|
Post by yggdrasil on Aug 4, 2023 15:56:57 GMT
I dunno - the second question on the leaflet seems a bit dubious: "Would you like to see a Traveller site next to your house?" Can you imagine if someone put out a leaflet asking "Would you like a black person moving next door to you?" There is an implication that Travellers are undesirable. Though I doubt that in itself counts as a crime. It's rather a leading question, isn't it? Thing is, their culture is that their homes are spotless and clean inside and they don't give a "tinker's cuss" (see what I did there?) about the mess they create outside. Why is their any need to create a permanent site, anyway? I thought Travellers were supposed to travel, the clue is supposed to be in the name. Bad enough they made Viz drop the "Thieving Gypsy Bastards" strip.
|
|
tommcclarey
Nick Nack
Preferred pronouns: He/Him
Posts: 167
|
Post by tommcclarey on Aug 4, 2023 18:33:38 GMT
It's absolutely not a police matter. I sincerely doubt they'll do anything.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Aug 5, 2023 6:00:09 GMT
Like when they sent multiple officers to arrest that man over that pride flag bollocks on Facebook? Even though simply looking at it should have been enough to determine it wasn't a criminal offence? No idea of the event or the outcome apart from what you are claiming. I very much doubt they do it for a laugh, Policing is tough enough already with the reduced numbers they have. They don't think "Oh, let's do such and such, it'll annoy the Daily Mail and a bunch of gammons" www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11066477/Veteran-arrested-causing-anxiety-retweeting-meme-swastika-Pride-flags.html
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Aug 5, 2023 15:39:23 GMT
still don't really understand your point, you seem to blame the police for doing what they are told to do. A complaint will be investigated and if it is deemed to have caused an offence the person involved will be arrested and questioned and maybe charged. An ex army bloke? I wouldn't consider it inappropriate to send 2 of 3 coppers to do it. If you don't like the current laws then lobby the current Government who have been in power for 13 years and obviously like those laws. Maybe your anger is directed at the wrong people? "lefties" haven't made any laws for some time.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Aug 5, 2023 16:02:25 GMT
still don't really understand your point, you seem to blame the police for doing what they are told to do. A complaint will be investigated and if it is deemed to have caused an offence the person involved will be arrested and questioned and maybe charged. An ex army bloke? I wouldn't consider it inappropriate to send 2 of 3 coppers to do it. If you don't like the current laws then lobby the current Government who have been in power for 13 years and obviously like those laws. Maybe your anger is directed at the wrong people? "lefties" haven't made any laws for some time. The point is that what he did wasn't a crime. The police had to conflate two different provisions of the Communications Act to conclude a crime had been committed. A cursory glance at this should have been enough to determine this. yet the guy had multiple police visits and was offered some kind of Stasi like reeducation course for £80. Posting something on your Facebook that causes anxiety to another is not a crime. That is only the case for direct messaging when the intent is to cause needless anxiety. Someone seeing something you posted doesn't meet the threshold for a criminal offence. And the police lied about this, claiming "'When officers arrived they were prevented from entering the address to discuss a potential resolution to the matter." Which is simply untrue, since the police were in the house when the video started. So why are the police lying about the law to extort money from people? Why are they breaking their oaths to harass people?
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Aug 5, 2023 16:19:43 GMT
If you don't like the current laws then lobby the current Government who have been in power for 13 years and obviously like those laws. Maybe your anger is directed at the wrong people? "lefties" haven't made any laws for some time. I don't think the main problem is with the laws that have been made. For instance, there is no shortage of laws against violent offences or burglary, yet police-recorded crimes of this nature is now at a record high in England and Wales, while the proportion of crimes solved has fallen to a record low. Thousands of extra officers have now been recruited to improve this dismal record, yet the police still can't be bothered to attend burglaries, and instead appear to spend their time going after tweets that might be construed as a hate crimes. While that might not necessarily be an indication that police aren't "doing what they are told to do", there is certainly a strong indication that they aren't doing what the public expect them to do. That's why the public feel angry toward them. The police are there to keep us safe, and that objective is not going to be met if they pursue people who tweet something that caused somebody offence.
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Aug 5, 2023 16:44:13 GMT
If you don't like the current laws then lobby the current Government who have been in power for 13 years and obviously like those laws. Maybe your anger is directed at the wrong people? "lefties" haven't made any laws for some time. I don't think the main problem is with the laws that have been made. For instance, there is no shortage of laws against violent offences or burglary, yet police-recorded crimes of this nature is now at a record high in England and Wales, while the proportion of crimes solved has fallen to a record low. Thousands of extra officers have now been recruited to improve this dismal record, yet the police still can't be bothered to attend burglaries, and instead appear to spend their time going after tweets that might be construed as a hate crimes. While that might not necessarily be an indication that police aren't "doing what they are told to do", there is certainly a strong indication that they aren't doing what the public expect them to do. That's why the public feel angry toward them. The police are there to keep us safe, and that objective is not going to be met if they pursue people who tweet something that caused somebody offence.
That would be a matter then for the Home Secretary and the regional police chiefs to discuss, she is their boss, if she thinks they are applying the laws wrong it is her job to instruct them. It does still come down to who is Home Secretary in these matters to control policy.
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Aug 5, 2023 17:50:17 GMT
That would be a matter then for the Home Secretary and the regional police chiefs to discuss, she is their boss, if she thinks they are applying the laws wrong it is her job to instruct them. It does still come down to who is Home Secretary in these matters to control policy. You raise a good point. At thr risk of going back to some time-honoured and endless "who runs this country?" discussion, it's an interesting question who actually does control policy. I'm pretty sure that Suella Braverman, who has a reputation of being a bit of a hard-arse, is not telling the police "you must focus on racially-aggravated hate crime and not waste resources on violent crime and burglary", but just how much control she has on how the police focus their resources is anybody's guess. I suspect a lot of time is spent accusing her of bullying and micromanaging the police when she does try to instruct them on the job they should be doing.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Aug 6, 2023 5:46:34 GMT
I don't think the main problem is with the laws that have been made. For instance, there is no shortage of laws against violent offences or burglary, yet police-recorded crimes of this nature is now at a record high in England and Wales, while the proportion of crimes solved has fallen to a record low. Thousands of extra officers have now been recruited to improve this dismal record, yet the police still can't be bothered to attend burglaries, and instead appear to spend their time going after tweets that might be construed as a hate crimes. While that might not necessarily be an indication that police aren't "doing what they are told to do", there is certainly a strong indication that they aren't doing what the public expect them to do. That's why the public feel angry toward them. The police are there to keep us safe, and that objective is not going to be met if they pursue people who tweet something that caused somebody offence.
That would be a matter then for the Home Secretary and the regional police chiefs to discuss, she is their boss, if she thinks they are applying the laws wrong it is her job to instruct them. It does still come down to who is Home Secretary in these matters to control policy. Local police answer to PCCs, not the Home Secretary.
|
|
|
Post by yggdrasil on Aug 6, 2023 15:14:35 GMT
That would be a matter then for the Home Secretary and the regional police chiefs to discuss, she is their boss, if she thinks they are applying the laws wrong it is her job to instruct them. It does still come down to who is Home Secretary in these matters to control policy. Local police answer to PCCs, not the Home Secretary. Well she instructed them to take grooming more seriously last year so she obviously thinks she has control over how their resources are used.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Aug 6, 2023 15:37:39 GMT
Local police answer to PCCs, not the Home Secretary. Well she instructed them to take grooming more seriously last year so she obviously thinks she has control over how their resources are used. She doesn't. Patel told the police to stop recording "non crime hate incidents" and they ignore her. So the courts told them to stop and they ignored them as well. The police need returning to the Home Office and PCCs need binning off.
|
|