Empty Hands
Senior Master
Why don't you clue me in? You must know that "well, you don't have a solution!" is a very common debate tactic to try and shut down criticism, no matter how legitimate.
New "anti-knife" powers for Brit. police
- Thread starter KenpoTex
- Start date
Why don't you clue me in? You must know that "well, you don't have a solution!" is a very common debate tactic to try and shut down criticism, no matter how legitimate.
I agree with what you are saying but in this case there are no arbitary arrests nor does it violate fundamental human rights. The searches have to be authorised by a senior officer who has reasonable grounds for suspecting an act of violence may take place, it is only for a period of 24 hours at a time and is not done lightly.
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/your_rights/legal_system/police_powers.htm
FearlessFreep
Senior Master
Just thinking... wondering... if there are realms of solutions that do not involve the government having to fix it.
Looking at the US. Through the 'war on drugs' and through smoking, societal pressure has been much more powerful than government regulation.
Wondering why whenever we see a problem, we assume the solution is through government intervention, through law or occasionally tax policy, when there are many other ways to change the world around us if we are willing to.
Part of the concern is the slippery slope, I imagine..every time it's done it gets easier to justify the next one. But, this hardly seems an overly harsh law...if used judiciously.
Still, I think the U.K. is going a bit overboard w.r.t. knives.
Empty Hands
Senior Master
It is an arbitrary detention however, which is one of the listed rights.
I saw those sections in the beginning. However, beginning with section 4, it only describes what a constable is, and the power of a constable to make searches "whether or not he has any grounds". I see nothing that directly connects the authorization sections starting with section 1 with the constable sections beginning with 4. Could you help?
Empty Hands
Senior Master
Sure, but we are specifically discussing governmental response and police powers, not discussing how I will pay for lunch today or how to raise my kids. My statements should not be seen as all-inclusive.
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
You must understand that us Americans have our 4th Amendment to our Constitution that we closely defend and cherish. This law, as well intended as it my be and as controlled as you can make it would be a blatant violation of our 4th Amendment and would cause a political backlash of biblical proportions if attempted here.
The reasons for Britain's violent crime problems are many and deep. Reductions in family wage jobs, demographic changes, the unravelling of social cohesion, epic alcoholism, a very high teen pregnancy and birthrate and any number of other factors.
It isn't that the UK's knife laws are particularly lax or permissive. They are neurotically strict. When the BMA seriously floats the idea of banning cooking knives you know that you've entered The System of Doctor Tar and Professor Feather.
A lot of the flailing about is a subconscious realization that the big problems may not have solutions. In such cases people tend to obsessively control the things they can. So we see the British equivalent of SWAT teams called out when kids are legally shooting BB guns and 150 year old trees cut down because the leaves have prickles. A quarter of the world's CCTVs haven't put a dent in crime according to law enforcement. But that's no reason to abandon them. We need more. Lots and lots more to make us feel like we're doing something. The prisons are full while aggravated assaults, habitual theft and chronic vandalism can and are "cured" with ASBOs.
If there were no cost associated with the craziness it wouldn't be a problem. But there's a hefty price tag.
All of the infrastructure costs money. It will take officers to carry out the plans. Every innocent stopped - and rest assured that almost all of them will be - will be time that could be spent on more productive policing. And some fraction of them who were willing to go along will grow to resent the police and the Law in general. Some will say "Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb".
I know that the UK isn't terribly fond of civil liberties. The Brits seem more eager to give them up than anyone except Americans. But there is a cost to maintaining that sort of social control. It isn't always obvious, but it's there.
Oh, I'm sure they'll catch a few people for simple possession. But it will end up being a very high price for a tiny reduction in crime. The overall cost almost certainly drowns the benefit. When it doesn't work there will be another round of increasingly restrictive laws with draconian penalties which will, once again, not work. Every penny spent on the miniscule marginal benefit could be spent on, say, the decrepit Tube system or NHS hospitals or alcohol education and treatment or repairing a bridge or something else that would measurably improve life and indirectly go to reduce the causes of crime.
But that isn't sexy enough for most politicians. And it doesn't help police administrators' budget requests. So the blood and money will be wasted. But that's OK. Nothing is more important than "feeling safer" even if it is pure Security Theater.
It isn't that the UK's knife laws are particularly lax or permissive. They are neurotically strict. When the BMA seriously floats the idea of banning cooking knives you know that you've entered The System of Doctor Tar and Professor Feather.
A lot of the flailing about is a subconscious realization that the big problems may not have solutions. In such cases people tend to obsessively control the things they can. So we see the British equivalent of SWAT teams called out when kids are legally shooting BB guns and 150 year old trees cut down because the leaves have prickles. A quarter of the world's CCTVs haven't put a dent in crime according to law enforcement. But that's no reason to abandon them. We need more. Lots and lots more to make us feel like we're doing something. The prisons are full while aggravated assaults, habitual theft and chronic vandalism can and are "cured" with ASBOs.
If there were no cost associated with the craziness it wouldn't be a problem. But there's a hefty price tag.
All of the infrastructure costs money. It will take officers to carry out the plans. Every innocent stopped - and rest assured that almost all of them will be - will be time that could be spent on more productive policing. And some fraction of them who were willing to go along will grow to resent the police and the Law in general. Some will say "Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb".
I know that the UK isn't terribly fond of civil liberties. The Brits seem more eager to give them up than anyone except Americans. But there is a cost to maintaining that sort of social control. It isn't always obvious, but it's there.
Oh, I'm sure they'll catch a few people for simple possession. But it will end up being a very high price for a tiny reduction in crime. The overall cost almost certainly drowns the benefit. When it doesn't work there will be another round of increasingly restrictive laws with draconian penalties which will, once again, not work. Every penny spent on the miniscule marginal benefit could be spent on, say, the decrepit Tube system or NHS hospitals or alcohol education and treatment or repairing a bridge or something else that would measurably improve life and indirectly go to reduce the causes of crime.
But that isn't sexy enough for most politicians. And it doesn't help police administrators' budget requests. So the blood and money will be wasted. But that's OK. Nothing is more important than "feeling safer" even if it is pure Security Theater.
A view from outside is always illuminating, even when you don't agree with some of the observations :tup:.
Some points are very ... er ... pointed
. The one about CCTV is particularly so.
The rising level of discontent with policing is also true. Those here who know me in a more than passing fashion have heard me express my admiration for and acceptance of our police force and the vital role they play. However, the excessive pressures of silly monthly 'targets' has caused a style of policing that has actively alienated a significant proportion of what should be the consensual 'support group' of the Force i.e. well-off, law-abiding, middle-class. There is a recognition of this but whether anything will change is a good question.
I have to disagree with regard to "epic alcoholism" tho'. As a society, we've always drank like fish over here - we built an empire on 'rum and gunpowder' after all. That hasn't changed (we're not as bad as the French, the German's or the Dutch tho').
What has changed is that young heavy drinkers have become more prevelent and the marketing change to larger measures has meant that even seasoned drinkers (used to 'counting' by the glass) are getting more than they think. There has been some dramatic language in the news about a 'doubling' of alcohol related hospital admissions, as if there is a tide of suppurating livers flooding the NHS - in reality, a lot of these numbers are drunken 'teens falling over and hurting themselves or getting into fights. Also, the numbers, when given, are small - if it was something that the current Pressure Group In Favour didn't care about then we wouldn't hear a word.
Also, we had "Civil liberties" to give up? I must've missed the memo. I know we Limey's keep mentioning it here at MT but we're subject to the whim of the Crown. Those of us of the peasant classes have certain obligations owed us by our betters but that's about as good as it gets.
Anyhow, I have to get back to my wine (as opposed to my whining ... not really a pun but close enough) ... which shows pretty clearly where my sympathies lie in the 'alcoholics' side of this debate :lol:.
Some points are very ... er ... pointed
. The one about CCTV is particularly so. The rising level of discontent with policing is also true. Those here who know me in a more than passing fashion have heard me express my admiration for and acceptance of our police force and the vital role they play. However, the excessive pressures of silly monthly 'targets' has caused a style of policing that has actively alienated a significant proportion of what should be the consensual 'support group' of the Force i.e. well-off, law-abiding, middle-class. There is a recognition of this but whether anything will change is a good question.
I have to disagree with regard to "epic alcoholism" tho'. As a society, we've always drank like fish over here - we built an empire on 'rum and gunpowder' after all. That hasn't changed (we're not as bad as the French, the German's or the Dutch tho'
). What has changed is that young heavy drinkers have become more prevelent and the marketing change to larger measures has meant that even seasoned drinkers (used to 'counting' by the glass) are getting more than they think. There has been some dramatic language in the news about a 'doubling' of alcohol related hospital admissions, as if there is a tide of suppurating livers flooding the NHS - in reality, a lot of these numbers are drunken 'teens falling over and hurting themselves or getting into fights. Also, the numbers, when given, are small - if it was something that the current Pressure Group In Favour didn't care about then we wouldn't hear a word.
Also, we had "Civil liberties" to give up? I must've missed the memo. I know we Limey's keep mentioning it here at MT but we're subject to the whim of the Crown. Those of us of the peasant classes have certain obligations owed us by our betters but that's about as good as it gets
.Anyhow, I have to get back to my wine (as opposed to my whining ... not really a pun but close enough
) ... which shows pretty clearly where my sympathies lie in the 'alcoholics' side of this debate :lol:.Some points are very ... er ... pointed
Sorry, they've always creeped me out, especially with the "Secure Beneath the Watchful Eyes" campaign you had a few years back.
One of the problems is that there as well as here the middle class is shrinking, undoing most of the benefits and basic social stability of the past seventy five years. If the police are accustomed to treating working class people automatically as suspects there's a problem. I also see a hint of British class consciousness at work which you can scarce avoid; no more than I could see a king without envisioning a pike and noose. And here we come to one of my perennial themes -
It's All Magic
The Law, government, society, social order, stability - every single one of them is an illusion, a trick we play on ourselves. They're magic in the purest sense because they only work as long as almost everyone believes in them. When we stop believing they go away as surely as dew in the hot desert sun. They're even more fragile than that; you can be sure that the dew will return some day.
Great civilizations have fallen and whole pantheons have gone to whatever awaits a deity with no worshippers because they passed that critical point where enough people stopped believing. We saw it in Russia when Boris Yeltsin briefly raised himself to greatness and the people and the Army decided that the fiction of a Soviet Union had come to its final chapter. Scandinavia wasn't converted at the point of the sword like other places, at least not as first. It was just that the old ways stopped providing the answers people needed and were abandoned.
Every people thinks that it is immune. Their Reich will last a thousand years. All the world will tremble at the words of the Great Prophet Zoroaster.
Or rather, we will "look upon my works, ye Mighty and despair". Nothing is forever. There are no permanent winners, only civilizations which have not yet fallen, species which have not yet gone extinct or evolved to the point where they no longer resemble their ancestors.
This relates to the police, and I thank you for going along with me this far. The simple fact is that there can never be enough police with enough cameras and enough guns to keep things together if the majority or even a significant minority stops believing and listening to them. We see it when riots break out. We see it when there are "no go zones" in major cities and the police only go in groups of three or more.
An old Colorado sheriff said it best. "I uphold the peace. Don't make me enforce the Law." As long as most want the peace to be upheld the officer walks cloaked in the Majesty of the Law. The respect that protects him is entirely in the imagination of the people. When they lose it it can not be recaptured no matter how many guns and how few restraints the police are given. There can never be enough if the vast mass of people want to decorate the streets with constables' heads.
It's the same thing that any sergeant or classroom teacher knows. If they believe you are the one in charge they will follow your direction. If they don't or if you ever lose that certain fraction of regard you are not the one who leads them, no longer the man in charge.
And that is the most dangerous part of the current mess in law enforcement on both sides of the Pond. When Vietnam was winding down a bunch of officers and men realized that they were up for honest work. And so they made themselves an industry like G-Men fighting bootleg liquor turned to drugs the better to ensure their pensions and their rank. We got SWAT and military weapons where traditional policing had so far been enough. And as the officer evolved to something else, to some sort of soldier counterfeit clad all in black behind a blank reflecting mask we went astray. It was not the only thing that went wrong then. But it was bad, and we compound that greedy mistake by further turning our police to something not respected, merely feared.
How can we change that? I don't know. It's hard enough to clearly look and see diagnose the patient's illness well enough. Wiser heads and long dispassionate debate will both be needed to effect a cure.
Great civilizations have fallen and whole pantheons have gone to whatever awaits a deity with no worshippers because they passed that critical point where enough people stopped believing. We saw it in Russia when Boris Yeltsin briefly raised himself to greatness and the people and the Army decided that the fiction of a Soviet Union had come to its final chapter. Scandinavia wasn't converted at the point of the sword like other places, at least not as first. It was just that the old ways stopped providing the answers people needed and were abandoned.
Every people thinks that it is immune. Their Reich will last a thousand years. All the world will tremble at the words of the Great Prophet Zoroaster.
Or rather, we will "look upon my works, ye Mighty and despair". Nothing is forever. There are no permanent winners, only civilizations which have not yet fallen, species which have not yet gone extinct or evolved to the point where they no longer resemble their ancestors.
This relates to the police, and I thank you for going along with me this far. The simple fact is that there can never be enough police with enough cameras and enough guns to keep things together if the majority or even a significant minority stops believing and listening to them. We see it when riots break out. We see it when there are "no go zones" in major cities and the police only go in groups of three or more.
An old Colorado sheriff said it best. "I uphold the peace. Don't make me enforce the Law." As long as most want the peace to be upheld the officer walks cloaked in the Majesty of the Law. The respect that protects him is entirely in the imagination of the people. When they lose it it can not be recaptured no matter how many guns and how few restraints the police are given. There can never be enough if the vast mass of people want to decorate the streets with constables' heads.
It's the same thing that any sergeant or classroom teacher knows. If they believe you are the one in charge they will follow your direction. If they don't or if you ever lose that certain fraction of regard you are not the one who leads them, no longer the man in charge.
And that is the most dangerous part of the current mess in law enforcement on both sides of the Pond. When Vietnam was winding down a bunch of officers and men realized that they were up for honest work. And so they made themselves an industry like G-Men fighting bootleg liquor turned to drugs the better to ensure their pensions and their rank. We got SWAT and military weapons where traditional policing had so far been enough. And as the officer evolved to something else, to some sort of soldier counterfeit clad all in black behind a blank reflecting mask we went astray. It was not the only thing that went wrong then. But it was bad, and we compound that greedy mistake by further turning our police to something not respected, merely feared.
How can we change that? I don't know. It's hard enough to clearly look and see diagnose the patient's illness well enough. Wiser heads and long dispassionate debate will both be needed to effect a cure.
I have to disagree with regard to "epic alcoholism" tho'. As a society, we've always drank like fish over here - we built an empire on 'rum and gunpowder' after all. That hasn't changed (we're not as bad as the French, the German's or the Dutch tho'
According to your own health service it's gotten worse and shows no sign of improving. By some measures Britons drink more than any of the rest. And they, especially the young are more likely to drink in quantity, to start while not yet teens and lose whole days from bingeing. It's not a fact to be ignored or put down as "just something that we do".
Again, it's not just the numbers ending up in wards. When the BBC says one in six below sixteen gets regularly drunk that's bad. I wonder if the end of closing time and serving liquor round the clock has made it worse or not. I think it's more a symptom of a deeper thing at work. Its something that requires deep analysis by someone skilled, not just a guess or two by random martial artists on the Internet.
Also, we had "Civil liberties" to give up? I must've missed the memo. I know we Limey's keep mentioning it here at MT but we're subject to the whim of the Crown. Those of us of the peasant classes have certain obligations owed us by our betters but that's about as good as it gets
A lot of Americans believe that the Constitution is some sort of Sacred Word that guarantees that nothing bad can happen. The truth is that it's more and less. When folks believe in what it represents and that belief includes the ones who make the rules, then they have rights. When they no longer so believe the fantasy is gone, and everything is at the whim of the one who has the guns. The English have no such document, but the Rights of Englishmen have been assumed and enforced in other times. Read Taking Liberties, the one on Tony Blair. He only followed Thatcher's lead, but he's more recent and more fresh. You'll see the process dissected.
As Sukerkin commented it's always interesting to see how others see us even if it's not how it is in real life, of course you realise how superior and smug everyone sounds when criticising us poor down trodden drunken Brits?
It's something I don't think Americans realise they are doing when they start comparing what happens in their country to the rest of the world, that they come over as sounding as if they are denigrating the rest of the world. It's the one quality of Americans that has annoyed the rest of the world for a long time. You think you are always right. It's part of the problem in Iraq. Ask any non American.
Most of you are slamming our laws and our country without actually having lived here or having much knowledge of us and it's based on what you read and see on the television. The article in the OP was a case in point, no one checked to see what the law was , you all assumed it was a new one.
You've seen things about CCTV but have never seen it at work, you talk about our class system but don't actually know what it is other than from the media.
How can an a non British person tell us what our problems are when they've never experienced them and it's based on media reporting? I for one don't post up about America's laws, problems and my solutions for them. I have no experience other than from the media and if I were to believe that dear me what a god awful place America would seem to be!
so thank you for all your opinions on how we can sort our lives out, I bleieve though it's a Native American expression that states you should walk a mile in a mans shoes before criticising him!
Yes this country has it's share of problems but we'll sort them out as we have done for millenia without the benefit of superior American minds.
perhaps now we can start a thread criticising all that is wrong with America and all non Americans can join in? No? I didn't think so.
It's something I don't think Americans realise they are doing when they start comparing what happens in their country to the rest of the world, that they come over as sounding as if they are denigrating the rest of the world. It's the one quality of Americans that has annoyed the rest of the world for a long time. You think you are always right. It's part of the problem in Iraq. Ask any non American.
Most of you are slamming our laws and our country without actually having lived here or having much knowledge of us and it's based on what you read and see on the television. The article in the OP was a case in point, no one checked to see what the law was , you all assumed it was a new one.
You've seen things about CCTV but have never seen it at work, you talk about our class system but don't actually know what it is other than from the media.
How can an a non British person tell us what our problems are when they've never experienced them and it's based on media reporting? I for one don't post up about America's laws, problems and my solutions for them. I have no experience other than from the media and if I were to believe that dear me what a god awful place America would seem to be!
so thank you for all your opinions on how we can sort our lives out, I bleieve though it's a Native American expression that states you should walk a mile in a mans shoes before criticising him!
Yes this country has it's share of problems but we'll sort them out as we have done for millenia without the benefit of superior American minds.
perhaps now we can start a thread criticising all that is wrong with America and all non Americans can join in? No? I didn't think so.
As Sukerkin commented it's always interesting to see how others see us even if it's not how it is in real life, of course you realise how superior and smug everyone sounds when criticising us poor down trodden drunken Brits?
It's something I don't think Americans realise they are doing when they start comparing what happens in their country to the rest of the world, that they come over as sounding as if they are denigrating the rest of the world. It's the one quality of Americans that has annoyed the rest of the world for a long time. You think you are always right. It's part of the problem in Iraq. Ask any non American.
Most of you are slamming our laws and our country without actually having lived here or having much knowledge of us and it's based on what you read and see on the television. The article in the OP was a case in point, no one checked to see what the law was , you all assumed it was a new one.
You've seen things about CCTV but have never seen it at work, you talk about our class system but don't actually know what it is other than from the media.
How can a non British person tell us what our problems are when they've never experienced them and it's based on media reporting? I for one don't post up about America's laws, problems and my solutions for them. I have no experience other than from the media and if I were to believe that dear me what a god awful place America would seem to be!
so thank you for all your opinions on how we can sort our lives out, I blieve though it's a Native American expression that states you should walk a mile in a mans shoes before criticising him!
Yes this country has it's share of problems but we'll sort them out as we have done for millenia without the benefit of superior American minds.
perhaps now we can start a thread criticising all that is wrong with America and all non Americans can join in? No? I didn't think so.
It's something I don't think Americans realise they are doing when they start comparing what happens in their country to the rest of the world, that they come over as sounding as if they are denigrating the rest of the world. It's the one quality of Americans that has annoyed the rest of the world for a long time. You think you are always right. It's part of the problem in Iraq. Ask any non American.
Most of you are slamming our laws and our country without actually having lived here or having much knowledge of us and it's based on what you read and see on the television. The article in the OP was a case in point, no one checked to see what the law was , you all assumed it was a new one.
You've seen things about CCTV but have never seen it at work, you talk about our class system but don't actually know what it is other than from the media.
How can a non British person tell us what our problems are when they've never experienced them and it's based on media reporting? I for one don't post up about America's laws, problems and my solutions for them. I have no experience other than from the media and if I were to believe that dear me what a god awful place America would seem to be!
so thank you for all your opinions on how we can sort our lives out, I blieve though it's a Native American expression that states you should walk a mile in a mans shoes before criticising him!
Yes this country has it's share of problems but we'll sort them out as we have done for millenia without the benefit of superior American minds.
perhaps now we can start a thread criticising all that is wrong with America and all non Americans can join in? No? I didn't think so.
kidswarrior
Senior Master
OK, good friend, I've seen you say something similar before, so I'm gonna just show my ignorance and blurt it out: Aren't you a Constitutional Monarchy, as in the crown is reigned in by a constitution? And if not, I want a refund on all the books I had to buy at university in which the Magna Carta was mentioned, up to and including British history to the mid-17th century. :idunno:Also, we had "Civil liberties" to give up? I must've missed the memo. I know we Limey's keep mentioning it here at MT but we're subject to the whim of the Crown. Those of us of the peasant classes have certain obligations owed us by our betters but that's about as good as it gets
And Tez, this is by no means a slight. I just genuinely don't quite grasp how it works (stunning to be my age and realize you're still ignorant, eh?).
kidswarrior
Senior Master
Actually, I'm game. :bangahead:Especially since I wouldn't have to actually...well...do anything. :rofl:
Empty Hands
Senior Master
It never stopped anyone before. I have seen posters of several nationalities contributing to threads dedicated to some stupid law or other problem in America. I have never seen someone's nationality become an issue.
Perhaps instead of taking criticism of your country personally, you could see it as constructive? Wanting the best for the good ol' UK? I for one would never invest too much of myself in the actions of my government, I would be bound to be let down. Constantly.
. That's what happens to me when I try to pass over a complex socio-political issue in a sentence or two .The Magna Carta is a much talked about document and snippets of it have been used to support this, that, or the other position with regard to the rights of the 'people'.
The purpose of Magna Carta was basically to curtail certain actions of the monarch with reference to the powerful Earls, who were a bit fed up with having their status eroded.
The principles writen within it have been used in other places but, for the peasant classes {that's us by the way :lol:} it made little, direct, measurable difference.
Since that time, much has been passed into law and even more has passed into tradition and altho' the Crown has the theoretical right to refuse Royal Assent, preventing proposed legislation from being enacted, it has not been done for hundreds of years.
The upshot is that when I exaggerate for effect by saying we are "subject to the whim of the Crown", that isn't really the case any more as 'modern' legislation has superceded the older powers ... but they are still there.
The book mentioned here (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-18395586.html) sems like it could be a good read for those seriously interested in this area.
Also, I've only scanned this site briefly but no major 'falsehoods' sprang out at me (doesn't mean there aren't any mind you ROFL):
http://www.sovereignty.org.uk/features/articles/moncst.html
When I draw attention to the difference between citizen and subject I am perhaps a little out of date these days in terms of what Johnny Chav in the Street thinks are his rights but it is still the case that the Government runs the country for the Crown and that Government exists at the Crowns discretion ... and guess who controls the military
?
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
What? Like that would be something "new"? We Americans should be pretty darn used to European criticism by now dontcha think?
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,692
- Reaction score
- 176
Coming back on topic............
Earlier the methods described were met with opposition, and in return thew question was asked, "What would your idea to solve the problem be?"
Before we can even answer that we must first agree on what the definition of "solve" is, and we haven't done that yet.
If by "solve" you mean "get rid of", then I cannot help but smile: At least some other person in this world is crazier than I.
I do have a solution but, suffice to say it would never be adopted within the United Kingdom, and I understand this, and will not pass judgment on the fact, and i will leave it at that.
Earlier the methods described were met with opposition, and in return thew question was asked, "What would your idea to solve the problem be?"
Before we can even answer that we must first agree on what the definition of "solve" is, and we haven't done that yet.
If by "solve" you mean "get rid of", then I cannot help but smile: At least some other person in this world is crazier than I.
I do have a solution but, suffice to say it would never be adopted within the United Kingdom, and I understand this, and will not pass judgment on the fact, and i will leave it at that.
dart68
Orange Belt
What an asinine statement. OF COURSE WE THINK WE'RE RIGHT! Just as YOU think you're right and THEY think they're right. Right or wrong is more often than not just a matter of perspective. But when you post a question or make some statement on a world wide format and get differing ideals that you don't agree with, your own bigotry rears its ugly head.
United Statesians (won't speak for Canada or Mexico) believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and all the civil liberties that go with that. We believe that for ALL mankind. I personally don't believe in trying to force those ideals onto others. If you believe that searching someone without probable cause is the way to go about solving your problems, go for it. But don't cry when we Americans think that you're wrong.
To be honest I haven't seen any threads on here where a non American posted up anything criticising American laws. I would also take criticism as being constructive if it were in fact based on truth. The OP posted up that there were to be new anti-knife powers for Brit police. As I pointed out that's not the case yet people were saying how draconian this new law was and how we were giving away our liberties. People are basing their criticisms on what they think they know and what they read about us.
Tellner's comment "One of the problems is that there as well as here the middle class is shrinking, undoing most of the benefits and basic social stability of the past seventy five years. If the police are accustomed to treating working class people automatically as suspects there's a problem. I also see a hint of British class consciousness at work which you can scarce avoid; no more than I could see a king without envisioning a pike and noose."
I'm sorry but you are so far away from the truth here I can only sit speechless with amazement. Firstly at being lectured at about my own country and secondly at the hilarity of it! The middle class shrinking, I'm afraid it's not it's actually expanding, they are the biggest class in the UK now.
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/class.htm
The police accustomed to seeing the working class as suspects? That's far fetched to say the least as the British working class has traditionally been the law abiding class and the police are traditionally working class themselves.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2052629/Police-punishing-middle-classes-to-hit-targets.html
Stability over the past 75 years? No I don't think so, in those years we've had national strikes, hunger marches, riots, sieges, numerous wars, major civil unrest etc. Britain isn't the peaceful place you perhaps think it is?
If the UK was a martial art would everyone be rushing to criticise it? would all the tournament rules be pulled apart, it's instructors accused of alcoholism and it's practioners labelled as having major issues?
Whether any of you like it or not and whether it's right or not in the long run, the British public wants something done about knife crime, there's major petitions asking for bans on knives, it's what people want and believe it or not they more often than not get what they want. This is what happens when the people don't like something lol!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/31/newsid_2530000/2530763.stm
The thing about the government in our country is that we actually don't want any other way of doing it, we want the National Health Service, the police to sort out crime,we want the government to 'do something about it' as far as we are concerned it's the governments job to do something about things, it's what we pay them for. It's nothing to do with giving up civil liberties or being put under the thumb, we pay the government to sort things out and if it doesn't we'll kick them out and get a government who will. Why do you think British political parties spend so much time campaigning on issues like law and order, the health service and education? It's because we expect them to be able to run these services and iron out problems. Ask any person in the street who's responsiblity it is to sort out these things and they will look in amazement at you and say the government of course! That's why we pay our taxes, we pay them to work for us, we aren't their slaves, they are ours! Look at any government in the UK and you will see them falling over themselves to please the electorate,us.
The truth about knife crime in the UK and a lot of British people don't want to or can't believe it, is that it isn't actually a huge problem. It's not widespread and it's contained in certain areas. Young people are wielding the knives and are killing other young people, that's emotive and catches the big headlines in the media. Of course innocent lives lost is tragic but the police can cope with the problem if they are allowed. However there is a big public outcry and uproar, people are demanding knives be banned so the govenment will, even against it's own better judgement and advice from the police ban knives, so who is wagging what dogs tail here? The government isn't trying to keep the people down, they are trying very hard to keep themselves in office. A government will perform a big U turn if they think it will please us and keep them in. The govenment relaxed the laws on cannabis but again there was a big outcry so they changed the laws back.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/31/newsid_2530000/2530763.stm
CCTV, despite what people think the police aren't totally in favour of CCTV, money is spent on putting systems in that could be better spent on real police work. However as this shows the public's demand for CCTV is rising.
""The demand for CCTV from the Leeds public is insatiable. Every community in Leeds seems to want it but cost is a factor. It costs £20,000 just to install one camera."
Housing associations are also increasingly turning to CCTV as a means of keeping their tenants safe."
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Huge-demand-for-CCTV-in.3782653.jp
More and more people want CCTV on their houses, down their streets and in schools. You can chunter about civil liberties all you like and I'd agree with you on many points but the fact is, again, this is what people want. they will badger their local councils and MPs until they get it too. Is it right, who knows but it's what the tax payers in the majority want so they get it. that's British politics for you,
Tellner's comment "One of the problems is that there as well as here the middle class is shrinking, undoing most of the benefits and basic social stability of the past seventy five years. If the police are accustomed to treating working class people automatically as suspects there's a problem. I also see a hint of British class consciousness at work which you can scarce avoid; no more than I could see a king without envisioning a pike and noose."
I'm sorry but you are so far away from the truth here I can only sit speechless with amazement. Firstly at being lectured at about my own country and secondly at the hilarity of it! The middle class shrinking, I'm afraid it's not it's actually expanding, they are the biggest class in the UK now.
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/questions/class.htm
The police accustomed to seeing the working class as suspects? That's far fetched to say the least as the British working class has traditionally been the law abiding class and the police are traditionally working class themselves.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2052629/Police-punishing-middle-classes-to-hit-targets.html
Stability over the past 75 years? No I don't think so, in those years we've had national strikes, hunger marches, riots, sieges, numerous wars, major civil unrest etc. Britain isn't the peaceful place you perhaps think it is?
If the UK was a martial art would everyone be rushing to criticise it? would all the tournament rules be pulled apart, it's instructors accused of alcoholism and it's practioners labelled as having major issues?
Whether any of you like it or not and whether it's right or not in the long run, the British public wants something done about knife crime, there's major petitions asking for bans on knives, it's what people want and believe it or not they more often than not get what they want. This is what happens when the people don't like something lol!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/31/newsid_2530000/2530763.stm
The thing about the government in our country is that we actually don't want any other way of doing it, we want the National Health Service, the police to sort out crime,we want the government to 'do something about it' as far as we are concerned it's the governments job to do something about things, it's what we pay them for. It's nothing to do with giving up civil liberties or being put under the thumb, we pay the government to sort things out and if it doesn't we'll kick them out and get a government who will. Why do you think British political parties spend so much time campaigning on issues like law and order, the health service and education? It's because we expect them to be able to run these services and iron out problems. Ask any person in the street who's responsiblity it is to sort out these things and they will look in amazement at you and say the government of course! That's why we pay our taxes, we pay them to work for us, we aren't their slaves, they are ours! Look at any government in the UK and you will see them falling over themselves to please the electorate,us.
The truth about knife crime in the UK and a lot of British people don't want to or can't believe it, is that it isn't actually a huge problem. It's not widespread and it's contained in certain areas. Young people are wielding the knives and are killing other young people, that's emotive and catches the big headlines in the media. Of course innocent lives lost is tragic but the police can cope with the problem if they are allowed. However there is a big public outcry and uproar, people are demanding knives be banned so the govenment will, even against it's own better judgement and advice from the police ban knives, so who is wagging what dogs tail here? The government isn't trying to keep the people down, they are trying very hard to keep themselves in office. A government will perform a big U turn if they think it will please us and keep them in. The govenment relaxed the laws on cannabis but again there was a big outcry so they changed the laws back.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/31/newsid_2530000/2530763.stm
CCTV, despite what people think the police aren't totally in favour of CCTV, money is spent on putting systems in that could be better spent on real police work. However as this shows the public's demand for CCTV is rising.
""The demand for CCTV from the Leeds public is insatiable. Every community in Leeds seems to want it but cost is a factor. It costs £20,000 just to install one camera."
Housing associations are also increasingly turning to CCTV as a means of keeping their tenants safe."
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Huge-demand-for-CCTV-in.3782653.jp
More and more people want CCTV on their houses, down their streets and in schools. You can chunter about civil liberties all you like and I'd agree with you on many points but the fact is, again, this is what people want. they will badger their local councils and MPs until they get it too. Is it right, who knows but it's what the tax payers in the majority want so they get it. that's British politics for you,
