Thought Police in action.

I wonder if this delightful young lady demanding that homosexuality is banned from the syllabus at their school is getting a call ?
View attachment 374245
Has anyone been accused of a hate crime from speaking out against her homophobia, that would seem more likely?

She has top trumps in the diversity Olympics unless a black atheist muslim transgender disabled with autism complains
 

Varrich

Swinger
Seems like the easiest thing to do to avoid all this drama with Police Forces mimicking Big Brother would be to stay off the likes of Facebook and Twitter and just realise that a) the world most of us knew where people sometimes made jokes not to the taste of everyone and dare to have opinions that others may not like is gone. Now replaced by a society full of "protected groups" whose rights and opinions are now deemed to be more important than everyone else. And b) know that the Police are not your friend, ever.

I get my kicks now by waiting until my feminist daughter invites her "Millie-Tant" like friends round, I then appear wearing an "Old Guys Rule" t-shirt and tell her friends that she bought it for me.

Its much more fun to turn the offence junkies on each other than to give them a target.
 
I'd have still hung up on him and there isn't a fcuking thing he could do about it. Comes around the house, I don't have to even let him in the house let alone talk or listen to him. Unless I'm committing a crime, what I put on social media has got fcuk all to do with him or any Police Officers.

Now I'm not saying that because I dislike the Police, I was a copper for 25 years and I know bullsh!t when I see or hear it.
I agree with your sentiment and have liked your post, but regardless of how we may feel about the fact, the police are now required to investigate certain complaints due to the blurring of the line between politics and law and order culminating in a raft of ill conceived legislation. I know the link in the OP was in the wail but there are literally thousands of comments decrying this kind of nonsense. Once again though our politicians know what’s best for us, even when on occasions they’re hoisted by their own petard as with a former Home Secretary being reported for a “Hate Event”.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
If the quote from PC Gul to Mr Miller is gen, ie. “It’s not a crime, but it will be recorded as a hate incident.”
how does an "incident" differ from a crime, and are there lists of other incidents that definitely aren't crimes ?
Exactly, I used to hate sprouts, am I bad? After all sprouts need love too!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
You need to be careful about the phone thing. It is a practice where I am in the USA for the local plod to telephone individuals whilst recording the conversation using an App on their mobile. The individuals feel somewhat safer as they are not directly faced with an officer and say things which they ordinarily would not. Then if the suspected offence warrants further investigation they already have an initial interview informal conversation with comments on tape, so to speak.
Surely inadmissible without a formal caution?
 
Surely inadmissible without a formal caution?
True. However, even nowadays still easy enough to bluff some people into digging a hole for themselves if you play it back to them in the interview room, later, after they have been cautioned.

On the range with mates and one mentioned a non event that resulted in a call from Dallas PD officer. We have a few PD police and one state bloke in our group, one of the PD blokes warned us that some officers have the practice of recording phone conversations, where they try and come across as all matey, that they later try and use to get people to formally admit to naughtiness.

Easy enough: Rule 1: Treat everything you write on the internet as if it is plastered all over a billboard in Leicester Square.
Rule 2: Treat everything you do and say as if it is filmed and recorded for replay on the BBC News.
 
I pray for a call from officer Dibble about a non crime, I once kept an Indian call centre pest going for quarter of an hour claiming for a accident that involved running myself over in my own car, and my own death.


Reading that I expect the thought police to be knocking on my door asap as when I get one of those f**king calls, I adopt 2 stances, if it is female I turn on the charm & gradually work up to some filthy suggestions of what I could do to her nice brown moist bits with my very hard white bits, if its a male they get the biggest tirade about them and their foul Indian defecation habits accompanied by some choice swear words in several languages, normally they ring off well before I have got into full flow. I have noticed a mark decrease in these calls of late :)
 
but considerably less accurate.
One of the reasons the Allies defeated the Germans in the summer and autumn of 1918 was the increased accuracy of the artillery. Try fighting any land battle where your opponent has an advantage in good quality artillery.
OK being serious 'plank' is the insult of choice. And totally undeserved of course.
 
Mark Steyn pretty sums up my feelings in one paragraph.

A land in which the police can lawfully investigate you merely for checking the heart icon underneath such a tweeted verse is no longer free. And the fact that neither the constable nor his superiors are ashamed of their "investigation" speaks volumes about what the English police are transitioning into.
 
A case of the plod earning brownie points before a perceived Corbyn government gains power?.

The prospect of Supreme Comrade Dianne Abbott being the Home Secretary must be keeping some awake at night in the police.
These are Tory laws and policies, not Labour.
 
I agree with your sentiment and have liked your post, but regardless of how we may feel about the fact, the police are now required to investigate certain complaints due to the blurring of the line between politics and law and order culminating in a raft of ill conceived legislation. I know the link in the OP was in the wail but there are literally thousands of comments decrying this kind of nonsense. Once again though our politicians know what’s best for us, even when on occasions they’re hoisted by their own petard as with a former Home Secretary being reported for a “Hate Event”.
I agree completely with what you write however I believe what you have wrote pertains mostly to the UK and Europe and a few other countries outside of Europe. Oh we have the easily hurt/offended types over here in the US but I don't believe it's as bad here as it is there and with Policing budgets here being what they are, Police have neither the time nor the manpower to go investigating hurt feelings.

I am a member of a law enforcement forum over here and some of the policing stuff coming out of the UK is being discussed on the forum. The general consensus seems to be one of where the fcuk do Police officers over there find the time to look into this sort of stuff. It's being viewed over here with some astonishment I assure you.

Thing is though as time goes on we are going to be seeing more and more of stuff like this as older generations die out and the younger (brainwashed) generations take over. Well it's their time and it's going to be their world and like it or not we are going to have to put up with it unless we the people start getting a lot more selective about who we send to govern us.

Edited and written again because I forgot to hit the reply button before I wrote my reply.
 
When serious assaults, murders, rapes etc happen, there has sometimes been a pattern of behaviour by the offender towards the victim in the proceeding period of time that when analysed, indicated that something more serious was going to happen. These might not amount to crimes but are an indication of a serious discriminatory intent, which can start with a quite low level incident that escalates when unchecked.

When these incidents are logged, risk assessed and a relatively modest intervention made, they can be stopped or if deemed serious enough, a safeguarding strategy put in place.

This is a similar thing to The Prevent Strategy that aims to identify potential targets of radicalisation at an early stage, often before an offence has happened.
 
Don't know how it works down in Englandshire, but up here in Scotistan, we don't need to speak to any solicitors. If someone gets a phonecall form me, it's a courtesy rather than tipping up at their place of work or home for what might be nothing. If they start to get arrsey with me, after I've outlined everything and I have to visit them, then it probably means my discretion is getting put on hold and I'll need to take it down the investigative route, which means they'd be arrested on suspicion and interviewed (or just outright charged if the evidence is there).

Every single phonecall I've ever made has had a co-operative person on the other end of the phone, as the vast majority of decent people shit bricks when the police suddenly take an interest in them, and what to do anything they can to stop the circus before it starts. Having said that, if I am phoning or visiting, it means there is something there that could be criminal, but I'm opting to go down the route of no crime, as long as the 'suspect' removes the post, or that I can find a plausible excuse as to why it happened - i.e I'm trying to help them out.



Nah. We're covered for anything we can do provided it's for a policing purpose and that policing purpose in this instance would have been to bottom out any allegations made here. So if someone has reported you for anything then I have full rights under powers conferred blah blah to check information held about you on various systems, such as police, UK voters role, UK telephone database, etc. Often it's to allow to me trace you, ascertain any previous convictions or engagements with the police, and so on.

Having said that, if I've read this DM article right, and all this guy has done is re-post a tweet that someone else wrote, then this cop is a ****, though it would be recorded as a hate incident - someone who has said / posted / whatever something that has been construed by another to have hate material within it (prejudice for another group) but that wasn't a crime (it didn't originate from them).

That's just how the rules are. Blame your countries crime recording and hate recording procedures. They're a mess (as are ours).

ETA: As someone else in this thread asked, yes, there is tons of reportable stuff on ARRSE as BCO and GCO know from bitter experience. That's why when I read ARRSE I keep my eyes closed.
If you're required by your job to engage in activity that you believe is wrong (as can be plausibly be understood from your post) should you not be raising it with management, Federation, colleagues or just changing jobs?
 

Latest Threads

Top