Comments on: Terror Bill

By: Julian Todd

Julian Todd — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 10:34:37 +0000

I’ve put up a history of the extentions of this "arrest without charge" period in the comment at:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-10-26a.350.3

By: Chuck Unsworth

Chuck Unsworth — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 15:58:17 +0000

Believe me - I would do almost anything to avoid having to deal with the Plod over any of the issues mentioned. They are just about the last people I would call. The fact is that they can’t or won’t take action in nearly all cases.

Even when they think it’s safe to become involved or there’s a fair chance of an easy conviction, speed of reaction is not their forte. It takes them two days to attend most crime scenes - if they can be bothered at all. It’s no good making futile calls to a ‘call centre’. These days one just has to take individual action and precautions.

As to yet more money and resources, well why? I would like to see proper usage of those that they already have. Although terrorist crimes make headlines, they directly affect a minimal number of people. Most people however are affected by constant low level criminality in our various communities. Read the comments about that ex South African copper if you need an example………..

By: Mr Pooter

Mr Pooter — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 07:10:37 +0000

Just remember who you’ll call first when you find an intruder in your house, get mugged, raped, attacked, have a riot outside your door etc etc.

Police=Crooks - a tired, cheap cliche.

90 days is absurdly long and will amount to a crude form of internment. Give them power and they’ll use it willy nilly. What’s needed? More resources eg. manpower and computer power to crack the codes the suspects might have on their machines. 90 days will allow the police to do what they do best - plod along. Before long they’ll need even more time… Of course Gordon Brown will resist this, he’s spent out and maxed out the cards too. Last thing he wants is more taxes before he gets in - afterwards, well, hide your wallets…

By: john the revelator

john the revelator — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 22:20:59 +0000

Since the morning of his appointment Lady Sir Ian Blair has been calling for more powers; this appointment pre-dated the most recent London bombimg (-recent because everybody goes on about this last lot as though London had never been bombed before.) Instead of this bumptious prick grandstanding about what powers he needs and how, disgracefully, the shooting oh innocents by psyched-up machosweety bobbies, was and is absolutely justifiable, he should reflect that people of his caste and self-importance have been bringing hot sharp death and evisceration to brown people all over the world for longer than we should be able to bear and his claimed interest in law and order and public protection are worthles.

For all his braid and ribbons and cheesy soundbites Lady Sir Ian is, like his namesake and mentor, an enemy of the people, abroad and at home; that instead of resigning and taking up charity work he demands further powers to mistreat citizens is an absolute scandal. For all his vileness and municipal thuggery Lord Blunkett was brought down by an unstoppable torrent of loathing from almost everyone outside his patronage. Can we do the same with this strutting policeman? If we let them away with any more abuses they will soon be shutting down sites like this.

By: Chuck Unsworth

Chuck Unsworth — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:04:47 +0000

That’s an excellent point. I recall discussions I had some years ago with people responsible for recruitment. They always said that the villains and the coppers usually came from very similar (if not the same) backgrounds. So it was often a matter of chance and fortune as to which side of the fence they ended up.

To be fair, maybe this is a symptom of the more general lowering of society’s standards. Mind you, yet more legislation and ASBOs are certainly not going to change attitudes. It will just lead to further criminalisation and alienation.

Blair etc need to learn that leadership is not the same as governance. There’s been far too much of the latter and almost none of the former.

By: PapaLazzzaru

PapaLazzzaru — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 19:36:46 +0000

Unfortunately, after serving in the police force in the dim & distant past, I have nothing but contempt for today’s force. As much as I’d like to give them the benefit of the doubt, I find I just can’t; their blunders and mistakes are too numerous, too widespread. It’s the corruption that gets to me and (I know) a lot of other ex-force members. Sadly, the police are too close, and too similar, to the people they’re supposed to be nicking, most of the time.

By: Chuck Unsworth

Chuck Unsworth — Fri, 04 Nov 2005 12:21:17 +0000

So, what’s wrong with issuing Green and White Papers on the matter, rather than constantly reiterating the ‘Andy’ Hayman claptrap as a justification for railroading controversial legislation.

It’s not up to ‘people’ to resolve the police’s ‘problems’. It’s up to the coppers to get their act together, rather than sitting in their ‘offices’ and canteens bemoaning their lot and waiting to be told what to do.

Does anyone seriously believe a copper these days?