News commentary and predictions of political trends and what the future holds

police

Shoot to kill

June 6, 2017

The Prime Minister, electioneering, has said that she fully supports “shoot to kill” while defending herself from the resonant accusation that she reduced the police forces during her time as Home Secretary and since by nearly 50,000.

“Shoot to kill” may sound like a brief action of a few armed officers but the concentration of automatic weapon brandishing officers in London has increased so much in the last ten years. The reduction in police on the beat has made the city feel under siege rather than safe.

Armed police are useless as investigators. As a last resort, they are more effective than a riot squad armed with batons, but it is only as a last resort are they at all effective. The PM is blind to the actual problem, she thinks that brute force is the only path to defeating terrorism, but it is actually the presence of many police with guns that normalises the fear and rewards terrorism for changing the way that we live, under constant reminders of threat.

London has over 2 million cameras which are nearly useless in detection but serve police well after an incident has occurred as investigatory tools. Reduction of police forces by such large numbers means that the support staff necessary to investigate and detect simply are not there. Being able to also now monitor internet chatter would not strengthen detection, it would require another 100,000 back office staff. There are not enough now to detect issues and thinking they can trail 20,000 people and predict that when they hire vehicle, they should be arrested, is plainly illogical.

To defeat terrorism, remove the reasons that stimulate it. Of course, there will always be radicals and insane criminality. Of course, there will always be thugs. But breeding them with an imbalanced society and starving the police of resources is Theresa May’s real crime. She is the cause of this rash of terrorism.


The Conservatives Stance on Law and Order

October 9, 2012

Home owners, licence to kill?

The ultra conservative MP Chris Greyling who has arbitrarily ordered a change of stance in law and order making it not illegal for a homeowner to attack a burglar with a knife, for example. Or perhaps a sword? Or a gun? The implications of this change to basic law are many.

Winding down any requirement of government to protect citizens by arming them does not respect the views of the majority.


Police Intimidation

January 14, 2012

Is it political? It is by its location and jobs of those concerned. Police appear to be taking to random street thuggery? That is hardly what we need to assure us all that we live in a democratic country and not a fascist one. The police must defend why they would pin down people without cause and intimidate and assault innocent civilians (who happen to work for Labour MPs making this political). And if it is not defensible, then something must change if we are to consider the UK a democratic land. Maybe a bit of self reflection on this as social commentary will become too embarrassing to the Government. It needs to change sharply, we do not require this culture of violent control.

Not at a civil level, nor at a parliamentary level either. In fact the conflict between super powers is counter intuitive and regressive.


Protests and police brutality

November 20, 2011

The question must be asked how freedom of speech is respected when police pepper spray valid protests against decisions made outside the social framework democracy is supposed to provide?

The riots in London were initially in response to police brutality; Is this really what we want – police killing and assaulting the voices of citizens?

The image is that of a martyr who represents the death of human values in a society driven to the edge by systemic fraud.


Sanctuary

October 28, 2011

The capitalism protest in London situated itself outside a cathedral, not just any cathedral but the most famous one that attracts thousands of tourists every day. Many of them pay St Pauls money which was reported as being twenty thousand pounds per day.

Why do they penalise the Church? Because it exemplifies the role of the Church as sanctuary from the law. The police tactics have backfired on the church. That is the political wedge driven by this protest. It goes beyond merely the bankers, it is their sense of faith in mathematical odds that require a powerful sense of belief, sometimes so powerful it becomes right. Sometimes however collective faith, the kind where everyone gets lucky in a market at the same time is revealed to be merely that, and a collapse follows. This recession is due to that sort of event to the power of each level of securitised assets that went horribly wrong amplifying the collapse from impossible risk sub prime mortgages. It was always going to happen.

The police tactics have drawn the response of political strategy.


Scale of the intrusion

July 12, 2011

The police have contacted only 170 of nearly 4000 cases of mobile phone hacking, in addition to over 5000 instances of landline interception.  Those numbers were in the original files.

It appears that there is a complete lack of cooperation from News International.  It appears that there is a case to be examined regarding payments to police.