|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Sept 26, 2023 7:55:37 GMT
The two black athletes who were stopped by the police have claimed that they were stopped because they're black - "driving while black" in the vernacular. Because of this perception they behaved very aggressively when the police attempted to search them and the whole thing got completely out of control and the police are now being prosecuted - I forget what for.
However it all centres on the belief that "profiling" is illegal which is nonsense. It's plainly obvious that the police must be able to use their judgement when stopping people. And it may well be that the police in this case looked at two blacks in a black Mercedes and immediately thought they were drug dealers and therefore worth stopping. To the best of my knowledge this is not illegal - yet the police are now facing a trial. Sadiq Khan has said "I take any allegation of racial profiling extremely seriously". Unfortunately the fact is that blacks are massively over-represented in crime so the police would not be doing their duty if they didn't preferentially stop blacks.
I don't think the police do a very good job in general, but it seems that even when they try to do their job they're in danger of ending up in the dock on criminal charges. We've got this case above and of course the murder charge against the firearms officer who shot some other black - who was suspected of being armed. And many police are handing in their arms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Sept 26, 2023 8:08:40 GMT
The government seem powerless to get to the root of the problem because the public sector cliques managing it have formed untouchable, unaccountable Marxist empires in the public sector. The only thing the elected government could sensibly do is sack half the public sector management and this would create a giant political confrontation. The biggest absence here is the public - who seem to blissfully unaware of how much danger they are in. These turds are systematically sabotaging key cornerstones of civil society - like rule of law and the rights of the individual.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vanna on Sept 26, 2023 8:36:14 GMT
Well said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutchyns on Sept 26, 2023 9:21:30 GMT
steppenwolf
Perhaps 'more likely to be' might be a better term, yet maybe it's possible that the Police have irrefutable statistics that indicate that two Blacks in a Mercedes are more likely to be involved with the drugs trade than two Whites ?' If stopping crime and getting illegal drugs off the street is the overriding aim, then yes, it is 'plainly obvious' that the police will need to use their judgment, and to use their skills built up by studying the evidence to discriminate between those most likely to be offenders and those who fit a much more law abiding profile.
However, while reading a different thread yesterday morning, a Forum member was explaining that politics was all about balancing conflicting rights. Does Mayor Khan for instance give considerable weight to those claiming a right not to be profiled, pointing out that such profiling has at its aim, the goal of assisting in discriminating between those more likely to be involved in certain crimes and those least likely to be ? Will there be a section of the community who are 'offended' by discrimination and 'offended' by profiling ?
"I take any allegation of racial profiling extremely seriously" ... hmmm, could it be that Sadiq Khan, and Deputy Mayor Dappy, will conclude that it's not 'plainly obvious' at all that the Police should be able to use their judgement, particularly when that judgement has been aided by 'profiling' techniques, and that various rights, mainly aimed at minimising offence, might tip the balance back the other way, to the extent that 'profiling' is found guilty of being racist, and therefore scrapped ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Sept 26, 2023 9:29:08 GMT
People don't have any right not to be suspects.
Being stopped and asked a few questions is a non-issue. The focused agitation around this is designed to make policing impossible and allow crime.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Sept 26, 2023 9:29:24 GMT
A quick browse of the MPS statistics for stop and search indicates that close to 100% of those stopped are males aged between 14 and 30. Is anyone complaining about 'sexual profiling' or 'ageist profiling'? No? Why not? Might it be that common sense indicates there'd be very slim pickings in terms of arrests in those two categories whereas young black men are the low-hanging fruit if you are in the business of apprehending those responsible for street crime?
I think this is known as intelligence-led policing.
|
|
|
|
Profiling
Sept 26, 2023 10:04:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by johnofgwent on Sept 26, 2023 10:04:42 GMT
The left leaning scum such as Lammy And Flabbott point to the number of blacks stopped and searched as a proportion of the number of blacks in the country and yell ‘racist’
They overlook the fact the police are looking at a population ‘out and about at 2am’ or some such
A study of police stop and search incidents measuring the colour of the person stopped as a proportion of the numbers of that ethnic group up and about on the streets showed significant bias towards stopping and searching WHITE men ….
You’ll never get lammy to admit that of course
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Sept 26, 2023 13:12:21 GMT
steppenwolf "I take any allegation of racial profiling extremely seriously" ... hmmm, could it be that Sadiq Khan, and Deputy Mayor Dappy, will conclude that it's not 'plainly obvious' at all that the Police should be able to use their judgement, particularly when that judgement has been aided by 'profiling' techniques, and that various rights, mainly aimed at minimising offence, might tip the balance back the other way, to the extent that 'profiling' is found guilty of being racist, and therefore scrapped ? If you take this argument to its logical conclusion you're saying that the police have to stop people randomly - exercising no judgement whatsoever based on their experience. If we had an infinite number of police officers it might work, but we don't. So they have to use their time sensibly - and that means not stopping little old ladies, for example, and searching them for explosives. We've already had an example of how this unwillingness to profile people has resulted in an avoidable tragedy. The Manchester Arena bomber was an obvious risk under any profiling guidelines in that this was a young muslim man who was at an Arianna Grande concert carrying a heavy rucksack and hiding away in the foyer. Many people reported him as suspicious but none of their security or police were willing to challenge him. Why? Because they were afraid of being accused of prejudice. Profiling is essential for the police to be able to do their jobs and the likes of Khan need to be made aware of that - and the IOPC. |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Sept 26, 2023 13:30:07 GMT
The left leaning scum such as Lammy And Flabbott point to the number of blacks stopped and searched as a proportion of the number of blacks in the country and yell ‘racist’ They overlook the fact the police are looking at a population ‘out and about at 2am’ or some such A study of police stop and search incidents measuring the colour of the person stopped as a proportion of the numbers of that ethnic group up and about on the streets showed significant bias towards stopping and searching WHITE men …. You’ll never get lammy to admit that of course Yes. There is no anti-black disproportionality. |
|
|
|
Post by Dogburger on Sept 26, 2023 16:10:00 GMT
I dont care how many black people get racially profiled and stopped in the streets . The more the merrier as far as Im concerned because I know and everyone else knows our streets will be a lot safer for it .
And that includes black people as well who should welcome it as much as anyone elses because for the most of it it is their communities that the police are protecting
|
|
