother' state than it has ever been before.

Yet, whilst cars get stopped for no reason and there are cameras on every road, thugs, anti-social morons, rapists, murderers and thieves have a free run.     

Don't blame the police - it is down to the clowns running the country!

Mel 

 

[Russethouse]

http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=6441&&&edition=1&ttl=20070527155418

Some comments from the BBC web site

[marina]

If UK police power makes you so uneasy I think you will have a shock when you move to France.

[Tony F Dordogne]

So why move to France Ernie Y where the police have had this power for many years?  Will you be leading the campaign in France to get it scrapped here or is it just another on-line rant against the Labour government in the UK who, incidentally, I do not support because they are too right wing for me.

I got searched at the Channel Tunnel last time round - not a problem at all - the guys searching had no suspicion that I had committed an offence, no idea who I was, didn't verify my details - nothing but so what, I can say rather easily that I had nothing to hide so nothing to worry about in the search.

I don't have a problem with this at all tho I do believe that if the current laws were enforced in a different way and the current UK obsession with the criminal or suspect's civil rights was got into some perspective by the judiciary and press/media, Blair's perceived need for new legislation would be done away with.

Labour politicians can't criticise the judges for implimenting legislation (and releasing people on appeal, like the terrorism suspects at Belmarsh who have since absconded) that the Labour politicians enacted, effectively they gave the criminals and suspects the means with which to beat the system when they enacted the legislation.

[Iceni]

[quote user="Mel "]

Don't blame the police - it is down to the clowns running the country!

[/quote]

Or should we blame the clown masters who put the clowns in charge ?

John

not

[AnOther]

Points taken Tony however I am moving to France by choice and I am therefore obliged, as should be any good immigrant, to accept my host country it for what it is, wart's and all, so no, I won't be mounting, leading or joining any campaings to change anything.

As for being searched at the Channel Tunnel well actually I would have no real problem with that because there is some justification to it although I do think that some form of profiling could be employed in these sort of situations, particularly at airports, but that would be far too politically sensitive of course.

One of my major gripes with the UK is it's pell-mell descent into an Orwellian cum Police state which happenend with almost total acquiescence from the British public and on what you rightly say are on largely nebulous and self serving grounds, yet despite which still so often fails to deliver.

I also have problems with other things such as the lack of care and consideration and overcrowding but don't want to turn this into a rant if it isn't one already [:)]  

[AnOther]

Points taken Tony however I am moving to France by choice and am therefore obliged, as should be any good immigrant, to accept my host country it for what it is, wart's and all, so no, I won't be mounting, leading or joining any campaings to change anything.

As for being searched at the Channel Tunnel well actually I would have no real problem with that because there is some justification to it although I do think that some form of profiling could be employed in these sort of situations, particularly at airports, but that would be far too politically sensitive of course.

One of my major gripes with the UK is it's pell-mell descent into an Orwellian cum Police state which happenend with almost total acquiescence from the British public and on what you rightly intimate are largely nebulous and self serving grounds, yet despite which still so often fails to deliver.

I also have problems with other things such as the lack of care and consideration and overcrowding but don't want to turn this into a rant if it isn't one already [:)]

The bottom line for me, as I suspect it may be for many, is that I'm more than willing to pay my fair share of dues and taxes and to try my best not to break the law, in return for which I seek nothing more than to be left alone to enjoy the fruits of my lifetimes labour. Is this really too much to ask. It seems to me that in UK it is.

[Patf]

There will be little point in the police stopping and searching while the courts/judges are so timid when cases come to trial. Protect the criminal and not the victim seems to be the policy. In fact the poor criminal is now the victim. Pat.

[David]

As and Ex, well Retired Copper, if I was honest, I could'nt wait to retire.

Our hands are tied to what we can and cannot do, paperwork is more not less and we have 'targets' to achieve. What a load of ' B..l...cks. We can stop people but cannot ask them who they are or where they live, unless they have committed an offence. Although there are ways round it using what is called PACE.

Luckily when I joined I was 26 and had seen life. So when they told me I had to do this and that, I told them where to go. Did'nt go down to well mind but for some reason I never got told off.

Not only that, the Coppers joining now have to work for 35yrs and only get a maximum of half pension. Admittedly they pay less into it, only 8% I think not the 11% I had to. But then the MP's dont pay anything, Civil Servants only pay something like 3%, it's all for those in the know and none for those they care nothing about.

Well, that's my rant over. Have a nice day everyone.

David

[MrCanary]

Tony - you touch on the most important issue in your post - there is nothing wrong with being stopped and searched if you are a decent, law-abiding, citizen. As such, I have no problem with the proposed new laws. As somebody else pointed out, they already exist in France and we all like it here...

My issue in present day Britain is the lilly-livered approach to yobs, bullies and arrogant people who always want you to get out of their way! The Blairs and Browns of this world will know nothing about this because they are cocooned by assistants, drivers and bodyguards. Every decision and change their government makes is decided upon the headlines they can achieve in the tabloids.

They need to get into the grass roots problems of the UK in a big, big, way. Not talk about it, do it now!

Mel  

 

[AnOther]

Point taken Tony however I am moving to France for various reasons but principally by choice and am therefore obliged, as should be any good immigrant, to accept my host country it for what it is warts and all, so no, I won't be mounting, leading or joining any campaings to change anything.

As for being searched at the Channel Tunnel well actually I would have no real problem with that because there is some justification to it although I do think that some form of profiling should be employed in these sort of situations, particularly at airports, but that would be far too politically sensitive of course.

One of my major gripes with the UK is it's pell-mell descent into an Orwellian cum Police state, something which has happenend with almost total acquiescence from the British public and on what you rightly intimate are largely nebulous and self serving grounds, yet despite which still so often fails to deliver.

I also have problems with other things but don't want to turn this into a rant if it isn't one already [:)]

The bottom line for me, and I suspect for many others, is that I'm more than willing to pay my fair share of dues and taxes and to respect the law, in return for which I seek nothing more than to be left alone to live peace and and enjoyment of the fruits of a lifetimes labour.

Personally I don't think this should be too much to ask but it seems that in the UK it is.

[Chief]

If your not black or muslim/arabic/foreign looking you won't have a thing to worry about anyway.....

[Will]

This quote describes a certain European country's policy on detention by police.

"• Terrorist suspects can be held in police custody before being charged for four days rather than two as is the norm. The further extension of up to 48 hours above the two days must be authorised by the examining magistrate. However, the first extension of 24 hours after the two days must be accompanied by a prior medical examination of the suspect with a view to ensuring that he is fit to stand further detention. A terror suspect in custody has the right of access to a lawyer as from the 72nd hour of his detention (article 706-88 Code of Criminal Procedure-CCP). In ordinary procedure access to a lawyer is currently granted as from the start of the detention (article 63-4 CCP).
• Under article 145-2 CCP, a suspect may be held in pre-trial detention after having been charged for up to four years in terrorist cases. Usually suspects can be held for up to two or three years without trial depending on the seriousness of the offence. The European Court of Human Rights has condemned the country for these time periods in both terrrorist and non-terrorist cases.
• Whereas in ordinary circumstances searches in storage spaces of houses can only be conducted from 6 am, in the context of terrorism night-time searches are permitted (arts 59, 706-90 and 706-91 CCP).
• Following the September 11 terror attacks the country's Parliament further adopted tougher antiterrorism measures that gave police the right to search cars without judicial warrant (article 78-2-2 CCP) and to obtain subject to warrant by an investigating magistrate access to private telephone calls (art. 706-95 CCP). Both these measures have been very controversial"

The name of this country? Well, it begins with F, ends with E and has AN in the middle....

I confess to borrowing the quote from another forum, where it was quoted by somebody not unkown to us. I suspect that Chief is right though and you have to be from a certain background before this policy applies to you - except perhaps in the right to detain you, between charging and trial, for two or three years for alleged non-terrorism offences.

[AnOther]

Originally from here here perchance............?

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/pdf/research/il/ILP081205.doc

[Chief]

[quote user="ErnieY"]

Originally from here here perchance............?

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/pdf/research/il/ILP081205.doc

[/quote]

Very informative article.  Cheers for that

[Will]

[quote user="ErnieY"]

Originally from here here perchance............?

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/pdf/research/il/ILP081205.doc

[/quote]

Yes, I understand that was where the quote came from originally. Thanks for the link, I hadn't read the whole document before. Anybody who cites Britain's big brother tactics with regard to CCTV surveillance, communications interception etc as a reason for moving to France had better read it, particularly the 'new anti-terrorism bill' section. They may well revise their plans if this bill becomes law. Or maybe it already has - does anybody know?

Chatham House seems to be an interesting organisation - its website says it is UK based and its official name is the Royal Institute of International Affairs. I would be interested to know just how it is funded and what its affiliations are - organisations which claim to be independent and non-political can often be quite the opposite in reality. However, if it is really independent it looks like a very good source of information.

 

[Tony F Dordogne]

Chatham House has, for many years, been a wholly independant organisation specialising in world affairs on a wholly non-partisan basis.  It is one of the few places in the world where politicians can meet and discuss issues without what is discussed being made available/discussed outside afterwards - Chatham House rules - and it is widely respected across the world.  I've been there a few times for conferences over the years and it is not beholden to anybody for funding, it's all private and arms length donation or funded through it's specialist conference/moderator programme. 

In many ways it is the direct opposite of the American Institutes (really pressure groups) which are politically based.