British anti-terrorism in action
How ‘every twentieth’ can expect to be treated. Nice to see someone enjoying their job so much, I suppose. And a public servant to boot. I wonder for how much longer searchees will be allowed to film proceedings.
I wonder if Osama’s seen it yet? I’m sure he’ll also be congratulating himself on a job well done.
(Thanks to Paul for link)
Update: The man doing the filming is Terence Eden - he’s got more on his blog.
Posted on August 20th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
| See also • Guido Fawkes and the BNP UPDATE UPDATED UPDATED UPDATED • Press Release • Withdraw your support |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
• Filed under The home front |
• |
I must confess, I don’t have a problem with this, I mean the police have been told that this is somthing they have to do, I think it’s easy to shoot the messenger and it’s not the police officer’s fault. They do the search in the best way possible in the face of someone who is being a tiny bit of a dick.
Daniel Hoffmann-Gill’s latest blog post… Poles Apart: Off to Poland
Is he “being a tiny bit of a dick” though - honestly I don’t think he is. He’s questioning their authority, absolutely - is that such a bad thing though ? He’s asking what they’re doing and where they’re checking his details - I think he has a right to know, considering he’s done nothing wrong at all - yet he’s not free to go, or decline the search !
I don’t think he was being a tiny bit of a dick either. I agree with Paul - if they’re going to invade our privacy, I think we’re entitled to ask whatever questions we like.
And as for the messenger, whatever happened to a bit of professional courtesy? That copper has done the image of the police no favours at all. He’s the face of the State and needs to remember it.
I think most of us realise that this is a sad fact of today’s society. I do think there was fault on both sides of this, the chap doing the filming was being pretty annoying, deliberately being difficult, but I do think that the policemen could have been slightly less rude. I mean just because they are members of the law does not give them the right to be an arse, and if they are going to go through your bag , pockets and credit cards then you have every right to see their ID and to know what they are doing. Wearing a policeman’s uniform does not necessarily make you a policeman.
Questioning authority and exercising our rights is perfectly healthy, but being a tad arsey is unlikely to be a very fruitful tactic when dealing with anyone employed in a public-facing job, be it a police officer, call handler, waiter etc. and that’s what seems to have happened here. There is always room for a bit more professional courtesy, but I’ve seen far worse in my time, and in all walks of like. In fairness to those officers featured they didn’t draft the stupid terror legislation, and they probably had no say in setting up and being roped into the pointless exercise of having to stop 1-in-20 for no good reason. They’re probably just trying to get through the day.
First time I’ve felt moved to comment on here but I think this is a really important issue, albeit perhaps in a slightly different way to others.
I’ve got very severe doubts as to whether stop and search - whether linked to terrorism, drugs or knives - is ever really a useful tactic. The number of ‘hits’ per 1,000 searches is so tiny (in fact it’s not far off zero) you have to think that there’s a better way for the police to use their resources.
BUT, given that the police are under a lot of political and public pressure to be seen to take this sort of action in the ‘wars’ against terrorism, drugs etc. I would much rather searches were conducted on a random basis (as this one allegedly was) than on the basis of some sort of profiling. This is not only on the grounds of natural justice, but because profiling really doesn’t work - because if ‘they’ know you’re profiling, ‘they’ can work out ways to get round it. This does of course mean that people who ‘don’t look like terrorists’ (as a commenter on another blog put it) are going to be stopped. But this is surely preferable to the targeting of specific types of people, with all the negative implications this has, certainly in terms of the comparisons with Nazi Germany which are being bandied around elsewhere.
Of course the extent to which these searches are random is open to question - I severely doubt they are in any real sense - but I think any moves in this direction, if we have to have stop/searches, are to be welcomed.
Thanks for featuring my story - and thanks to all of you who’ve commented.
It’s interesting (to me) to see how this story is perceived by various people. I’ve been contacted by those on the far right and far left both claiming it’s proof of the totalitarian / fascist / socialist / New World Order-ist we live in. It’s amazing how people with such different ideologies can have such a similar viewpoint…
I don’t feel any particular animosity towards the police (well, the second one could have been more polite) - I don’t want the police picking and choosing which laws they’re going to follow. What does make me angry is knowing that politicians created such laws to make it look like they’re doing something and that a large swathe of the British public is quite happy because “it stop terrorists, innit”.
To those who think I was a bit arsey… Well… Yes I was. But you try keeping your cool while the whole of Waterloo watches you getting “done” by the police. It’s not a nice experience.
Thanks
T