(no subject)
So, before I get onto nice things, I want to spend a minute or two ranting about the fact that there is a Police database containing what they call "domestic extremists", who are people who attend open meetings about environmental issues, animal rights campaigners, us lefties, and Nazis. Hey, blood pressure issues on a Monday morning! Win!
Two things about this article struck me:
One man, who has no criminal record, was stopped more than 25 times in less than three years after a "protest" marker was placed against his car after he attended a small protest against duck and pheasant shooting.
Wait, whut? This is using ANPR, which is a system more commonly used to stop stolen vehicles, or cars without MOT, insurance or tax, or where the registered owner has an open warrant against them. Function creep, much? Oh, but it's ok, because (and this is the second thing):
Anton Setchell, who is in overall command of Acpo's domestic extremism remit, said people who find themselves on the databases "should not worry at all". [...] He said he could understand that peaceful activists objected to being monitored at open meetings when they had done nothing wrong. "What I would say where the police are doing that there would need to be the proper justifications," he said.
Well, that's all right then.
Wait, no, that's not right. It's far from being all right. It's very much a bad thing to find yourself on a police "intelligence" database of people engaged in "domestic extremism" for the terrible reason of being engaged in noncriminal activity. But he's saying that people shouldn't worry, because the police would have a "proper justification" for doing so. What justification could they possibly have? No crime is being commited. For the vast, vast majority of these events no crime would ever be even suggested, let alone carried out. Also, if the police have justification, shouldn't they target the individuals that is based upon, rather than saying one size FITs all (pun intended) and creating another list of people who'll be shot, persecuted, arrested, sent to the Falklands (the Brit equivalent of Siberia) or "disappeared" when the extreme right or extreme left enters power? "Persons of interest"? Hah. This is "everybody who disagrees with the politicos is going on the list." Maybe it should be The List, like many people have; the list of people who's behaviour demands vengeance.
This reminds me very much of a book I read called "The File", Tim Garton Ash's account of finding out that the Stazi had a file on him. The police is not supposed to maintain the status quo, it is not a private intelligence and armed force for politicos to use as they see fit, the police is supposed to maintain the safety of the citizenry and employ the law to do so. Perhaps, one day, this will happen.
Two things about this article struck me:
One man, who has no criminal record, was stopped more than 25 times in less than three years after a "protest" marker was placed against his car after he attended a small protest against duck and pheasant shooting.
Wait, whut? This is using ANPR, which is a system more commonly used to stop stolen vehicles, or cars without MOT, insurance or tax, or where the registered owner has an open warrant against them. Function creep, much? Oh, but it's ok, because (and this is the second thing):
Anton Setchell, who is in overall command of Acpo's domestic extremism remit, said people who find themselves on the databases "should not worry at all". [...] He said he could understand that peaceful activists objected to being monitored at open meetings when they had done nothing wrong. "What I would say where the police are doing that there would need to be the proper justifications," he said.
Well, that's all right then.
Wait, no, that's not right. It's far from being all right. It's very much a bad thing to find yourself on a police "intelligence" database of people engaged in "domestic extremism" for the terrible reason of being engaged in noncriminal activity. But he's saying that people shouldn't worry, because the police would have a "proper justification" for doing so. What justification could they possibly have? No crime is being commited. For the vast, vast majority of these events no crime would ever be even suggested, let alone carried out. Also, if the police have justification, shouldn't they target the individuals that is based upon, rather than saying one size FITs all (pun intended) and creating another list of people who'll be shot, persecuted, arrested, sent to the Falklands (the Brit equivalent of Siberia) or "disappeared" when the extreme right or extreme left enters power? "Persons of interest"? Hah. This is "everybody who disagrees with the politicos is going on the list." Maybe it should be The List, like many people have; the list of people who's behaviour demands vengeance.
This reminds me very much of a book I read called "The File", Tim Garton Ash's account of finding out that the Stazi had a file on him. The police is not supposed to maintain the status quo, it is not a private intelligence and armed force for politicos to use as they see fit, the police is supposed to maintain the safety of the citizenry and employ the law to do so. Perhaps, one day, this will happen.