Reply to: Met Police Targets

[Zigenare]

Does seem to be for certain coppers.


No

Constable Savage?

[vetran]

Is that a recognised offence now?



Does he live close to this guy?

https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...o-i-stand.html

Does seem to be for certain coppers.


No

[Paralytic]

Mates & colleagues have been repeatedly stopped for driving while black and to the best of my knowledge they have no serious convictions or they wouldn't have been colleagues.

Is that a recognised offence now?

Another white mate who does have a criminal history does get a regular tug but knows it is because of his past so puts up with it.

Does he live close to this guy?

https://www.contractoruk.com/forums/...o-i-stand.html

[vetran]

You don't honestly believe this would work do you?

Better than no intelligence at all. If the owner has a job and respectable lifestyle why stop the car except for a supportable reasonable suspicion? If you mark the car as kosher but see a known drug dealer in it, dangerous driving or bald tyres then you can stop it. Both defuse the accusations of racism.

Mates & colleagues have been repeatedly stopped for driving while black and to the best of my knowledge they have no serious convictions or they wouldn't have been colleagues.

Another white mate who does have a criminal history does get a regular tug but knows it is because of his past so puts up with it.

[Paralytic]

Met Police Targets

Good for them!

[northernladuk]

You know drug dealers tend to be young and drive high end cars. By vetting the car and marking as safe it means people would only be stopped once unless they got red flagged. If we had that sort of intelligence we can report against it.

You don't honestly believe this would work do you?

[vetran]

If your deacon is female she may not have told you that at least once when she was stopped they decided she was wearing fancy dress. Female black clergy have all told me this.

Anyway the people I know who are stopped apart from clergy and drivers under 25 have all been driving cars from the luxury end of the market. The tints on their cars are manufacturers standards so unless BMW, Mercedes etc are over tinting the front windows the police are deliberately targeting them.

Well as I mentioned if the Police can't see the ethnicity of the driver then the windows are really too tinted or we need to insist the officers wear glasses. I see plenty of high end cars that have windows so dark that a photograph would not capture the drivers face effectively. If they are factory standard then the law needs changing.

Tinted vehicle windows: the law - GOV.UK

The front windscreen must let at least 75% of light through and the front side windows must let at least 70% of light through.

As I said the police could have a cheap portable test they can use.

You know drug dealers tend to be young and drive high end cars. By vetting the car and marking as safe it means people would only be stopped once unless they got red flagged. If we had that sort of intelligence we can report against it.

[Zigenare]

What happens if minorities commit more crime though...

Then it is the responsibility of the majority to commit more crime to level the playing field.

[northernladuk]

I would like to believe that our Police are not racist but they don't reply to the accusations levelled against them with facts & figures that prove they aren't, until they do that they will lose the argument.

I just don't buy that something that has 120,946 officers in 43 territorial police forces can be identified by the single word 'racist'. That in itself is just ridiculous and generally means the person saying they are has an agenda and isn't up for debate. You think if they did provide facts and figures it would help? No it wouldn't. As I say, anyone that thinks something that big is racist isn't going to be turned.

If they had charged Ms Butler's friend with having too tinted windows and bald tyres etc. then we would have just laughed another MP who is trying to avoid the law, they are so common. If they had countered that they stop anyone driving dangerously regardless of colour people would understand.

But we keep hearing of people we know being stopped for being black, these aren't scallies they are the deacon at the local church.

You keep hearing about the odd one very high profile situation that is blow out of all proportion. You don't hear about the 10's of thousands of others. You are being played by the news and this tide of hate that is going on.

Fix stop and search and tell us how you did it, then prove it with facts.

You can't fix it. Someone will always be offended. They can do it better but you've got to ignore much of the noise that is liberals that are being offended and look at the facts.

By the way only stopping a third of the people you used to is not fixing it, increasing the detection rate to 100% of the people you stop is, no cheating of course. If the Police can prove they had a valid reason to stop and search and in the majority of cases it solves crime they will have nothing to defend.

I posted the stats on the number of stops. I haven't seen any stats of how many stops resulted in action being taken per head and the like. That would be pretty interesting but if it shows a link to race and offending rate then all hell will break lose and it's probably best just burying it.

I don't think the police are racist. I do believe there is a problem with institutional racism in some areas. You patrol a high crime rate black area for long enough and you are going to form an opinion. That's a problem but it's isn't just the police's.

Interesting paragraph on a wikipedia..

Figures from the Office for National Statistics showed that in 2007 an estimated 10.6 percent of London's population of 7,556,900 were black.[25] Evidence shows that the black population in London boroughs increases with the level of deprivation, and that the level of crime also increases with deprivation, such that "It is clear that ethnicity, deprivation, victimisation and offending are closely and intricately inter-related".[26]

In June 2010, through a Freedom of Information Act request, The Sunday Telegraph obtained statistics on accusations of crime broken down by race from the Metropolitan Police Service.[n 2] The figures showed that the majority of males who were accused of violent crimes in 2009–2010 were black. Of the recorded 18,091 such accusations against males, 54 percent accused of street crimes were black; for robbery, 58 percent; and for gun crimes, 67 percent.[27] Robbery, drug use, and gang violence have been associated with black people since the 1960s.[28] In the 1980s and 1990s, the police associated robbery with black people. In 1995, the Metropolitan Police commissioner Paul Condon said that the majority of robberies in London were committed by black people.[29]

Just looking at those figures it's hardly suprising stop and search is disproportionalty used and that there is institutional racism.

We aren't even getting in a dicussion about wether the problem is to do with race or is it to do with culture. Man that would have liberals spinning like wooden tops.

All very badly broken and really needs fixing but **** knows how. 'The police are racist' is not a good start though IMO.

[Beiberbuffet]

Do you expect competency? Remember they are a public service.

[SueEllen]

I would like to believe that our Police are not racist but they don't reply to the accusations levelled against them with facts & figures that prove they aren't, until they do that they will lose the argument.

If they had charged Ms Butler's friend with having too tinted windows and bald tyres etc. then we would have just laughed another MP who is trying to avoid the law, they are so common. If they had countered that they stop anyone driving dangerously regardless of colour people would understand.

But we keep hearing of people we know being stopped for being black, these aren't scallies they are the deacon at the local church.

Fix stop and search and tell us how you did it, then prove it with facts.

By the way only stopping a third of the people you used to is not fixing it, increasing the detection rate to 100% of the people you stop is, no cheating of course. If the Police can prove they had a valid reason to stop and search and in the majority of cases it solves crime they will have nothing to defend.

If your deacon is female she may not have told you that at least once when she was stopped they decided she was wearing fancy dress. Female black clergy have all told me this.

Anyway the people I know who are stopped apart from clergy and drivers under 25 have all been driving cars from the luxury end of the market. The tints on their cars are manufacturers standards so unless BMW, Mercedes etc are over tinting the front windows the police are deliberately targeting them.

[vetran]

But they have made massive inroads in to 'fixing it'. There was very clearly a problem but look how it's reduced massively in the last 10 years. IMO it's no longer an outright issue of institutional racism. The numbers are too small. Something else is going on. Bad things like poor leadership or individuals in some cases, in others it's the areas where the statistics come from. 50% of stop and search is in London which has a higher proportion of black people, which in turn also has a higher propotion of black crime, and that type of crime has been targetted so it just throws the stats right out of the kilter.

I just don't think terms like 'fix stop and search' and 'in response to George Floyd/BLM' are useful. Looking at it deeper it's changed massively and continues to do so.

Stats are here and check the overlaid graph in section 6 at the bottom.

Stop and search - GOV.UK Ethnicity facts and figures

I would like to believe that our Police are not racist but they don't reply to the accusations levelled against them with facts & figures that prove they aren't, until they do that they will lose the argument.

If they had charged Ms Butler's friend with having too tinted windows and bald tyres etc. then we would have just laughed another MP who is trying to avoid the law, they are so common. If they had countered that they stop anyone driving dangerously regardless of colour people would understand.

But we keep hearing of people we know being stopped for being black, these aren't scallies they are the deacon at the local church.

Fix stop and search and tell us how you did it, then prove it with facts.

By the way only stopping a third of the people you used to is not fixing it, increasing the detection rate to 100% of the people you stop is, no cheating of course. If the Police can prove they had a valid reason to stop and search and in the majority of cases it solves crime they will have nothing to defend.

[northernladuk]

Its about time they fixed stop & search. They allegedly stop the same law abiding citizens time after time because they are black and have a nice car.

You stop someone in a car and they check out and don't have criminal affiliations, mark them as clean on the system and future stops should be on the basis of a documentable suspicion so its not the same black clergyman being stopped every week.

We know 1 in 3 cars fail an MOT initially so once you stop a car give it a good check and ticket as appropriate. Combine other data such as convictions & arrests + benefit & earnings data (maybe at a higher level) so the Police have enough information to go on.

If challenged you prove > 53% (yep there might be some overlap) of our stops result in a traffic ticket or other offence (currently its 20% result in action) so you may think its racism we think it is good Policing.

A picture of bald tyres or a dirty exhaust and a ticket to visit the MOT centre proves its not racism.

At least then any drug dealers allegedly on benefits in expensive cars would have them well maintained and be wearing a seatbelt. Maybe we could stop people with kids in the back not wearing seatbelts or using mobile phones that we capture on body cams?

Invest in face recognition so we can do the similar on foot.

But they have made massive inroads in to 'fixing it'. There was very clearly a problem but look how it's reduced massively in the last 10 years. IMO it's no longer an outright issue of institutional racism. The numbers are too small. Something else is going on. Bad things like poor leadership or individuals in some cases, in others it's the areas where the statistics come from. 50% of stop and search is in London which has a higher proportion of black people, which in turn also has a higher propotion of black crime, and that type of crime has been targetted so it just throws the stats right out of the kilter.

I just don't think terms like 'fix stop and search' and 'in response to George Floyd/BLM' are useful. Looking at it deeper it's changed massively and continues to do so.

Stats are here and check the overlaid graph in section 6 at the bottom.

Stop and search - GOV.UK Ethnicity facts and figures

[FIERCE TANK BATTLE]

Data should be used to see if some obvious abuses are happening (or not) - ie stopping same person all the time without charges filed

What happens if minorities commit more crime though...

[vetran]

Police officers claim they can't see who is driving cars. Oddly in my area they catch people crossing them at junctions or by waiting in side roads then coming out....

If the front windows are overly tinted that is a traffic ticket or a requirement to visit an equipped MOT centre for a test and then a nice fine.

They could probably use a piece of Paper with a greyscale and a phone to do a rough test.

If its legal the Police need their eyes tested and words of advice from a senior officer.

If they have decent procedures and management it is surprising how good even poorly paid staff can be.