“Auditors” - a simple poll of the membership.

Considering the practice of “auditing” official locations - Police, Military, Prisons etc - are you:

  • Comfortable with it

  • Not comfortable with it


Results are only viewable after voting.
I’ve been lucky in that I’ve only had one interaction with the muppets.
Consisted of bloke filming us sat up in a public order carrier. Open the carrier door, ‘you alright sir?’
Some mentalist gibbering about rights.
‘Yeah good luck with that’ carrier door closed in his face.
 
I am neither comfortable nor uncomfortable about the whole thing. If they want to waste their time doing a so-called "audit" fine, but they shouldn't go out the way to antagonise the people who work there.
 
I’ve been lucky in that I’ve only had one interaction with the muppets.
Consisted of bloke filming us sat up in a public order carrier. Open the carrier door, ‘you alright sir?’
Some mentalist gibbering about rights.
‘Yeah good luck with that’ carrier door closed in his face.

The Public order teams also used to be search teams (don’t know if thats the case for all force). Some search equipment is classified, although you could give him a closeup of a drag hook.
 
My opinion is that all auditors of this variety, whether they are morons or 'more rational' are pointless creatures and need to go and take their head for a shit.
 
I voted yes simply because these installations are in view of the public anyway so not really a big deal.

Step over the demarcation line however and intruders must be politely invited to step back over the line ONCE
in the event of non-compliance "say hello to 'woody' asshole"
View attachment 614916
Feel free to demonstrate the principle of proportionality to the courts. Would you also seize there camera, view and delete images, or destroy the device?
 
Last edited:
I take issue with the name. There are ways of Auditing the police, without having to join part of the state's own auditing organisations (i.e. HMICFRS or IOPC) - they could request ride-alongs or they could join an IAG (independent advisory group). The IAGs are fantastic for engagement and often have people with a level of influence in the communities they represent - they can pass on the true feel of the community, not just the vocal ones, and they can also facilitate the police's point of view.

These people could become Independent Custody Visitors, and perform a genuine and important service to the community by making sure, independently, that custodies are fulfilling their obligations and duties of care to those arrested (keeping in mind that not everyone who passes through a custody suite may be guilty of the crime for which there were grounds to arrest for in the first place). These are legitimate and important checks and balances, and also allow much deeper interaction with the Police from the outside. That is auditing.

The bell-ends who go around claiming the title are almost inescapably going out of their way to waste everyone's time and provoke a confrontation. They aren't auditing and wouldn't know what to do if they were actually given the chance to carry out an actual audit. Society isn't benefitted by these people and whilst the concept isn't illegal, it's the preserve of the pathetic with nothing better to do.

But, it's not illegal -- so I'm comfortable with it.
 
I take issue with the name. There are ways of Auditing the police, without having to join part of the state's own auditing organisations (i.e. HMICFRS or IOPC) - they could request ride-alongs or they could join an IAG (independent advisory group). The IAGs are fantastic for engagement and often have people with a level of influence in the communities they represent - they can pass on the true feel of the community, not just the vocal ones, and they can also facilitate the police's point of view.

These people could become Independent Custody Visitors, and perform a genuine and important service to the community by making sure, independently, that custodies are fulfilling their obligations and duties of care to those arrested (keeping in mind that not everyone who passes through a custody suite may be guilty of the crime for which there were grounds to arrest for in the first place). These are legitimate and important checks and balances, and also allow much deeper interaction with the Police from the outside. That is auditing.

The bell-ends who go around claiming the title are almost inescapably going out of their way to waste everyone's time and provoke a confrontation. They aren't auditing and wouldn't know what to do if they were actually given the chance to carry out an actual audit. Society isn't benefitted by these people and whilst the concept isn't illegal, it's the preserve of the pathetic with nothing better to do.

But, it's not illegal -- so I'm comfortable with it.

This in spades although I take the opposite position of 'Moggy' being comfortable, with because in part the poll is a simple binary, so thus I on the whole am uncomfortable with it.
 
This in spades although I take the opposite position of 'Moggy' being comfortable, with because in part the poll is a simple binary, so thus I on the whole am uncomfortable with it.

Don't get me wrong, accepting that it is within the bounds of the law, is not the same as liking it or thinking it's an acceptable thing for a normal person to do, and I would happily see it banned.

I am mindful that my own nick had a terror attack foiled, where the defendants were planning to shoot coppers as they left it (Shepherd's Bush, 2014 - or maybe early 2015) - I think that by making a big song and dance when even just being asked what they are doing, they are pushing a scenario where a copper might see someone filming, and ignore them - "he's not worth the bother, why give him the reaction he wants" then they might miss someone carrying out genuine Hostile Reconnaissance.

On the balance of further consideration, I'm overall not comfortable with it, but that doesn't mean that I don't accept that it's legal as things stand.
 

Arte_et_Marte

ADC
Moderator
Don't get me wrong, accepting that it is within the bounds of the law, is not the same as liking it or thinking it's an acceptable thing for a normal person to do, and I would happily see it banned.

I am mindful that my own nick had a terror attack foiled, where the defendants were planning to shoot coppers as they left it (Shepherd's Bush, 2014 - or maybe early 2015) - I think that by making a big song and dance when even just being asked what they are doing, they are pushing a scenario where a copper might see someone filming, and ignore them - "he's not worth the bother, why give him the reaction he wants" then they might miss someone carrying out genuine Hostile Reconnaissance.

On the balance of further consideration, I'm overall not comfortable with it, but that doesn't mean that I don't accept that it's legal as things stand.
My bold.

(Speaking as an ex cop.) These people need to be spoken to, you cannot just walk past and ignore them.

All it takes is a couple of minutes to satisfy yourself that they are not a real threat, just a pathetic youtuber looking for a 'bite,' then ignore them and carry on normal jogging.
 

Buddy!

War Hero
I think the results are only going to go one way when posing such a question to the (very loosely speaking) armed forces and wider armed forces communities.

Just because the auditor community highlight poor practice / behaviour by some security / policing professionals, doesn't mean their actions are appropriate... A lot of it is completely childish in my opinion. They could focus their efforts in a much more positive manner.
 

Arte_et_Marte

ADC
Moderator
I think the results are only going to go one way when posing such a question to the (very loosely speaking) armed forces and wider armed forces communities.

Just because the auditor community highlight poor practice / behaviour by some security / policing professionals, doesn't mean their actions are appropriate... A lot of it is completely childish in my opinion. They could focus their efforts in a much more positive manner.
Good post, but we must stop calling them Auditors. They are no such thing!
 
I think the results are only going to go one way when posing such a question to the (very loosely speaking) armed forces and wider armed forces communities.

Just because the auditor community highlight poor practice / behaviour by some security / policing professionals, doesn't mean their actions are appropriate... A lot of it is completely childish in my opinion. They could focus their efforts in a much more positive manner.
A lot of security/ policing professionals could also focus their efforts in a more positive manner, is another view.
 
Don't get me wrong, accepting that it is within the bounds of the law, is not the same as liking it or thinking it's an acceptable thing for a normal person to do, and I would happily see it banned.

I am mindful that my own nick had a terror attack foiled, where the defendants were planning to shoot coppers as they left it (Shepherd's Bush, 2014 - or maybe early 2015) - I think that by making a big song and dance when even just being asked what they are doing, they are pushing a scenario where a copper might see someone filming, and ignore them - "he's not worth the bother, why give him the reaction he wants" then they might miss someone carrying out genuine Hostile Reconnaissance.

On the balance of further consideration, I'm overall not comfortable with it, but that doesn't mean that I don't accept that it's legal as things stand.

Indeed and no criticism of you choice was intended. Its a complicated issue. And as you, I and others are well aware that as it's not unlawful to be a raging idiot, these 'auditor' pests are just another bugbear example.
 
I’m ok with it, as almost all of these places are in plain view and recordable by car cameras etc. also pretty much everywhere is on google.

I do understand that security may want to engage with them, but the manner of that interaction can take it to a higher level. As the two other threads show it takes both sides to make it into the spectacle they became.

People have made money on YouTube etc with this and other antics, and while there is money to be made it isn’t going away.
 
My bold.

(Speaking as an ex cop.) These people need to be spoken to, you cannot just walk past and ignore them.

All it takes is a couple of minutes to satisfy yourself that they are not a real threat, just a pathetic youtuber looking for a 'bite,' then ignore them and carry on normal jogging.

Couldn't agree more. However when even clearly nonsense complaints can see you sidelined for months at a time, I worry not everyone will see it that way.
 

Latest Threads

Top