Anti terrorism 'stop and quiz'

[ludwig]

The government's considering giving stop and quiz powers to the police in order to help the fight against terrorism.
I find this quite worrying and think it would probably end up being counter productive. What do you think?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6695685.stm

[sp1814]

chompu

I've got a few (actually, just three) mates in the Met, but they all joined in the late 90s, so don't have an opinion on this, but as you've had 30 years, I'm curious - the 'sus' laws of the 70s/80s - do you think in balance they were a good thing - helping to identify criminals who would've otehrwise gone undetected, or a bad thing - souring relations between the black community and police?

Do you work in an area (geographically) where the 'sus' laws were used?

Finally, do you know whether they were used specifically on the black community or were they used throughout the country even-handedly?

Note: I'm casting aspersions - just curious.

[ruby27]

Chompu
I can not respond on points of common law or not because I do not have the necessary knowledge in this area. However, I do know the sus laws were infamous and as I have referred to previously were considered to have been the major contributory factor to the riot that took place in Bristol in 1980, I had a student placement in St Paul�s so heard what the community was saying. This event and other riots that took place in other cities resulted in the sus laws being abolished because it was recognized what detrimental effect the law and how it was used on race relations. It was because the police targeted the black community that the relationship between the black community and the police were so poor. I have personal knowledge of this as a family friend was a very senior police officer in Bristol at this time and as a young socialist committed to anti racism we had different view points and his was that young black people were criminals and should be treated as such. (Yes I know some young black men commit offences but crime is not exclusive to them, women, older people etc also have the capacity to commit crime) What I and others are suggesting is why can we not use history to help our actions now. We know the effect the sus laws had, do we want such poor relations to exist again, do we want to radicalize young Muslim men?
Sorry but what�s the issue about teachers having lost their authority, please the only authority that they no longer have is that they can no longer physically chastise or abuse children in their care! True children may not be as respectful, obedient, and passive or whatever but that is reflection of a much wider changes not due to the removal of using corporal punishment. Also many head teachers I know would be offended by your claims because they do have authority; (some of them are revered by their pupils and parents), which comes from treating the pupils and their parents with respect, honesty and decency.

[Kromovaracun]

In response to chompu, I feel I have to acknowledge something:

I would check your facts before you relpy in a supercilious and patronising manner

There's no intention to sound either of those things on my part - I'd like to apologise if this has indeed come across, it's entirely unintentional.

And this:

By the way we don't have a written constitution in this country.

AAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!

We do have a written constitution - it's just not codified in one place. The various components are written, as I'm sure you're aware.

It is generally about laws which have not been made by statute of parliament but have been passed down through tradition and the rulings of court

Ah - there's a separate component of the constitution which this entails (or in the way I've been taught it anyway) - I know it as judicial precedent (or tradition). Though this may also come under common law (though I'd always been taught it was separate).

I'll respond to the rest of your post when I have time later...

[Kromovaracun]

Oh, one more thing:

The right to silence has never been abolished in this country by John Major or anyone else.

I'll admit I was wrong about it being removed per se (I'd not read up on it in a while and my memories got confused - my mistake) - but it was substantially altered in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act of '94. 34-9

[Kromovaracun]

I wish someone would move this to the top of the 'news' page - it's easily the most popular topic at the moment.

Sorry for the triple-post, it's rather a lot even by my standards - last one, I promise.

However some idea may be apparent if someone is brought to trial, for instance the recent 'fertiliser bomb' trial in which it was obvious much use had been made of phone tapping.

Perhaps. But I'll bet they didn't get there by stopping, searching/questioning people who 'look a bit terroristy'.

would concede, however, that this is another area where the police woud be reluctant to publicise in view of the safety of informants.

Obviously you'd know more about the workings of this than me, so I shan't comment on that - but perhaps even if specific information on individual cases isn't released, you'd think they'd want to make it far more well known that they were co-operating with the ethnic community or looking for help from them, rather than adopting pointlessly draconian measures which (as you've pointed out in your post) have been abolished on several occasions in the past.

Please give me a nudge if I've come across as patronising again - I have a naturally rather aggressive debating style, I wouldn't want to cause offence.

[ludwig]

I suppose I should say what I think before this thread scrolls off the bottom of the page into obscurity.
Basically, if I thought there was a chance this would do more good than harm I would be right behind it but I can't see that being the case. The reasons for this have been argued eloquently enough by others, so there's no point me repeating them.
Some good points made on both sides though. Thanks for your comments.

[chompu]

sp1814. In reply to your questions about the sus. laws, I would say that there was not a police force in the country that didn't use them at some point. We called them 'stop checks' as opposed to sus. laws.I don't think that they were specifically aimed at the black community but as I stated earlier if you have a spate of steet robberies and the vast majority of the victims describe the offenders as young black males, then it is likely they will receive more of your attention. Not forgetting that many of the victims were also black. A police force is reflective of the society it polices and therfore I accept that racism will sometimes appear within the police but would argue that it is more likely to be at a lower level than the general populace due to rigorous vetting. I know that at one time the Met, as part of their training sent recruits to live with etnic minority families for a couple of weeks. There aren't many organisations who would go that far in trying to build understanding. I don't know if that system still operates but I do know that the honest police officer who make up the majority hate nothing more than a corrupt officer.

[chompu]

ruby 27. I'm sure you are probably right that the sus laws were a contributory factor in the riots of the 80s. I also think what ever measures had been used to combat crime would have had the same result as the criminal elements obviously don't like having their activities curtailed.The riot was sparked by a raid on the Black and White cafe which was selling alcohol without a licence and where drugs were openly being sold. I policed the steets of St. Pauls in the aftermath of the riot and had many friendly greetings from black people who were fed up with the criminal element amongst them. There were many other factors culminating in the riots of this era ,not least the involvement of political extremists. The Broadwater Farm riot, for instance, was far from spontaneous. Officers on the ground were reporting the stockpiling of petrol bombs days before the riot but nothing was done by their seniors.On the question of alienating sections of the community. I never found that football spectators showed any resentment on being searched on entering the ground, they rightly saw it as the fault of the minority hooligan element. Likewise in the event of bomb scares we are sometimes subject to having our bags checked when entering a public venue. Again no widespread resentment. I would be more worried if it wasn't done. I accept that the muslim community may be working from a different mind set but perhaps we need to educate them as to why these actions are being taken.

[chompu]

ruby27. And on to schools. You have made an assumption that I'm refering to corporal punishment which I never mentioned. I've just retired from my second career which was in a large inner city comprehensive where I worked for 10 years. You are right when you state that discipline in schools is affected by many wider issues but far from being offended I'm sure many Headteachers would tell you that they have a minority of disruptive students who take up a disproportionate amount of the staffs' time. These are the type of students that if punished with a detention will refuse to do it and just walk out.Now the ultimate punishment is expulsion which doesn't solve the problem,merely moves it elsewhere. Expulsion is hard to implement and usually follows someone getting hurt, normally another student.Very annoying for the parents of the other student, if their child is well behaved. You are right when you say most Headteachers are respected and liked by students and parents but I'm talking about the minority whose behaviour often severely disrupts the education of the better behaved majority. If my children were still of school age I would be concerned by this downward spiral.

[chompu]

Kromovacun. I must admit I smiled when I read your sincere apology in your post because you immediately did it again. Do you not think that a long line of the letters AR and G in bold type is indicative of an impatient scream as if you are addressing a child who is failing to grasp that two and two make four.You claim that we do have a written constitution albeit not in codified in one place. I'll set you a task then. Taking my earlier example, tell me where I can find it written down that it is against the law to murder someone.
In answer to no-one knowing what use the police may have made of their powers to combat terrorism, you state
'but I bet' etc. A bet eh? A wager or gamble on the outcome of a future event. The use of those words tends to prove my point because you are merely surmising on what results the police may have gained.

[chompu]

This is the start of the revolution. I have taking over this thread and will be holding it hostage until the sports section is returned to its' original state.

[dinners42]

I think the police should stop any one that looks suspicious who ever it is, if we had zero tolerance England as whole would be much safer alround.