Home Secretary states Stop and Search is Waste of Time

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by ACAB, Jul 3, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Whilst I disagree with the Home Secretary (unless she means completing the mind numbing paperwork after a Stop and Search is a waste of time0 I cannot resist posting this, BounceBanana, eat your heart out! (again)

    From The Telegraph

    'Waste of time' stop and search powers under threat, says May - Telegraph
    "Mrs May told the House of Commons that it takes police officers an estimated 312,000 hours a year to fill in paperwork required for the 1.2 million stop and searches carried out each year.

    She pointed out that on average only about 9% of the incidents result in an arrest and called the rate "far too low for comfort".

    Launching a new public consultation on a range of powers which allow officers to stop and search people and vehicles, Mrs May said it was unacceptable for law-abiding members of the public to be stopped simply because of their skin colour.

    She also told the House of Commons it may also be necessary to review the bureaucracy requiring officers to fill in a lengthy form – which takes on average 16 minutes to complete – every time they perform a stop and search.

    She said that in one force, Cumbria, only three per cent of stops lead to an arrest, while in Kent the figure is 19 per cent."
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. 9%. I'm suprised it was that high. Maybe she could pass her findings onto Hammond. I sure has hell was less than 9% effective.
     
  3. I've been stopped and questioned (though never searched) a number of times - normally when walking to the local shop after working late. Though the coppers have always been friendly and professional, it's not great. I shouldn't have to explain myself unless there's a very good reason.

    If only 3% of stops are leading to an arrest, then something probably needs to change.
     
  4. Possibly, but it's 9%.

    Anybody else thinking this is a ruling being forced down from Brussels?
     
  5. Is it more to do with disproportions in the IC getting stopped and searched? Minority lobbying, and votes? Or is the reason actually time-consuming paperwork. Saw this yesterday We still need stop and search on the streets - Telegraph (Phil Johnston). How true is it that "official figures show that black people are 37 times as likely to be searched as whites"? Genuinely interested with absolutely no racist agenda.
    Edited to add; been stopped and searched by an eager young Bobby once and what may have been his Probationer mentor, all friendly and polite, long as we remain calm and co-operative we get no problems.
     
  6. Its not the best conversion rate in the world but it does seem to make some of the vermin go to extraordinary lengths to hide their stuff as the twat on my last briefing who'd hidden a knife in his arse wrapped in toilet paper showed.
    Personally I think sergeants and inspectors need to be more robust in challenging people's search grounds on their 5090s as too many get away with essentially 'he looks dodgy'.


    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. In Cumbria, it's 3% - the final paragraph in the quote above.

    Even at 9%, 9 out of 10 people are being harassed unnecessarily.
     
  8. Oddly enough it's something that doesn't trouble me at all. Might be an NI thing.
     
  9. It's something I'd happily put up with if I lived in a high crime area, but I don't. I live in an area with a lot of bored Policemen...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. "Current figures show black and Asian people are up to seven times more likely to be stopped by the police than whites."

    Unless you live in Scotland, NI or Wales, in which case you are 7x more likely to be stopped and searched than a black or Asian person.

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/strathclyde-police-stop-and-search-numbers-1512145


    But funnily enough, that doesn't fit an agenda nor sell news papers......

    In 13.5 years service I've searched 5 black or Asian people. I know cops with half my service who haven't searched any.

    So, are we racist to whites up here by picking them out?

    Or is it, that maybe, just maybe, the people being searched are demographically and culturally the most likely to be carrying.....just like, say, some black people in the Met area........

    Maybe the neds up here are just the wrong colour to have their grievances heard in the mass media.


    Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
     
    • Like Like x 4
  11. It's once instance where I honestly do believe that if you're not up to something you shouldn't be... You've nothing to worry about.

    If you were to ask me about cctv monitoring, phone/net interception, routine fingerprinting or DNA testing you'd get a different reaction.
     
    • Like Like x 1

  12. 9 out of ten are being deterred. 1 out if ten are being caught. Christ almighty, some medical screening processes are about as successful as stop and search conversion rates, but there would be uproar if we said 'this operation only has a one in ten chance of saving your life so we won't bother.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  13. Stop stating facts and the truth and admit that you are a racist half wit as are all police officers. That seems to be the official line anyway. Personally, anything I walked away from in one piece was a win. They can shove their figures.