MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
OK, sorry if I misunderstood.
Kryton,
No worries, I guess you glanced at my post and thought WTF? I feel the same was as you do, not just generally but specifically right now. More cash had the temmerity to ask me if I was angry, as if there's something wrong with being angry about racism. He also accused me of being preachy. Which made me more angry.
I know you've shared some personal information this last couple of months, things, that like me and some others on here, you haven't said before. I think that's kind of testament to the kind of silencing of debate and self censoring that has gone on for ages.
There's a perception out there that black people and those advocating for them are always moaning and blowing things out of proportion when you and I know the opposite is often the case. Our partners tell us only a fraction of what they experience and would be quite right to complain about even though we might have been with them for decades.
Apart from those instances where I have been present to witness for myself, when black friends have had negative encounters with the police they dont usually tell me. I often get to hear about these things from a mutual friend, who themselves may have had adverse experiences but haven't conveyed them to me.
This vicarious roundabout of conversation suggests to me that is a topic that is suppressed and people have been hesitant or scared to raise their voices.
Anyhow, back to the Important queestion. How old do you think ajaj is?
Anyone debating "ARE black folk more likely to get stopped by the police" needs a slap and some education
The debate should be "WHY are black folk more likely to be stopped by the police and what can be done about it"
How old do you think ajaj is?
We have a chance at a decent debate here, let's not derail things. I'm guessing ajaj is either uninformed or trolling. Hoping that it's the former as maybe he can learn from folk such as yourse;f and Kryton who have a deeper understanding.
The debate should be “WHY are black folk more likely to be stopped by the police and what can be done about it”
If this could take place with everyone free to air their thoughts, we may finally move forward.
#edited due to a pompous sounding response.
I think the odds of a black person in a Merc being stopped by the police are much less than 14 million to 1.
But still they’re BAME.
Sorry.
The car before my current one was a Cardiff registered car brand new one I got. In the 3 years and almost 50k I owned it for I was stopped exactly nil times.
With the rise in lease vehicles, I'd say it's highly likely most cars are "not from round here". My previous car was registered in Nottingham and I wasn't stopped at all in 3 yrs & 90k miles in Kent.
What shows up their duplicity is not the "input wrong number" but why they felt the need to input it in the first place. I wonder if anyone convicted on the strength of this particular officer's evidence can ask for a retrial as they can't read a number plate/record data accurately?
While this is not really core to the topic being discussed, there seem to be a lot of people saying that they have owned cars not registered where they live, but they have never been stopped.
Are we talking about the address on the V5, or the 2 letter designation on the number plate?
I would have thought when a set of plates were put through a system, the Police are not looking to see if the number plate designation is local to that area; but rather the V5 details that come back are local to that area?
Although having never owned a lease car - FB-ATB does the v5 for your car show your name address, or that of 'lease company'?
Probably number plate letters.
RX is near Reading but our campervan lives with us in Yorkshire
Stumpy - the lease company as they hold the V5
From the report I head yesterday on Dawn Butler they checked the address after they stopped but the excuse was the car was out of the area.
tjagain
There is no doubt at all from the stats tho that especially in london black folk get pulled much more often even tho the % of arrests is less than it is for white youth
I really do not believe its conscious bias in the main. Its unconscious in that multiple small effects build up to the bias
I agree with that - I think there's some overtly racist "bad apples", but a lot of it (for all of us, not just the police) is going on out of sight of our own minds.
There is no doubt at all from the stats tho that especially in london black folk get pulled much more often even tho the % of arrests is less than it is for white youth
One thing to bear in mind when talking about statistics - For stop and searches, which are generally under PACE or MODA, the ethnicity of the person searched is recorded. For vehicle stops, which are under the RTA, no ethnicity data is collected, so there are no stats for ethnicity and vehicle stops (like Dawn Butler’s one this week).
Also, a car registered from outside of the local area driving around at night is always worth a quick stop check, that’s a completely normal thing for a police officer to do.
This is total and utter bollocks and should be called out as such. Lease and PCP HP cars make up a sizeable proportion of the cars in the UK. The chances of them being 'registered locally' (I'd challenge if this is even a thing tbh) is extremely low. Given this seems to be a reason we're given from the police you'd expect white middle managers in leased Audis to be pulled over all the time.
except they're not. Because it's not the reason.
It's interesting how much of this thread has been taken up with discussions about the procedural aspects and rights and wrongs of stopping cars with out of town licence plates.
Interesting because it doesn't really relate to the video in question in the sense that Dawn Butler didn't film the initial encounter with the first officer. She said although she disagreed with him about the policy the officer himself was polite and respectful. She only began recording when a second officer came up and adopted an aggressive and insulting attitude, making up reasons for the stop including 'we couldn't see what's in the back of your car.
Yet here we are debating issues around number plates. It's almost as if sardines have been tossed into the sea and we are gobbling up false narratives like gullible seagulls.
Thats why its referred to as Systemic Inkster. Its so ingrained to find any other reason because injustice against black people is so mindlessly accepted due to a now unconciously aware racial bias.
Just in the thread people are trying very hard not to accept a black person was treated unfairly.
If its so hard to make racism so obvious, imagine what it must be like to live like as a recipient of this every day of your life.
Just in the thread people are trying very hard not to accept a black person was treated unfairly.
I suspect you (two) are wasting your time here now. That's a brick wall you're headbutting
I think most "people" are doing no such thing and I think it's important for us all to recognise that (very obviously true on here but even in the wider UK). I do also think that one or two here and a lot more elsewhere are trying to be either "clever" or disingenuous in regard to that same point.
(almost) Any one incident of a black driver/pedestrian being stopped is, effectively by definition, unable to demonstrate anything. Unless a copper comes over all "Constable Savage" on tape, we're all guessing at motivation for any single stop.
The fact that the weight of so, so many similar incidents adds up to an obvious inequity can be either missed, deliberately ignored or even attempted to be hidden (depending how much of a Yaxley-Lennon you may be) when referring to the one incident as "nothing".
The force involved in this case should front up and answer a series of new questions, like the legitimate points raised above. Otherwise they can't be seen to be non-racist and will pretty quickly lose what little public consent currently remains. If they had any sense they'd make their car-based teams submit a video of the preceding 5 minutes so the grounds for the stop can be reviewed by one of their managers if there's an issue raised (and maybe a sample of those where one isn't). They could/should say to the camera in advance "I'm stopping this one because ...."
Me (yes, middle aged middle class white bloke), I'm generally happy for police to apply their intuition/gut feeling in general circumstances - as long as it's done appropriately
I got pulled once on a motorway one evening years ago just after leaving a service station - I'd turned off just to look at my map and then went round the system "fast" to get back on the road. Was stopped as it looked a bit unusual/dodgy so he followed me out. It went fine; I told him what I'd been doing and went on my way after he'd told me a better way to get where I was going. If he'd have got arsey with me I'd have had no hesitation in being arsey right back, because I would have felt safe to do so (again, I was a young middle class white bloke). I have no doubt that a young black bloke might very well have had a different experience.
Just in the thread people are trying very hard not to accept a black person was treated unfairly.
No, a few are doing this not a majority. The rest are having conversations within the conversation about why it’s bollocks they stopped her as he car was out of town, which is supporting that she was stopped for being black.
ajaj was implying that our experiences were not of the real world and therefore invalid.
No I didn't. I pointed out that Police officers were asked to comment on the thread, and when one did they were treated very rudely.
I also used an example to show why you can't draw statistical inferences from single, or a handful, of events. Both Drac and TJ will likely have done the "quality of evidence pyramid" in their training, and anyone with a post-graduate degree will have covered something similar. For what it's worth, very little, my ex was Ghanaian and we were never stopped by the police but I have been with white partners.
real world experience
I lived in Handsworth during the early 1990s. I would very much rather we have a considered, evidence based debate so that doesn't happen again.
No, a few are doing this not a majority. The rest are having conversations within the conversation about why it’s bollocks they stopped her as he car was out of town, which is supporting that she was stopped for being black.
Yet this is a classic example of denial. First, I didn’t use or imply the word “majority”. Secondly, the very conversations you point out quite correctly in their nature are in no way focused on the basis that the victim could have been right.
There is most certainly a minority in this thread that are prepared to consciously entertain that Dawn Butler was treated unfairly because of the colour of her skin. As I mentioned, others are finding reason to put that fact to one side and focus on the action, rather than the cause. I appreciate it supports the cause, but it’s a subconscious bias that’s removing the focal point away from race.
Edit; TDLR, it’s naive to think Dawn Butler was pulled over based on anything other than a racial profile, and to continually search for other reasons to justify the event is to deny the issue.
TDLR, it’s naive to think Dawn Butler was pulled over based on anything other than a racial profile, and to continually search for other reasons to justify the event is to deny the issue.
I'm sure that's the point most of us are trying to make by pointing out the "out of town" number plate thing as clearly bollocks, maybe some of us are articulating it better than others.
I think its pretty obvious that Dawn Butler's interaction with the Police went differently just because of the colour of her skin.
The "Driving While Black" issue has long been highlighted in the USA. In the UK we have a tendency to pretend these issues don't exist and downplay them just because they are clearly worse in the US. The fact that this goes on in the UK needs to be highlighted too, and while its disappointing that it happens at all, at least its now beginning to be addressed and recognised as an issue.
As I mentioned, others are finding reason to put that fact to one side and focus on the action, rather than the cause. I appreciate it supports the cause, but it’s a subconscious bias that’s removing the focal point away from race.
@Kryton57 I don't think you're right at all. Read my comment a few posts ago, do you think that's implicit in what I've written?
If you do then you are mistaken.
It's a fact that black people do get stopped and searched/pulled over in vastly disproportional numbers. Pretty disappointing to see police officers try to deny/downplay/justify this.
Nobody is saying all police are racist we are saying everyone is affected by bias whether conscious or not, and we need to be extremely careful about that. Yes I'm sure police need to be able to use instinct but they also need to be aware that their instincts will tend to skew towards seeing people who look like them more positively.
I lived in Handsworth during the early 1990s. I would very much rather we have a considered, evidence based debate so that doesn’t happen again.
How is a considered debate going to stop you living in Handsworth again? 😛
@pictonroad don't take it personally, I haven't singled you out. Read through the thread and have a think about the generic context and try really hard to imagine that you aren't white - you still won't get that and neither will I - when you do so.
The Actor Lenny James - almost in tears - summed it up quite nicely in a recent program called "The Talk" (channel 4) which was about Black parent explaining to their children Racial facts of life in the same way white folk might consider "The Talk" to be the chat about sexual issues - did you even know that happened? Anyway, not the exact words but he stated;
After living in Dominique for two months surround by people of the same colour, attributes, mannerisms, background and traditions of his forebears and him, he got on the Virgin plane back to London and as he did so, he could feel his body "tense". It took him a few moments of awareness to realise that this was a psychological reaction to returning to a place he's previously called home and felt comfortable in. It was a state of being he hadn't realised he'd lived in for 40 years until that point. He now describes as as a "shield"; an expectation of a defence needed in the UK as a natural part of being Black in the UK environment. In that moment of awareness, he sat on the plane and cried.
I'd urge people to seek that moment of TV interview out, its very powerful and educational.
I imagined numbers were collected by APNR so there shouldn't be any mistakes dialling a number in. My motor (was) always miles from home, that's what cars are for, and I never got pulled over.
Edit; TDLR, it’s naive to think Dawn Butler was pulled over based on anything other than a racial profile, and to continually search for other reasons to justify the event is to deny the issue.
+1
And the Mets latest poor excuse:
He said in a statement: "The stop of a car in which Dawn Butler MP was travelling by Met officers on Sunday has prompted a lot of debate and it is important that the facts are fully understood."
Sir Steve said they were part of the Met's violent crime task force and that "criminals often use vehicles to travel in and to commit crime", so "officers will often check cars to see if there is anything that requires them to stop it and do further checks".
He said they could not see who was inside the car because the windows were tinted.
One of the officers made "a human error as he inputted the car registration" into the police database, which meant it falsely brought up details of a vehicle in Yorkshire, he said.
What utter bullshit, a justified stop because "criminals use cars" and we're expected to believe every police officer has memorised every criminal therefore the fact the cars windows were tinted causing a lack of recognition raises suspicion because they can't not see this:
They don't do themselves any favours do they? Some police union rep (?) talking sh1te on the radio just now ..
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1293231874043719682
Plods stop a car cos it's from Yorkshire (it's not) and say the windows are illegal (they're not). Good work, guys!
DrJ,
You took the words right out of my fingers, I saw this and was just about to type it up on here.
The reason I started the thread was that the first I knew of the whole incident was seeing a talk radio host put the boot in first. The oft repeated bullet point of his show was that Butler was 'gagging' for it, eagerly salivating at the opportunity to get stopped and whip her phone camera out. His not so subtle narrative was that she was stopped because she 'wanted' to get stopped, she was 'asking for it'. The police were the victims.
Now we have the Met Police Federation Chairman doing his best Bob Kroll impression. The message doubled down on this podcast is that Dawn Butler is 'rude and belligerent.' Some of you know that this is a trope constantly applied to Black Women who dare have an opinion. My partner and her sisters have made me aware that in the workplace they have to be very carefull when voicing and opinion or making a criticism. There's a box with 'Angry Black Woman' written on it and the lid is always open.
He just single-handedly proved the police are still institutionally racist.
Guessing he will be up for promotion
This is total and utter bollocks and should be called out as such. Lease and PCP HP cars make up a sizeable proportion of the cars in the UK. The chances of them being ‘registered locally’ (I’d challenge if this is even a thing tbh) is extremely low. Given this seems to be a reason we’re given from the police you’d expect white middle managers in leased Audis to be pulled over all the time.except they’re not. Because it’s not the reason.
I think people may be mixing up where a car is originally registered (when bought)
With what the police will actually be looking at, which is where the Insurance is registered.
Lease cars, number plate prefixes and cars people bought in a different area From where they live don’t factor into it.
It’s still a crap excuse for a stop though.
Why would anyone think the met isn’t institutionally racist anymore? What has changed to make you think that?
I’m waiting for an enquiry into Sheku Bayot’s death to see if the same verdict is reached on Police Scotland.
The old bill do need a bit of an overhaul for the 21st century.
Saw the vid and thought Cop 1 and Dawn Butler came out of it OK. Cop 2 on the other hand is definitely part of the problem. Cop 1 was doing his best not to escalate and back pedalling whilst Cop 2 got stuck in.
The pathetic excuses and "rude and belligerent" from the hierarchy is confirmation of Institutional racism.
Why would anyone think the met isn’t institutionally racist anymore? What has changed to make you think that?
Well I was being kinda flippant but they have recently (unconvincingly) claimed exactly that.
As I mentioned, others are finding reason to put that fact to one side and focus on the action, rather than the cause. I appreciate it supports the cause, but it’s a subconscious bias that’s removing the focal point away from race.
No, a minority are the rest are arguing why that the number plate excuse was flawed as it happened after the stop not before and that many of Drive or have driven cars with plates outside the region with not once being stopped. We are agreeing that she was probably stopped based on racial profile. I’m not sure how you’re seeing that as the opposite.
If Cressida Dick's response has been un-convincing, the police federation chairman's response is damming. And stupid. I'm surprised the police can't see the negative effect that the police unions are having in the US. Every time they make a contribution to the debate the police gets a little more defunded.
The Police Federation are the 'voice' of ordinary police officers, by going public like that he is letting down his own officers. By choosing to publicly defend on officer No.2 on a very right wing platform he is letting down officer No.1 Actions like these can only make it more difficult for good police to speak out.
I appreciate the contributions from members of police in this thread but what they haven't alluded to is the divisions and cliques within the police which I'm sure must exist. I mentioned earlier about the 2 people who joined the police from my 6th form, one a good mate of mine at the time, the other an uber racist. Well I met them both at a wedding a decade later. Any thoughts that the racist knob had grown up a bit were quickly dispelled. He never passed up an opportunity to make a disgustingly racist and violent remark and where there wasn't an opportunity he'd pitch in anyhow. The racist cop, (officer No.2 I shall call him) was a high flyer, after going to university he had been fast tracked to detective level. My mate was still at PC level.
This all played out as we were sat in a large group was that my friend totally disengaged from the other officer. He wouldn't even make eye contact with 'officer No.2'. It made me wonder if this is what it is like in the police canteen, separate cliques, with the bullies in the ascendancy. I could see both how difficult it would have been for him to speak out at work and that to get ahead in the police you might have to be in the right clique, you had to be one of 'the lads'. Nudge, nudge. Wink wink.
I sometimes wonder if either of them are still in the police now. My guess would be that for police officer No.1 the answer would be no but for officer No.2 probably yes and perhaps he had been promoted much further up the ladder. My mate was a good guy, he wanted to join the police to make a difference. I imagine there are many like him still in the police but I can see how the comments from the poloce commisioner and federation chairman would effectively silence them, a kind of cancel culture within the ranks.
I've got a loose friend who's a copper.
He's very quick to jump on people's posts of Facebook about BLM defending police actions and denying racism.
He seems to completely forget that his entire pub chat comedic repertoire about 2 years ago consisted of racist jokes. Not now, funnily enough.
I've not forgotten.
I agree that focusing the discussion on the reasons for this particular stop follows an established pattern of insisting on examining each tree in isolation, but refusing to acknowledge the forest.
However, the police seem to be denying any racial bias in this instance, by offering another explanation for the stop. So what is that explanation?
Mutter mutter wrong area, mutter mutter tinted windows, mutter mutter data entry error......
Yeah, Nah. It looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck - you want us to believe it's anything other than a duck, you'd better come up with a better explanation than that.
Whats also telling is that, given the weakness of the alternative explanation, they are actually publishing it! Why didn't somebody in-the-loop with a modicum of integrity/media awareness, just say: "hang on, that's clearly bullshit. Why don't we actually look at the circumstances surrounding this stop, and hold our hands up if it does look like there was a racial element".
'criminals use cars and they were in a car, so....' really is next level BS
Criminals also use shoes to walk around...
Lots of armchair experts on this thread, aren’t there?
I’ll rise to the bait and let you know why lots of Police Officers haven’t replied to this - and it’s probably because they can’t be bothered to get into an argument that won’t possibly lead anywhere constructive. We get enough argument and conflict at work (both with the public and our own ‘management’) to have any interest in doing so on this forum, seem by many as a place of escape and relaxation.
I for one am fed up with the Job that we (used to) love and cherish, and have sacrificed so much time, effort, blood and sweat to, being eroded by some obscure agenda by the main stream media. Morale is at an all-time low, budgets and resource levels are rock bottom, we get vilified everywhere whatever we do, and yet we still get on with it, helping those in need, saving lives and trying desperately to win a losing battle against criminality, all the while being hobnailed by the public, the government and the Courts.
I for one am fed up with the Job that we (used to) love and cherish, and have sacrificed so much time, effort, blood and sweat to, being eroded by some obscure agenda by the main stream media.
Yup, it ain't the good old days anymore. If I were you I would quit.
some obscure agenda
There's your issue, so you feel Racism is seen as an obscure agenda in the Force? Wow.
Morale is at an all-time low, budgets and resource levels are rock bottom, we get vilified everywhere whatever we do, and yet we still get on with it, helping those in need, saving lives and trying desperately to win a losing battle against criminality, all the while being hobnailed by the public, the government and the Courts.
There's a lot of people that value what you - and the other Services do - I suspect more than don't, easily. Unfortunately - and this is for another thread - you know full well how the media works in this country. Yeah its painful, and if its not you it'll be Nurses, Government officials, Doctors, Minister's and so on. We all get a battering from life from time to time, but in the main we adjust to an honest agenda. To date there's been no reaction from the Met or otherwise to change based on the current issues other than a bit of ill educated moaning on on Radio & TV.
Other problems are other problems and believe me we'd support you in extra funding, training, kit, whatever because you help us incredibly, but to jump on a thread and suggest Racism or racial bias is an "obscure agenda" doesn't help people - especially people of colour - to be very empathetic. You also need to acknowledge that although police activity is the focus in this thread, systemic racism is recognise as being much wider than you. But you are an authority in our society, with a responsibility to that as an issue in a society which is very much multi cultural.
Yes lets all remember that the real victims here are the police, not the people they harass on a regular basis because of the colour of their skin.
Ok Siwhite, why did you mock Diane Abbott, a black MP with diabetes for wearing two left shoes? Wearing two left shoes for confort seems perfectly reasonable to me if someone has a physical disability due to illness.
siwhite
SubscriberExcellent news to wake up to. Perhaps we can now leave the EU (there was a referendum, remember) and devote some parliamentary time to dealing with other matters that have been neglected over the last four years.
The only disappointment was that the Abbotasaurus is still an MP. Would anyone here give someone a job if they turned up to an interview with two left shoes on?
Also, time for Comrade Corbyn to resign – albeit about two years too late.
Posted 8 months ago
Reply | Report
Siwhite.
Are you sitting comfortably?
Starting with the armchair expert reference, youre invalidating not only other people's opinions but their experiences too. You're saying to people what happened to them or what they saw or experienced either didn't happen or doesn't matter.
I'll counter 'an argument that possibly won't lead anywhere constructive' with: 'a conversation that possibly will lead somewhere constructive.'
When you say 'obscure agenda by the mainstream media' not only is that incredibly dismissive of the issue of racism as a whole, you are knowingly and willingly trotting out a Trump line, (Trump being the poster boy for 21st Century racism). Meanwhile, fringe media (talk radio etc) and social media have been following a much less obscure agenda. One of naked, hostile racism and for the last few years fringe and social media have arguably had a greater impact on society than mainstream media.
You chose to do a job that gives you absolute power over any member of the public, up to and including elected members of parliament. If you can't hack the responsibility then maybe it's not the job for you, though I see that you have considered that possibility.
Sorry to be so forensic with my review of your post but that's all many of us one here are asking the police to do and police comissioners going public with a scatter gun full of what look like made up excuses is anything but forensic. And the police federation chairman, who represents officers in the field (like you) is hardly helping things by going on the most inflammatory media platform available to blame the victim and stir up more bile.
some obscure agenda
...being Police bashing at every opportunity (including this, it seems) and not racism. Hope that clears things up?
…being Police bashing at every opportunity (including this, it seems) and not racism. Hope that clears things up?
It seems to me that the police-bashing in this thread is because of racism. I suppose one could use the former as an excuse to not address the latter...
I don't think this thread is full on police bashing but there is certainly an element of this.
Some constabularies have been recognised as being institutionally racist, some police officers are racist. Not all police officers are racist just like not all of the public are racist.
Some of the comments in this thread, on both sides, are very loaded and there seems to little room for dialogue.
It's very easy to point fingers and identify problems. It's much harder to come up with solutions. So why don't you guys with the very strong views try to work together rather than pointing fingers?
ElShamino,
This is the first thread in relation to recent events that police members have contributed to so in that sense at least a dialogue has started. And whilst I take issue with much of what those officers have said I don't see them as deliberately trolling. I see their contributions as valuable.
I'm not going to comment on how I value the contributions of the Police, the military, the NHS etc. I would have thought that these things were a given. There's a post cold war, post Diana sentimentalism that's crept in to Western Society which has morphed into a kind of fascism. Talk about virtue signalling.
I wondered if I'd gone in too hard with siwhite, but looking back I only responded directly to his comments, I didn't indulge in any whataboutery or wild accusations. Yesterday I was talking about how difficult it must be for good police to speak out and cited reasons why I thought that might be the case.
I'd like siwhite to reflect on his comments from a few months back. Whilst we can't defend Diane Abbot from her own ineptitude we can defend her from abuse. You might think it fair that if it's ok to use the word 'gammon' to describe an old white reactionary then it's ok to refer to a black woman as an 'Abbotasaurus.'
Freedom of speech and all that but you should be aware that you're contributing to one of the largest tsunamis of hate that any public figure has endured. There is a history of refering to black people as animals that has a particular connotation. Intentions and outcomes, you might not have intended to be racist, but every little helps.
You could apologise for that comment. I apologised earlier for making a gender assumption with regards policemen / officers. I feel a little better for it and have found myself double checking every time I use the assignation. I'm making progress. An appology for your past remarks might do the same for you. I take your point that you were reffering to a police bashing agenda rather than racism as a whole, just as you took it that your comment could be misunderstood, so made a correction.
ElShalimo
MemberSome constabularies have been recognised as being institutionally racist, some police officers are racist. Not all police officers are racist just like not all of the public are racist.
Of course not, nobody except from idiots ever says they are. But there's more than enough racists, and enough non-racists prepared to turn a blind eye to racists, to be a major problem. (and as sometimes gets overlooked, if a non-racist officer is willing to overlook a fellow officer's racism, what else will they overlook? It's a nasty thin end of a wedge, that.
"Not all police officers are racist" isn't much of a win really.
[ edit: someone crossed the streams... I replied to something copied from another thread, further derailing this one... I've removed my post. ]
Anyone else concerned that Dawn Butlers involvement in this will start or continue or reinforce the identification of the BLM movement along party political lines?
For me, this is something that should transcend our usual grubby politics; be seen as something more important, more far reaching. If BLM = Labour, I think we lose some of that, I think it will be soaked up and diluted and that translated into activism will mean that BLM becomes another placard to carry at Labour marches rather than a separate thing.
I appreciate that she is involved because this happened to her and therefore her interest is personal as well as political, but sometimes personal is not the same as important.
Anyone else concerned that Dawn Butlers involvement in this will start or continue or reinforce the identification of the BLM movement along party political lines?
It always was. I can't see any right wing politics showing much interest in it or taking any actions to improve things.
I think it's always been political, and largely along a left/right or progressive/conservative line. Racism itself doesn't split as cleanly but wanting to do something about racism largely does these days. Even totally unracist conservatives still are more inclined to oppose social change, be "tough on crime", believe that everyone has opportunities etc. (and even totally racist leftwingers are probably more inclined to support the sort of changes in education, poverty, law etc that by their nature also help to reduce some of the impacts and divides of racism)
I have driven all over the country in various (nice) company cars day and night. Rural and urban areas. I have never been stopped. Maybe if i wasn’t white this would be different?
The driver in this case was white and he got stopped. (Dawn Butler was the passenger, not the driver).
The driver in this case was white and he got stopped.
Source please.
The driver in this case was white
Not according to Dawn Butler.
Source please.
Fair question but I'm afraid I can't provide one, so Hitchen's law applies. (I've viewed a few clips, the phone pans round and you can see the driver - his face is pixeled out but appears white to me.)
Not according to Dawn Butler.
I've just googled and I can't find anywhere where she claims the driver was black.
Sir Steve House has been quoted and paraphrased: "He also condemned abuse directed towards Ms Butler, including conspiracy theories suggesting the driver of the car was white, after the footage was shared."
If BLM = Labour, I think we lose some of that, I think it will be soaked up and diluted and that translated into activism will mean that BLM becomes another placard to carry at Labour marches rather than a separate thing.
The suggestion/claim in this article is that the BAME members are not happy with Starmer.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/aug/13/hierarchy-of-racism-fears-threaten-starmers-hopes-of-labour-unity
Hmm... looking into this led me to reading an article on Spiked. I knew they'd ramped things up, but it's full on alt-right extremism now, isn't it. The legacy of Living Marxism really is just controversy stirring for hard cash (and perhaps a place in the house of lords). I forget that we're as now as bad as the USA. Spiked, Academy of Ideas etc are all just Info Wars style grifting... rewarded by political patronage. To think they once claimed to be Marxists, just for the grift as well. Depressing.
So the copper put in one digit on the number plate wrong and somehow miraculously that number came back to the same make, model and colour car but from Yorkshire. Or did the copper bury the lead?
I appreciate that she is involved because this happened to her and therefore her interest is personal as well as political, but sometimes personal is not the same as important
So, are you saying that Ms Butler's interest is not important? Or her involvement is not important? So the involvement of a black woman who has been stopped with no good reason multiple times, being in a car driven by a friend who has been stopped many more times than herself, is not important?
I would say the involvement of a rather high-profile black woman is pretty important.
As ever, it's always good to see the racists out themselves on these threads!
Fairly depressing to think that these types of people have such power over us though ☹️
I am suggesting that the involvement of Dawn Butler may continue to define BLM as a party political issue rather than something which should be bigger than party politics.
Of course it's important.
Of course it's personal.
Elsewhere on the web her political status is being used to discredit her and by extension, the story.
I don't know if she can be separated from her political status in this instance, but I don't want this to be a Labour thing because it should be a people thing.
I don't know how this can be avoided, I don't know if it should be...
Rather than throwing mud at those who serve let's step back
What is currently happening isn't working for the communities and is separating the police from them which means it is not working for them either.
Policing of these communities in London and other inner cities needs to be tested against the Peel principles. Policing by consent needs the community to support it
The heavy lifting isn't just for the police, communities need to engage. It's important that the community realise that there are people who act criminally, who are very dangerous, and that need to be put through the criminal justice system. The flip side is that policing needs to engage carefully and understand what works and what doesn't, it may not be captured on the spreadsheet.
It will take a lot of money, leadership, time and effort. Quite a lot is probably done now or in the past, what is needed is to step that up into much larger effort to reset relationships and change behaviours
I hope the serving officers on here stay safe whilst keeping us safe. I hope they think about what is happening and try to do their bit to make things better. Dealing with the nasty end of society can lead to a fatigue, we need to recognise that sometimes that requires a reset.
The heavy lifting isn’t just for the police, communities need to engage.
On the subject of racism in the police, this looks awfully close to victim blaming.
People would have a lot more sympathy for the police if we didn't continually see this 'protect your own' mentality where people make crap excuses for stuff that shouldn't be happening.
The fact is that black people are disproportionately stopped and searched, more likely to get charged for drug offences, receive longer sentences for the same crimes etc. We need some honesty about that as a starting point.
By extension, the anti-racism work shouldn't be left to the BAME communities.
Having read the Peel principles, it's pretty hard not to see that there have been many instances where they have certainly not been upheld.
For examle, no.6:
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">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.</span>
The video of Wretcn 32's 61 year old father getting tasered with pretty much no warning. Let alone persuasion or advice. Just screaming orders. Tasering a race relations group leader in the face, a 63 year old, does not really meet the minimum degree of physical force, does it?
And no.2;
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.
When instances like Ms Butler's occur so often, how can the community that is disproportionately affected by policing strategies give their approval?
Hearing officers say that it is normal to pull people for almost no reason does not make me more respectful of the police. The pretty much constant, instant, defending of officers actions in many of these situations, is also something that diminishes trust. It gives the impression of closing rank. The use of software to determine the criminal speciality of particular ethnicities, doesn't really help, either.
If you don't want to be seen to be racist, don't do racist things. And if you want to earn the trust and respect of communities, don't target them and wonder why that trust and respect don't exist.
It will take a lot of money, leadership, time and effort.
Exactly. Shame we've had 10 years of cutting police and local authority budgets. That needs to be reversed - I know this isn't a great time to do so what with Covid and all but unless we want prisons to be a major part of our economy like the USA we need to act.
Political disclosure: voted Conservative until 1997, voted Lib Dem since.
So the copper put in one digit on the number plate wrong
So how long can you drive round that there London without passing an NPR installation?
The system was obviously not putting out an alert if the registration insurance MOT(?) were all valid so was the wrong registration input before or after the stop?
One of the reasons we/I don't have any trust in the police is because of their inclination to make their actions fit the circumstances and often with the collusion of msm and the Sun.
I am rather enjoying seeing their current 'its not fair poor us' situation. Had it been another unarmed shooting this would all have been cleared up and moved on 'nothing to see here' but it was low key and below the radar and suddenly it is mainstream.
I understand that the Police have been beleaguered for a decade now, being stripped of resources, being asked to fullfil roles that should be the responsibillity of social services and other agencies and at constant odds with the Conservative government. I can see that they must feel they are in a constant state of crisis management.
However, in having to juggle all this they have dropped a ball. Whatever progress the Police feel they have made with regards race over the years, they now have to recognise that that progress has stopped. Gone backwards even.
The Police now look as out of touch as they did in the early 80's, although this time they don't have the unswerving support of the Government that they had under Thatcher. Thatcher made a deal with the Police, she politicised them with regards the miners strike etc and supported them publicly and financially but in return she demanded they conformed to due process, she introduced the recording of all interviews, thus putting an end to 'verbals', where in court a police officers word would be taken as gospel, as hard evidence. Thatcher's insistence on recorded evidence was probably the single most effective meaaure ever taken in tackling Police corruption.
This time Police are on their own, they don't have proper funding or even moral support (save the odd platitude) from the Government and they're losing the support of ever wider sections of the public with every bit of their public messaging. Part of the reason the Police are embarrassing themselves in the media by throwing out a smorgasbord of excuses and whataboutery is because the Gov't isn't even covering for them. They're being thrown to the wolves like poor little lambs, all this conflict is a great distraction and cover for the Goverments other nefarious actions.
So a reset is definitely needed but God knows where it's going to come from.
crikey
MemberI am suggesting that the involvement of Dawn Butler may continue to define BLM as a party political issue rather than something which should be bigger than party politics.
I sort of almost said this earlier but didn't actually manage to get to the conclusion, so...
The only thing that can stop anti-racism being a party political thing, is to have the racist parties stop being racist, not to have the anti-racist parties worry about being anti-racist. I get where you're coming from but this isn't a thing to handwring over, or be moderate about, this is a line to draw.
"The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal..."
The other thing is, it's not a Black Lives Matter thing at all. It's a common or garden racism thing, same as has been happening for generations before anyone ever said "But surely all lives matter?"
Yes.
I'm struggling to properly articulate what I mean, partly because the debate especially here doesn't lend itself towards ...the free-er explanation of things without automatically being accused of racism.
I think I'm thinking along the lines of BLM/antiracism having to become a bit like drunk driving or seatbelts or some other social thing; it needs to become part of us, part of our psyche, an unacceptable thing in general terms rather than in party political terms.
If it gets aligned with party politics then it becomes easy to ignore by that part of the population who don't align with the party politics that it becomes aligned with...
I think it becomes easy to 'protest' for this week, or this month. It's not easy to carry that forward for a year or a couple of years or forever, Amen.
There are lessons to be learned from Brexit, from the current Tory party, from Dominic Cummings et al; I'm sure that giving Rupert Murdoch a million pounds in return for a BLM or antiracist campaign would do more than any number of earnest speeches or heartfelt protests, but does the end justify those means?
The battleground of protest and social change has moved and I think that the 'game' needs to move accordingly. Protest in itself is all well and good, but we need to move beyond placards and committees and strident and heartfelt comments on forums...
Fair question but I’m afraid I can’t provide one, so Hitchen’s law applies. (I’ve viewed a few clips, the phone pans round and you can see the driver – his face is pixeled out but appears white to me.)
Not according to the police themselves.
On the subject of racism in the police, this looks awfully close to victim blaming.
Really?
Getting communities to work with the police to reset their relationship from both sides is victim blaming.
To police by consent successfully with the emphasis on one side to do all the work is a recipe for failure, the police alone will be unable to see the changes required. At the same time more resources are needed, more political support to change, more BAME people need to join the police, either as specials or for their career etc.
If the issue is tackled on multiple fronts and investment and leadership follows change will happen.
With regards the politicisation of BLM, the Tories own this from Windrush to Brexit. Add to that Boris doing his best Enoch Powell impersonation by tweeting about Winston Churchill 10 times on the day of the London march. He was trying to stir it up as much as he possibly could.
Labour has in general been pretty clueless about how to respond. In many ways Starmer mimics Corbyn in that it seems that he's got to wait for party conference or a round of committee meetings to have a debate about what official Labour 'Policy' should be. As I mentioned on another thread, events seem to pass Starmer by. Just respond as a human being FFS.
BLM as a movement is much too agile for Starmer and the Labour hierarchies. By the time the party finds a 'position on the issue the debate will have progressed beyond whatever statement comes out from the leadership.
I'm ok with that, not expecting the Labour Party to deliver for BLM. Changes will come from the cultural sector and the business sector, they always have. The most effective strategy that BLM can employ is to make racism bad for business. The biggest changes we've seen so far have been related to sport, where business and culture collide. Sport has been pushed towards a zero tolerance approach and has had to respond. To not do so would be bad for business.
We've seen a lot of businesses proclaim their support for BLM and even if you think they're being cynical or disingenuous their motive is clear, they want to protect their business and they recognise that racism is bad for their business.
To police by consent successfully with the emphasis on one side to do all the work is a recipe for failure, the police alone will be unable to see the changes required
So the police can't help being racist because their victims aren't holding their hands. Riiight.
Doesn't help when head of Met doesn't really get it.
The Met apparently "doesn't tolerate racists" - actions greater than words needed on that one.