UK Police Now Threatening to Arrest People Who Make Fun of Their Facebook Posts About Drug Busts

It seems that a lot of members have absolutely no idea about British politics or our way of life and love spouting about there great "freedoms" compared to Great Britain?? They should maybe take the time to back up the tabloid stories they all seem to love posting about, with some real facts.

Some members also really need to read a dictionary or look up on-line what political group a conservative goverment belongs to. Maybe checkout what a liberal and a communist also means.

I posted back a few pages some cases of social media posters being arrested from around the world INCLUDING America, maybe instead of beating chests and claiming "a revolution will happen if that starts here", should try looking out the window 'cause it's happening right now on their own turf.

Also the "Nazi dog" malarkey happened because a local Scottish Jewish priest saw the vid on YouTube, and complained to the local police, so they investigated. If you want to look like a numpty on-line, maybe try not using Jewish genocide as a punch line when you live local to a synagogue??


Deny Ignorance…... This is the ATS motto after all.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy


Thanks for posting the link. Very funny and the Police are getting well and truly ripped. Free speech right in your faces right there, Yanks.

Mind you, all this right-on politically correct policing is a bit lame. "Hi Visibility Bike Patrols" - ie Hobby Bobbies on pushbikes. That'll teach those crims.

Haha no worries, more of the US members should actually read the thousands of comments from Brits on the police facebook page, it's hilarious! That was a red rag to a bull when a tiny village police unit basically say "Don't troll us or we'll arrest you" PMSL!! They opened the floodgates and have shamed themselves, comedy gold.

Here's the link to the fb page of the cops again for anyone who missed it, read the comments there before deciding if the police won that freedom of speech battle lol...

Backwoods 'Wakefield Rural' banjo land (like Deliverance movie) fb page

Worth pointing out there is major risk of these kinds of bans being put into place by the privatised police force the government are slowly rolling out from London as they have a financial incentive to do so while police have a financial and personell constraints that stop them being able to enforce the law.

Old landlord/mate is CID and predicted such a thing would happen a few years back (we spoke after the first police walkout of Tory conference) and saw a total replacement of police by private security shortly after if cuts continued (which they did). It's slowly happening with G4S taking over prisons, patrols, processing.

Private forces are legally bound to protect the interests of their shareholders over their duty to protect the public and preserve the peace. The government quietly hailed the trails in London as a major success just after the bankholiday weekend shooting and stabbings, maor violent cfrimes have skyrocketed in areas its used but they're pressing on claimming there's no shortage of police but there's a need for a private force. Makes no sense, unless plenty of bribes going on.

a reply to: bastion


Are there any plans for G4S to have any powers of arrest? I am not aware of any.

a reply to: oldcarpy

If they don't have constable status then expect fun and games because 'resisting arrest' and 'assaulting a police officer' are two offences which won't apply. I see carnage similar to fighting bouncers on a weekend. Nobody respects an SIA badge but most people still do actually respect the average decent constable.

I'd love to see an SIA badge try to tell me what to do in a public place, the council trialled civil compliance officers in my parts and abandoned it because of the abuse they got. Walking around with their thumbs in their stab vests like they were cops lol the community shunned them at best and abused them at worst.

People here respect our under resourced constables but snarl at SIA wannabes.
How it should be.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: bastion


Are there any plans for G4S to have any powers of arrest? I am not aware of any.

Not sure about G4S, the biggest contractor is TM-eye who've run them in the billionaire district of the UK and been awarded a half a billion national government contract as a result. Officers are ex-MET, GCHQ, Scotland Yard and NCA but they're not officially meant to have investigative powers/access to any non-public info. Their only power is citizens arrest but their major speciality is suprisingly major financial crime which requires a lot of extra-legal investigation (I support this move very strongly but can't agree with a private force having this ability in areas other than major fraud/money laundering//tax evasion).

www.mylocalbobby.co.uk...

They charge £200 a month for their service MyLocalBobby which is a phone app that tracks where they are live and gives you a direct line (instead of free 999/local/PACT meetings/PCSO drop ins/home chats) and they provide a meet and greet service at Tubes and Trains (what this has to do with policing, I have no idea).

Outside that all they can do is a citizens arrest, they have no powers. People can just walk away if they want, though somehow they managed to get a few convictons for serious crime (helping police in cases). They

It's essentially a £2400k a year useless phone app creating a two-tier police force. Millionaires would see increased heavy policing near where they live while all other areas have police numbers gutted as the policy rolls out. Common sense says it'd never happen as no government would allow lawlessness to take greater hold but every handling of privatisation by the last four governments has resulted in reduced service at much higher cost.

ETA: They do bodyguarding and loads of James Bond stuff too in a personal package -
Close protection
Executive car service
Manned guarding
Residential Security Team
Investigations
Technical counter surveillance measures
Priority support
Instagram, Facetime, Snapchat eith local police.

You can enter details and get a quote on the website. Pretty sure they're getting trolled as twitter account has been made private.


ETA: Question for people more legall versed in private prosecution payouts of financial crime, tax fraud, carousel fraud etc... if the prosecution is private doesn't the payout/repayment go to the private company rather than Treasury/intended recipient? Fuzzy on this stuff but if true would seem it'd rob the Treasury of billions it could have got/was owed.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: ScepticScot

It is an absolute right in the United States.

"Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech"

These enumerate our unalienable birth rights, and enshrine them in such a way as to specifically insulate them from government. So free speech is unlimited in the United States, but our government will prosecute you for certain exercises of free speech. Good luck trying to reconcile that prosecution with the First Amendment though

Yep, I'm a jonny-come-lately to this thread and completely agree with the above. It's been an ammusing to read posts by Americans getting het up on behalf of us Brits due to tabloid quality reporting on British laws - like no Americans ever get arrested or jailed for things they write online:

www.businessinsider.com...-tweeting-about-assassinating-the-president-2

Face it, both our countries have some dumb laws and questionable enforcement of them. Most of the Brit's (like Nazi Dog Boy) were arrested because they acted like Dicks. Don't be a Dick and you'll probably be fine - that works in the US as much as the UK.

What concerns me most on the topic of free speech is how far down the UK and USA are on the Reporters without Borders index. Neither are where you would think countries that champion free speech should be (The UK is only slightly ahead of the US and has fallen considerably). Both countries should be in the top 10, not in 40th and 45th positions - Canada & Austrailia are at 18 & 19 by comparison.

rsf.org...

The UK decent all round in terms of press freedom however we have by far the worst when it comes to major corporate crime and stories that matter (see use of super-injunctions by Trafigura killing thousands in the Ivory Coast but it was illegal to report, mention the super injunction existed and mention the company name or anything related to it). Super-injunctions spread to gossip like it being illegal to say Ryan Giggs was snorting coke and shagging hookers for years but perfectly legal on a US website or twitter.

There have been dozens of attempts to gag the press by calls for prior notification to be mandatory - this would mean newspapers would have to give public figures/companies/governments a heads up negative press about them will be published - which always results in legal threats to sue/make poublication illegal on spurious charges.

We have a backdoor privacy law and terrible libel/slander laws where the onus is on the defendant as they're viewed as guilty until proven innocent and have to prove they had reasonable. In general it's advised to use US servers to avoid multi-million pound CFA suits.

We have some messed up laws in the UK but the police ethics code on how to enforce the law is pretty excellent. Generally they're never enforced as harshly as the law states plus arrest in the UK is nowhere near as arrest in the US, it's just asking questions. In this case there was never any threat of arrest just facebook ban - which they rightly got mocked for as the public has the power to stop the police enforcing the law if its unpopular or unrealistic.

The nine principles were as follows:

To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.

To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.

To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.

To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.

To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.

To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.

To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary, of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.

To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.