More London Killings

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/one-teenager-shot-dead-and-another-fatally-knifed-in-24-hours-of-violence-in-london-8610284.html

And the killings go on, should the police now conduct random stop and searches, with very strict sentences imposed on those found carrying weapons, or are they scared of being accused as racist?

[Gromit]

Randon stop and searches would take up a lot of police time and money that they do not have. It would be unlikely to stop future killings and would generally be a waste of time.

But apart from that, it is a great idea.

[sp1814]

AOG

What makes you think that the police don't conduct random stop and searches?

Also, young blacks are 28 times more likely to be stopped, so it's not like the police fear being accused of being racist.

Why do you think they do?

[sp1814]

AOG

By the way - only 3% of random stop and searches actually end in an arrest.

Weird huh?

Some further reading:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/12/police-stop-and-search-black-people

I'm a little surprised you didn't look up 'police stop and search' before posting your question. The answer is all over the Internet. Took me about seven seconds.

[FredPuli43]

aog, the police already did this, and did it for decades, and they still do it, though the procedure that follows now differs (more paperwork; they issue a notice to the person stopped, when they leave him or her).

But feel free to believe it doesn't happen and free to bring the word racism, a favourite (and why not?) into the post to explain why what does happen doesn't happen

[LazyGun]

I have never known the police to be scared of being regarded as racist.

And no, they should not conduct random stop and searches - police have far too much power as it is.

Skin colour should never be the grounds for stop and search....

[sp1814]

AOG

Did you do any research before posting this thread?

Did you not realise that stop and search goes on all the time?

[Orderlimit]

SP, out of interest, do you believe the statistics you are looking at are true and accurate of what really happens on the 'ground'?.

Also, a lot more males are stop searched (Sec 1 and Sec 60) than females, would we consider the police sexist?

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// Also, young blacks are 28 times more likely to be stopped, so it's not like the police fear being accused of being racist. ///

That is total poppy-cock.

This is from a Equality and Human Rights Commission report.

*** Black people are at least six times as likely to
be stopped as white people; Asian people, around twice as likely. ***

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/raceinbritain/ehrc_stop_and_search_report.pdf

[Baldric]

Sorry but the Mail seem to have missed it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/12/police-stop-and-search-black-people

[anotheoldgit]

Lazygun

/// Skin colour should never be the grounds for stop and search...///

So take this scenario a stabbing of a young black male has taken place in a predominately black area of London, a witness has said that he saw a group of young black males running away from the scene of the stabbing.

Are you saying that every man woman or child in the area, (regardless of skin colour) should be equally stopped and searched for the knife?

[jim360]

I've read that Daily Mail article and think it possibly the worst piece of journalistic rubbish I have seen. As far as I can make out not a single figure it quotes matches the source in any way whatsoever. Dreadful.

[LazyGun]

No, I am saying that you stop and search those where you have a reasonable suspicion. If the eye witnesses say it was a black male, then stop and search black males.

If they say it was a white elderly female, stop and search them.

But we are not talking about a specific scenario as that, are we? In your initial post, you talked about police conducting random stop and searches - that is the very opposite of a targeted stop and search policy, based upon reasonable suspicion by virtue of evidence.

And as SP points out, and your own article suggests - black people are disproportionally stopped by the cops in stop and search operations, and you have to conclude it is because of the colour of their skin - this should not be the predominant reason.

[Zacs-Master]

Give it a rest son.

[anotheoldgit]

LazyGun

/// I have never known the police to be scared of being regarded as racist. ///

Here is one such time.

/// Complaints to social workers and the police were ignored because they were "petrified of being called racist", former Labour MP for Keighley Ann Cryer said. ///

/// "This is an absolute scandal. They were petrified of being called racist and so reverted to the default of political correctness," she said. ///

/// Greater Manchester Police is now being investigated by the IPCC over the failings of its first investigation in 2008. ///

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9253250/Rochdale-grooming-trial-Police-accused-of-failing-to-investigate-paedophile-gang-for-fear-of-appearing-racist.html

[sp1814]

AOG

Perhaps you should consider performing a little due diligence before posting on the News section, because this thread is at best, faulty.

The police DO stop and search young black men - and the numbers in both of our links show this.

My link is from a report published in 2012.

Yours is four years older.

Again - a little checking here and there would have sorted this out for you.

[sp1814]

AOG

Back to your question:

And the killings go on, should the police now conduct random stop and searches[i

They do.

[i]with very strict sentences imposed on those found carrying weapons[i]

Perhaps, but I don't know what the current sentencing guidelines are, or how they are being applied.

[i]or are they scared of being accused as racist?]

The numbers in both of our links suggest not.

What are your comments, based on the above?

[anotheoldgit]

Lazygun

/// In your initial post, you talked about police conducting random stop and searches - that is the very opposite of a targeted stop and search policy, based upon reasonable suspicion by virtue of evidence. ///

When it is a known black on black gang killing which most of these have proven to be, then when I said 'random search' I meant a random search amongst blacks in the area, what is wrong with that, or are you saying only those blacks who are the actual perpetrators should be searched?

That would prove rather unlikely don't you think?

Best to throw one's 'net' wide in the hope that amongst those caught in the net a few prove worthy of catching.

[LazyGun]

You can offer an account of an allegation of failure to investigate due to fear of being seen as being racist. I can offer you this account of the racial sensitivity of one particular Met officer....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/oct/16/police-officer-man-self-esteem

The police most certainly should not allow the fear of being termed racist to prevent them to investigate or prosecute or arrest people where they have reasonable evidence of wrongdoing - and the Greater Manchester Police are being investigated, according to your link, and rightly so. It will be interesting to see the outcome.

But they most certainly should not use racial profiling to determine who they intend to stop and search - and the figures suggest that they do that right now...

[sp1814]

AOG

Why do you think that police don't perform random stop and searches?

Is there a link you could provide us with, because everything I've seen so far suggest they do.

[anotheoldgit]

jim360

/// I've read that Daily Mail article and think it possibly the worst piece of journalistic rubbish I have seen. As far as I can make out not a single figure it quotes matches the source in any way whatsoever. Dreadful. ///

And what Daily Mail article may that be?

Amazing even when a Daily Mail link has not been provided on which to debate upon, it still gets dragged into the argument.

Pathetic absolutely pathetic.