Where have all the police gone?

[bluethrunthru]

That's all fair enough but regardless of what's gone on in the past I'm not sure I'd be content to just allow anybody and everybody to film certain buildings with impunity.
The important detail for me is how they approach and question those doing the filming. There have, as you rightly point out been too many instances of the Police making a pigs ear of it.

But the law isn't about an individuals contentment. What is permissible is you have the right to film anything or anyone which can be seen from a public space. So through railings through open gates on the streets etc - there is no right to assumed privacy when in public. The two words - private - and - public - make that clear.

What always gets me is if its a cop shop, an Army Barracks or a crisp factory its all legal from the road, on a nearby hill and even now by drone as long as the drone pilot meets the necessary licensing requirements. There is nothing stopping any institution from erecting a 50 foot fence or hedge all around the perimeter and block out probably 99% of the "audits" - its just they find it cheaper not to and would rather instruct a minimum wage security guard to confront someone and tell lies and quote non existent laws

 

[paulchapo]

That's all fair enough but regardless of what's gone on in the past I'm not sure I'd be content to just allow anybody and everybody to film certain buildings with impunity.
The important detail for me is how they approach and question those doing the filming. There have, as you rightly point out been too many instances of the Police making a pigs ear of it.

It's not illegal to do so. Not yet anyway.

This is the problem being highlighted. Annoying as it may be to the police involved it is often escalated due to their ego's at not being able to legally prevent it, so they become aggressive and misuse laws to arrest and harass the person filming when they know doing so is a misuse of those powers.

I'm in no way anti police, many are fantastic and dedicated and are fighting an impossible battle trying to keep a lid on all the crime and violence out there. A fair few though, as highlighted in such videos, are egotistical bullies.

 

[mancityvstoke]

It's not illegal to do so. Not yet anyway.

This is the problem being highlighted. Annoying as it may be to the police involved it is often escalated due to their ego's at not being able to legally prevent it, so they become aggressive and misuse laws to arrest and harass the person filming when they know doing so is a misuse of those powers.

I'm in no way anti police, many are fantastic and dedicated and are fighting an impossible battle trying to keep a lid on all the crime and violence out there. A fair few though, as highlighted in such videos, are egotistical bullies.

yeah...but for me it's the ridiculous waste of scarce police resources on "not rights" legally filming them. Just ignore them. Or politely ask why they're filming and then drive off.

 

[bert38]

Exactly. I don't think there's been one. There also hasn't to my knowledge been a terrorist attack aside of Ireland on a police station in this country. There was the custody sergeant killed by a prisoner who had a weapon concealed on him that the arresting officers failed to find. It's a nonsense excuse to use. Anyone really wanting to glean info or do harm would do it in a totally different manner.

And yet numerous officers have been killed in the line of duty, including a former colleague of mine, and even more officers sustaining life altering injuries just going about their job.
Filming and publishing details of officers and their private vehicles is not justified, despite people’s views.
This thread has gone down a predictable route.

 

[mexico1970]

 

[Blue Mist]

Here's one for you. If the cops want to listen to phone calls, drug dealers etc, they have to do pages of reports that eventually make their way to the Home Secretary. He is the only person who can authorise a telephone tap.
If you want more cops catching criminals would you agree to a change in the law where a Superintendent of a force could authorise it ?
Also, you cannot use anything said on the phone as evidence, ignoring that is stupid, works you agree to that being changed.
Or is it an attack on your civil liberties

 

[mancityvstoke]

And yet numerous officers have been killed in the line of duty, including a former colleague of mine, and even more officers sustaining life altering injuries just going about their job.
Filming and publishing details of officers and their private vehicles is not justified, despite people’s views.
This thread has gone down a predictable route.

I'm not sure it has. We all agree with your posts but there are also issues from the other side of the coin.

It's a debate.

I've never seen details of officers or their addresses.....how do they find personal details from a car registration unless they follow them home which any loon can do.

 

[bert38]

I'm not sure it has. We all agree with your posts but there are also issues from the other side of the coin.

It's a debate.

I've never seen details of officers or ther addresses.....how do they finf personal details froma car registration unless they follow them home which any loon can do.

No, but if you work in a small town it’s quite easy to identify officers from their vehicles and vise versa. It poses a risk to officers.
Every officer has had the ‘I know where you live, I’m going to fuck your missus/mother/sister’ nobody should simply accept that in their place of work.
And morons filming and publishing personal details adds to that risk.

 

[mancityvstoke]

No, but if you work in a small town it’s quite easy to identify officers from their vehicles and vise versa. It poses a risk to officers.
Every officer has had the ‘I know where you live, I’m going to fuck your missus/mother/sister’ nobody should simply accept that in their place of work.

have you any evidence of attacks on officers in a small town from youtube films?

you're beginning to sound like the officers who react to dicks filming. Just ignore them and they go away and no more filming plus saving us all compo money.

The reactions they are getting are making them do it even more.

OR make it illegal.

 

[Phil1]

have you any evidence of attacks on officers in a small town from youtube films?

you're beginning to sound like the officers who react to dicks filming. Just ignore them and they go away and no more filming plus saving us all compo money.

The reactions they are getting are making them do it even more.

OR make it illegal.

My biggest gripe with those auditors is the ones I've watched when they've been approached respectfully or asked politely have all just gone straight to the "it's not illegal to film" route which they know will antagonise.
I suppose one day laws will eventually be introduced to prevent it from happening which ironically will speed up the process of becoming the nanny state the nobheads are worried about in the first place.

 

[bert38]

have you any evidence of attacks on officers in a small town from youtube films?

you're beginning to sound like the officers who react to dicks filming. Just ignore them and they go away and no more filming plus saving us all compo money.

The reactions they are getting are making them do it even more.

OR make it illegal.

I have numerous examples of officers put in fear in their own homes by very violent individuals because they’ve arrested them or had dealings with people who took a dislike to the officer. I have numerous examples of officers who have been badly assaulted and wake up terrified that the assailant will find where they live or where their kids go to school.
There are laws around harassment and public order that do apply to filming and publishing personal details.

 

[El_george]

It was deliberate hyperbole, but I think you can act woke and racist at the same time. Consider those police who turned a blind eye to Asian gangs abusing teens. A racist assumption (it’s what they do) and a woke view (we better not upset this minority and cause racial tension).

I'm sorry, but I am struggling to understand that comment. First of all I read your bit about 'exaggerating for effect' I got that. But on the grooming gang issue: well I have never considered the failure to deal with that as an example of racism, quite the reverse. It has been alleged that the perpetrators of this abuse considered the girls as 'white trash' and treated them as such. But surely that is racism from the men towards the girls.

That it wasn't investigated with the vigour it should have been, nor prosecuted through the legal system as well, are examples of 'political correctness gone mad' or as you put it 'better not upset this minority and cause racial tension' or have I misunderstood you?

Police these days have almost all gone through University - I would suggest that to have done so whilst holding 'neanderthal views' would be very difficult indeed. Although as in all walks of life there will be some bad eggs. However, as I said earlier, to suggest that the police are on the one hand like the blokes from 'Life on Mars' whilst simultaneously 'woke', to coin a mis-used phrase, doesn't make sense to me.

I would suggest the majority of Police are right-thinking (as in modern, not political right) but are under-manned and over-worked especially in relation to documenting everything that has happened.
Because of the opportunity to sue and claim compensation, things have to be oh so correct. I work with troubled young people and very occasionally we have to use the techniques of restraint that we have been trained in. It's a bloody nightmare though if we do, because of all the follow-up paperwork that has to then be done and even then, we have a few days of worry in case an unfounded allegation is made. It must be 100x worse for the Police.

I'm not saying Gene Hunt had it right by the way, back in 1973, beating up suspects and patting the bottoms of WPCs ain't right either, but there must be a middle-way.

Finally, I would say this though - if I was in the police and two calls came in - one a complaint about some facebook issue or a twitter thing and the other call was a knife fight or a riot. Well I'd be putting my hand up to deal with the online thing! And that was never a choice, back in the past.

 

[mancityvstoke]

I have numerous examples of officers put in fear in their own homes by very violent individuals because they’ve arrested them or had dealings with people who took a dislike to the officer. I have numerous examples of officers who have been badly assaulted and wake up terrified that the assailant will find where they live or where their kids go to school.
There are laws around harassment and public order that do apply to filming and publishing personal details.

I don't doubt any of that and frankly it's not what I'm even saying.....I'm talking about nobs filming for youtube clicks and compo money and police reacting to said obvious nobs. These people are not violent offenders threatening families etc.

I think we are getting at cross purposes mate.

 

[bluethrunthru]

No, but if you work in a small town it’s quite easy to identify officers from their vehicles and vise versa. It poses a risk to officers.
Every officer has had the ‘I know where you live, I’m going to fuck your missus/mother/sister’ nobody should simply accept that in their place of work.
And morons filming and publishing personal details adds to that risk.

Police officers very seldom live in the immediate area they Police and I doubt even the simplest cop who Polices a small town would choose to live there. They would only recognise their cars if they went home in a car with day-glo yellow decals and POLICE written on the sides....possibly also with a lightbar on the roof. I'd like to get 30 cars of varying makes and models 5 of which were officers personal cars and have you identify 5 in 5 guesses with the give away signs that told you. A Skoda Octavia is a Skoda Octavia regardless of the drivers occupation.

People I know who work in customer facing roles has had that and worse. I know people who work security in shops or are just shop workers in the shops who have been punched full on in the face and they don't have a pepper spray a baton or a badge to use.

Not sure what you mean by publishing personal details on line? I have never seen a copper when asked to identify themselves go further than name, collar number and rank ( even then not always all of that ) so not sure how you discern from that their home address. Of course you could ban the sale of Ring door bells to home owners who live near officers and their families and ban dash cams from being operated on the streets where they live.

The threat you describe only exists if they are followed home or by persons acting using far more sophisticated surveillance techniques than standing outside a police station filming with a mobile phone.........

 

[ganganvince]

And what are they doing exactly?

My Mrs told me this morning about horrific situation in Chorley (I think) where kids are routinely being several beaten up - like jumping up and down on heads and kids potentially losing eyes or getting brain damage - and the police being "too busy" to do anything about it.

I know police numbers are down, but I wondered by how much, so I did a bit of Googling. Turns out there were roughly 120,000 police officers in England and Wales in the 1970's and although that number rose in between and has fallen back, there are today about 120,000 officers.

But back in the 70's we saw bobbies on the beat, routinely. Burglaries were followed up on, always. Fingerprints taken etc. Patrol cars visibly patrolling often. Local police stations existed, and were not closed due to "cuts". And they had no technology back then to help them either.

And yet nowadays, the police have all sorts of tech to help them fight crime. And they have the same numbers of police as before. So it made me think, what are they all actually doing? Is there lack of action to combat the sort of criminality described above actually more political by them, sending out a message saying "we need more resources", rather than an actual lack of resources, perhaps? The police say they are overstretched and can't cope. Overstretched on what?

Plus the PCSO's

 

[Bluesince1979]

Huge problem was a lot of the hospitals like cheadle royal and park side in macc that dealt with mental health issues closed down years back so a lot of problems that were mental health issues are now police problems.

Do work for a bobby who said he is dealing with what maybe should be social worker problems than actual crime

Like a lot of things in this country, its fucked

 

[bluethrunthru]

anyway this is all going off topic but to conclude I would say that ALL Police Officers have been issued with a directive that photography in public is not a crime

https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice/

 

[bluethrunthru]

anyway this is all going off topic but to conclude I would say that ALL Police Officers have been issued with a directive that photography in public is not a crime

https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/ph/photography-advice/

 

[paulchapo]

No, but if you work in a small town it’s quite easy to identify officers from their vehicles and vise versa. It poses a risk to officers.
Every officer has had the ‘I know where you live, I’m going to fuck your missus/mother/sister’ nobody should simply accept that in their place of work.
And morons filming and publishing personal details adds to that risk.

Out of interest which small town do you live in? It's still not easy to find out where somebody lives through their car. If you had the registration and the make and colour of the car you might and it's a big might, walk past a house and spot that very car parked outside but it's a slim chance that's going to happen. A determined thug would just sit outside a station and follow somebody home if they really wanted to do harm.

Every job where you come into contact with the public you face that risk and threat. From a shop worker confronting a shoplifter to a doorman on a nightclub. They must get numerous threats every weekend from punters.

I lived in two very small places, Hollyhead in Anglesey and Dover in Kent and don't recollect any incidents of a police officer being attacked at home.

 

[bert38]

I don't doubt any of that and frankly it's not what I'm even saying.....I'm talking about nobs filming for youtube clicks and compo money and police reacting to said obvious nobs. These people are not violent offenders threatening families etc.

I think we are getting at cross purposes mate.

No I don’t think we are-what I’m referring to is those kind of videos increase the likelihood that officers will be identified by the types of people I mention. And even on a more moderate scale police don’t have many rights, at the very least they should be free to go about their job free from annoyance and harassment.