Prepare to be searched...

[Crompton Karl]

Is about 15 mins ASAP enough? If it took 1 minute to quickly put a metal detector to you fine but this is far, far more than that and very time consuming.

Actually i can totally understand that, i'd rather be stopped and searched and be alive than dead. 15 mins is nothing, its probably quicker when you co-operate rather than slow proceedings down by asking the why's and wherefores of everything. I have no problems in asking for id and why they are doing it but once they have fulfilled this request i'd personally let them get on with it.

Karl

 

[class 313]

Do you not think that randomly stopping people on the remote chance that they might be a terrorist is a little bit draconian? How many terrorists have been caught by these random stop and searches?

As I said earlier some of the stop and searches that I've read about have used the pretext of terrorism to search people for other things that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to search for. A lot of these "random" people would seem to fit certain predefined profiles.

Ok so say the police didn't stop people. What else could they do to show they are doing something against terrorism?

 

[devon_metro]

Do you not think that randomly stopping people on the remote chance that they might be a terrorist is a little bit draconian? How many terrorists have been caught by these random stop and searches?

As I said earlier some of the stop and searches that I've read about have used the pretext of terrorism to search people for other things that they otherwise wouldn't have been able to search for. A lot of these "random" people would seem to fit certain predefined profiles.

Yes it is, but our politically correct world often means perfectly normal looking people must be searched for fear of insulting the people who apparently get victimised by the police.

Flames on a postcard...

 

[richa2002]

Of course terrorists take photos. We can't just ban photography though and I personally think it's out of order for a policeman to be suspicious about anyone taking a photo, no free country should have that mentality, I'd rather go about my daily life feeling free rather than to be harassed by the authorities so they can meet their stop and search targets. It's akin to Nazi Germany.

Terrorists also may use ruck-sacks to put a bomb in. Surely using that logic then, anyone seen with a ruck-sack or buying one is suspicious. Should they be searched?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ok so say the police didn't stop people. What else could they do to show they are doing something against terrorism?

So surely with that logic, let's say the governments gave us trackers where they could see where we go and some people argued about that, you would just say to them, well, what else can they do so in other words, saying it's okay?

 

[Beaker]

But if you catch drugs and knifes etc off people who go around mugging people surely this is counter terrorism. As they are not terrorising people. Terrorism doesn't have to be blowing stuff up.

 

[class 313]

Of course terrorists take photos. We can't just ban photography though and I personally think it's out of order for a policeman to be suspicious about anyone taking a photo, no free country should have that mentality, I'd rather go about my daily life feeling free rather than to be harassed by the authorities so they can meet their stop and search targets. It's akin to Nazi Germany.

Terrorists also may use ruck-sacks to put a bomb in. Surely using that logic then, anyone seen with a ruck-sack or buying one is suspicious. Should they be searched?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So surely with that logic, let's say the governments gave us trackers where they could see where we go and some people argued about that, you would just say to them, well, what else can they do so in other words, saying it's okay?

Like I have said before, you can't and wont keep everyone happy when trying to clamp down on terrorism. The fact is you feel like you're hard done by doesn't mean the government should changes its techniques when it keeps other people happy.

I'd rather the government did something rather than nothing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But if you catch drugs and knifes etc off people who go around mugging people surely this is counter terrorism. As they are not terrorising people. Terrorism doesn't have to be blowing stuff up.

Again this is a very good point.

But fools would rather the fact their civil liberty's aren't infringed for 20mins or so rather than stopping crime.

:roll::roll::roll:

 

[Craig]

Ok so say the police didn't stop people. What else could they do to show they are doing something against terrorism?

Use intelligence (as they also do currently) to find some actual potential terrorists rather than stopping people randomly. I'd be more reassured if they arrested some actual terrorists rather than randomly stopping people for no good reason.

Terrorists also may use ruck-sacks to put a bomb in. Surely using that logic then, anyone seen with a ruck-sack or buying one is suspicious. Should they be searched?

Definitely not, I carry my camera in a rucksack!

 

[richa2002]

That's fine if you think like that Loader but it means you're happy with draconian measures, what would be going too far in your book?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Definitely not, I carry my camera in a rucksack!

Blimey, imagine it, first you're suspicious for having a rusksack, then they find you have a camera, probably have to shut the whole station. . That's if it was at a railway station of course .

 

[Craig]

But if you catch drugs and knifes etc off people who go around mugging people surely this is counter terrorism. As they are not terrorising people. Terrorism doesn't have to be blowing stuff up.

Again, how many would-be muggers are likely to be caught by these random searches? Not all muggers carry weapons or mug people in the middle of a busy train station. Officers out on patrol in high crime areas would be a better solution.

 

[class 313]

That's fine if you think like that Loader but it means you're happy with draconian measures, what would be going too far in your book?

Thank you for telling me its fine to think the way I think.... :???:

I won't answer that question as it has no relevance about being stopped and searched.

 

[Craig]

Blimey, imagine it, first you're suspicious for having a rusksack, then they find you have a camera, probably have to shut the whole station. . That's if it was at a railway station of course .

I've also been known to occasionally carry a map too hock:

 

[class 313]

Again, how many would-be muggers are likely to be caught by these random searches? Not all muggers carry weapons or mug people in the middle of a busy train station. Officers out on patrol in high crime areas would be a better solution.

Not all muggers no, but a lot do. Officers do patrol 'rough' areas. :roll:

And there's nothing wrong with spreading the weight out instead of just keeping it in those 'rough' areas.

 

[richa2002]

I've also been known to occasionally carry a map too hock:

Oh, my, God, 5 mile evacuation!

 

[class 313]

Oh, my, God, 5 mile evacuation!

I don't know why you're mocking it so much. So when you get mugged by a guy who could of had their weapon taken off them by a stop and search lets see who changes their opinion.

Fools.

 

[Craig]

Officers do patrol 'rough' areas. :roll:

How many of these 'random' searches are carried out in 'rough' areas?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't know why you're mocking it so much. So when you get mugged by a guy who could of had their weapon taken off them by a stop and search lets see who changes their opinion.

I might do next time I get mugged in the middle of Waterloo :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm off out for a bit now, hopefully they police will stop me just in case my car is stolen or my road tax is out of date.

 

[Bill EWS]

Yorkie,
What evidence do you have that proves it doesn't? The officials aren't going to tell you or publish everything that they come across.

 

[class 313]

Yorkie,
What evidence do you have that proves it doesn't? The officials aren't going to tell you or publish everything that they come across.

Exactly.

I feel this is mildly based on peoples personal experiences and not proper facts.

 

[Mojo]

If I am carrying a bomb and am stopped by the police, what is the first thing I am going to do?

1) Hand over my bag to be searched, resulting in almost certain arrest and spending the rest of my life in prison

2) Detonate the bomb

 

[1D53]

If I am carrying a bomb and am stopped by the police, what is the first thing I am going to do?

1) Hand over my bag to be searched, resulting in almost certain arrest and spending the rest of my life in prison

2) Detonate the bomb

Gee, thats a difficult one.....

 

[Craig]

Exactly.

I feel this is mildly based on peoples personal experiences and not proper facts.

Show me an example of where a would be terrorist has been caught by a random stop and search.

 

[yorkie]

Actually i can totally understand that, i'd rather be stopped and searched and be alive than dead. 15 mins is nothing, its probably quicker when you co-operate rather than slow proceedings down by asking the why's and wherefores of everything. I have no problems in asking for id and why they are doing it but once they have fulfilled this request i'd personally let them get on with it.

Karl

Evidence that if we are not searched we'd be dead?

And 15 mins isn't nothing if you miss an advance purchase train!

But if you catch drugs and knifes etc off people who go around mugging people surely this is counter terrorism. As they are not terrorising people. Terrorism doesn't have to be blowing stuff up.

Drugs/knives are not counted under terrorism. Are you admitting that you support searching people for weapons/drugs instead of for terrorisim reasons? in which case you don't need to do a full search. A quick metal detector and sniffer dogs taking 1 minute rather than a full examination of the contents of your bag and going through personal stuff should suffice. Also you admit that they are abusing their powers by pretending it's counter-terrorism?

I'm off out for a bit now, hopefully they police will stop me just in case my car is stolen or my road tax is out of date.

You're going in your car? There is NO CHANCE of being stopped and searched without foundation (err, I mean "randomly") then!

Yorkie,
What evidence do you have that proves it doesn't? The officials aren't going to tell you or publish everything that they come across.

In other words, YOU have no evidence so you are turning the question round onto me

In 2003/4 8,120 stop and searches of pedestrians under section 44(2). 5 arrests in connection with terrorism. You can work out the tiny percentage for yourself!!

I would like all those who support "random" stop and searches to view this http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html and tell me, after reading that, they would be HAPPY for that to happen to YOU..... I await the responses with interest

 

[Bayum]

Evidence that if we are not searched we'd be dead?

And 15 mins isn't nothing if you miss an advance purchase train!


Drugs/knives are not counted under terrorism. Are you admitting that you support searching people for weapons/drugs instead of for terrorisim reasons? in which case you don't need to do a full search. A quick metal detector and sniffer dogs taking 1 minute rather than a full examination of the contents of your bag and going through personal stuff should suffice. Also you admit that they are abusing their powers by pretending it's counter-terrorism?


You're going in your car? There is NO CHANCE of being stopped and searched without foundation (err, I mean "randomly") then!




In other words, YOU have no evidence so you are turning the question round onto me

In 2003/4 8,120 stop and searches of pedestrians under section 44(2). 5 arrests in connection with terrorism. You can work out the tiny percentage for yourself!!

I would like all those who support "random" stop and searches to view this http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html and tell me, after reading that, they would be HAPPY for that to happen to YOU..... I await the responses with interest

I wouldn't be happy for that to happen to me... No. But at the end of the day, as has been said before, if it saves a lot of lives, it doesn't really matter I don't think. And plus - with such a short time between the bombings happening as well... Honestly, If I was a policeman, I wouldn't wait for hard evidence, i'd just do it.

 

[yorkie]

I wouldn't be happy for that to happen to me... No. But at the end of the day, as has been said before, if it saves a lot of lives, it doesn't really matter I don't think.

If. Yes if. And there is no evidence whatsoever that it does.

Banning car travel WOULD save a LOT of lives, so why don't we do it?:roll:

And plus - with such a short time between the bombings happening as well... Honestly, If I was a policeman, I wouldn't wait for hard evidence, i'd just do it.

Do what? Murder an innocent person? oh yeah, they did didn't they. but hey if it saves another life in some fantasy world, that's okay isn't it?

 

[Bayum]

If I suspected someone of terrorism, without evidence - I would arrest them under the terrorism act. Surely it's better - prevention is better than the cure right??

And banning car travel? We try to make it safe. Whereas, terrorism - is not safe, for obvious reasons. It can't be controlled, whereas Car travel can.

 

[yorkie]

If I suspected someone of terrorism, without evidence - I would arrest them under the terrorism act. Surely it's better - prevention is better than the cure right??

Do you support "random" searches where there is no suspicion of terrorism? you are now talking about suspecting people, although quite how you can suspect someone without any evidence is something you may be able to explain?

And banning car travel? We try to make it safe.

Yet thousands die from it annually.

Whereas, terrorism - is not safe, for obvious reasons. It can't be controlled, whereas Car travel can.

if terrorism can't be controlled, why do we try to control it? :roll:

I think terrorism can be controlled - indeed, clearly it is being - but it needs to be linked to intelligence, not victimising random members of the public.

 

[Bayum]

Do you support "random" searches where there is no suspicion of terrorism? you are now talking about suspecting people, although quite how you can suspect someone without any evidence is something you may be able to explain?


Yet thousands die from it annually.

if terrorism can't be controlled, why do we try to control it? :roll:

I think terrorism can be controlled - indeed, clearly it is being - but it needs to be linked to intelligence, not victimising random members of the public.

Yes, I support random searches. If it's random - people can't hide themselves or find time to try and hide anything. And like other people have said - if you have nothing to hide - you will be fine.

Yes, thousands of people die in car travel annually, but as I've said - we try to control it through use of Speed Limits, etc etc.

And yes - I think terrorism is, and can be controlled as you have said, but - what would you rather?? You being on a tube train, police have no hard evidence that someone they think has a bomb, has one. Because of the bad press from people like you - they decide to let it go, and hope for the best. 5 minutes later, the train pulls into a packed station at Kings Cross Underground, and off goes the bomb.

Hundreds die, causing yet again - more chaos - is this what you want to happen?

 

[yorkie]

Yes, I support random searches. If it's random - people can't hide themselves or find time to try and hide anything. And like other people have said - if you have nothing to hide - you will be fine.

Fine? Behing held for 9 hours is "fine" is it?

Yes, thousands of people die in car travel annually, but as I've said - we try to control it through use of Speed Limits, etc etc.

But the police cannot randomly do anything about people who do not adhere to the speed limit, they have to put up speed camera notices....

And yes - I think terrorism is, and can be controlled as you have said, but - what would you rather?? You being on a tube train, police have no hard evidence that someone they think has a bomb, has one. Because of the bad press from people like you - they decide to let it go, and hope for the best.

No hard evidence or no evidence whatsoever?

5 minutes later, the train pulls into a packed station at Kings Cross Underground, and off goes the bomb.

Hundreds die, causing yet again - more chaos - is this what you want to happen?

How do you propose preventing it? Searching all the millions of people who use the tube daily? How many police officers would this need? How long would journeys take? an extra 1 hour to queue to be searched?

BTW glad to see you changed your mind that it can be controlled

 

[richa2002]

And yes - I think terrorism is, and can be controlled as you have said, but - what would you rather?? You being on a tube train, police have no hard evidence that someone they think has a bomb, has one. Because of the bad press from people like you - they decide to let it go, and hope for the best. 5 minutes later, the train pulls into a packed station at Kings Cross Underground, and off goes the bomb.

Hundreds die, causing yet again - more chaos - is this what you want to happen?

Stop and search would most probably not prevent as shown above with Yorkie's statistics.

 

[Craig]

And yes - I think terrorism is, and can be controlled as you have said, but - what would you rather?? You being on a tube train, police have no hard evidence that someone they think has a bomb, has one. Because of the bad press from people like you - they decide to let it go, and hope for the best. 5 minutes later, the train pulls into a packed station at Kings Cross Underground, and off goes the bomb.

Provided they have at least some evidence then I have no problem with someone being stopped. However, stopping people "randomly" on the off chance that they might be carrying a rucksack full of explosives isn't going to do anything to combat this. Look at the stats Yorkie posted earlier, 5 arrests in around 8000 searches. Surely those 1300 hours (assuming about 10 minutes per search) could have been used more productively?

 

[Bayum]

Fine? Behing held for 9 hours is "fine" is it?

But the police cannot randomly do anything about people who do not adhere to the speed limit, they have to put up speed camera notices....

No hard evidence or no evidence whatsoever?


How do you propose preventing it? Searching all the millions of people who use the tube daily? How many police officers would this need? How long would journeys take? an extra 1 hour to queue to be searched?

If thats what it takes - then yes, 9 hours is fine. Why only do half a job??

And yes - the speed camera thing is a load of bol***ks. Why people should be given notice that there are speed cameras about - I dont know. They should be sticking to the speed limit.

And how do I propose preventing Terrorism?? I'm not saying I have ideas for it - i'm saying, I don't see a problem with people being randomly searched on suspected terrorism charges. In the instance you gave via that link, it was just unfortunate that he had a map he had scribbled on, and the page from Wiki, and the backpack on his back. But so close to something like the Bombings - like i've said - i would rather one person suffer on being *suspected* then hundreds of others being injured/killed because no one did anything about it.