Following on from the discussion about the police (and the plastic variety) making up the law as they go along and harassing members of the public for doing nothing illegal, Jock Coats draws my attention to an example of stop and search by the BTP at Waterloo station using the “war on terr” as their excuse.
Apparently they were looking for anything that may be useful to a terrorist – such as maps, large sums of money, cameras and such. Just the kind of things a tourist might be carrying, frankly. As Terence Edent (who filmed the piece ) points out, perhaps they cannot distinguish between a terrorist and a tourist after all they do sound much the same. Still, if you are in the habit of carrying maps about, watch out, eh?
It’s about 14 minutes long, but worth watching (providing you’ve taken your heart medication first). At the very end, Terence asks “is it because of my long hair?” as opposed to a truly random stop. I suspect, though they will never admit it, that it is.
So, nip over to Jock’s place and see an example of modern Britain in all its democratic liberal glory. And weep.
That is horrendous. Makes you wonder what has happened to the same country that fought Hitler.
tbrrobs last blog post..Register to vote or else!!
Indeed so. Random stop and search in a liberal democracy is wholly unjustified. The excuse of a terror threat is pure hyperbole. We have lived through greater threats without this imposition and come through it. That we can be arbitrarily stopped and searched while going about our legitimate business for no good reason is outrageous. Of course, it is not only the police who are to blame here but our increasingly authoritarian government. Joe Stalin would be proud.
Indeed so. Random stop and search in a liberal democracy is wholly unjustified
I don’t go quite as far as that. I could accept it as a *temporary* measure AND where the threat was high AND the effectiveness of random stop and search was also high. In the case of terrorism, the threat isn’t that high and the effectiveness of random stop and search is poor (the statistics for arrests following S44 searches bears this out) so there is little case for it.
One area where random stop and search would be highly effective – though I am certainly not advocating it! – would be with the ‘war on drugs’. We know that a significant minority (several millions of people) consume illegal drugs of one sort or another. If you randomly stopped and drugs tested people you would get a huge haul of positive test results. I have always taken a decriminalisation and regulation line on drugs so I certainly don’t think this is a good idea but you can’t deny that randon stop and test would be highly effective in identifying people who have taken illegal drugs. But the authorities also know that such a policy would involve them in tripling the prison population. Despite all the tough words, the state will never get that tough with illegal drugs because it would provoke a very negative reaction from the electorate. Hell, they might even vote for a policy of decriminalisation and think of how many police we’d have to make redundant if that happened. No that would never do!
Um.. isn’t that pretty much what I said, though? Given that we didn’t have this during much greater threats, I see no justification for it now. The whole point of a liberal democracy is that we expect to go about our business without interference.
Reasonable cause is one thing, random is simply a waste of everyone’s time.
I take your point on the drugs, though. Although I do not and have never taken illegal substances, I would refuse a random test in these circumstances. I accept them in my employment because it is reasonable and proportionate (rail industry, safety of trains etc.) – and I signed up for it upon entering the industry. I do not accept it for the whole population, though. And, yes, you may be right, the backlash could well have a positive effect.
“if you are in the habit of carrying maps about”
I guess the best way of foxing the BTP (never the best of the best) is to carry a TomTom Go, then.. 🙂
Overreaction on the part of the authorities seems routine, though, nowadays. I’m tired of hearing of roads closed because of the ‘threat’ from exploding canisters everytime these’s a fire. And my blood nearly boiled when I read this this morning.
“Roads were sealed off..”! In the name of God, why?! RThe thing (even if it had been real) was about as big as a pet cat, and not the swiftest thing on dry land. Cretins…
JuliaMs last blog post..Taxpayer Money – Keeping You Them Safe
Caimans are relatively easily captured if you know what you are doing – and, as you say, fairly small and not too quick. Hardly a huge threat to the public.
Just a minor thing – everyone does it so no worries – most “Coateses” have an “e” in their name, even though it is the less obvious way of spelling it. Me, I consumed mine long ago…:) Jock Coats
But I did wonder about that one Julia – dear knows what they will do when there are Pay As You Go iPhones complete with GPS!
Apologies. Corrected.
Haven’t managed to watch more than the first couple of minutes yet as either the server is very busy, or the links from the USofA are congested. I will be back!
Thinking about the cuddly toy croc, last October Soho was closed down because a Thai Chef was plying his trade! And that article has a reference to something equally silly in the USofA.
As a method of population control, I suppose that the mantra is: “it doesn’t matter what you are afraid of, just be very afraid“. To that end, all this “security theatre” is not a problem; it is part of the solution, the Final Solution.
What are they going to do to those of us who refuse to be cowed into unthinking Submission?
Yes, I had that problem. You just have to be patient with it. Worth the wait – in a perverse way.
Hopefully the fact that it is busy is a “good thing”! Oor maybe it’s more sinister…last night when I tried to send two TinyURL links to my and Tristan’s blog entries to the Libertarian Alliance mailing list they didn’t work when people received them. First time that’s happened to me too 🙂
Here’s more misuse of anti-terror legislation, done quite specifically to intimidate a member of the public behaving in a lawful manner.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/07/30/police-use-terror-law-to-quiz-photographer-over-police-car-snap-115875-20676608/
What gets me is the dumb arrogance of Supt Neil Sherrington who defends the use of the anti-terror laws in this case.
“The act states that ‘this power can only be used for the purposes of searching for articles of a kind which could be used in connection with terrorism, and may be exercised whether or not the constable has grounds for suspecting the presence of articles of that kind’.”
“He added: “It is therefore reasonable for the officer in this case to have made reference to the act and been suspicious about why the photograph of the vehicle had been taken.”
Which basically boils down to, “we can do it because we can do it and you can’t stop us. Ha ha” Well perhaps this smug cunt will be laughing the other side of his face when his officers need the help of members of the public and none is forthcoming. Frankly if I saw a policeman in trouble I would turn the other way. If there are ‘decent officers’ who are dismayed at this kind of intimidatory shit, then they’d better stand up for themselves, for as far as I am concerned their silence makes them complicit and as worthy of comtempt as the thugs who get off on this kind of shit.
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)