Litter in MY neigborhood? I don’t think so, punk!

Police consider extra powers call

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) is consulting members on whether to seek the authority to punish people without going to court.

It has heard plans from one police chief for powers to ban teenagers from city centres and gangs from meeting up.

Civil rights group Liberty said that the suggestion was “a recipe for arbitrary justice”.

“When you do decide that someone’s been so criminal and behaved so badly and harmed other people that you need to punish them, that really is something that in a democracy belongs with the courts,” director Shami Chakrabati told BBC News.

Next up, summary executions!



  1. Frank IBC says:

    Police in many countries have the power to levy on-the-spot fines for traffic violations.

  2. Improbus says:

    If the cops start despensing roadside justice they are going to loose any moral authority they have and they will become targets.

  3. TJGeezer says:

    I thought summary executions were already an accepted tactic. Or is that just reserved for visiting electricians from Brazil?

  4. blastum says:

    Judge Dredd.

  5. Judge Dredd says:

    I AM THE LAW!

  6. Frank IBC says:

    Improbus –

    Police already “impose roadside justice” everytime they write a traffic ticket.

  7. Frank IBC says:

    These are the proposed punishment powers to be given to these police:

    -The power for police to deal with “town centre yobs” by excluding them for an “appropriate period” while they are given an informal warning or made to pay a fixed-penalty fine

    -Powers for a “neighbourhood constable” – armed with local knowledge – with the right to hand out a three-month ban on gang members causing disorder on estate from associating in public

    -The ability for police to seize and crush cars driven by those repeatedly driving without registration or insurance, no driving licence or MOT. Instant driving bans could also be imposed ahead of a court appearance

    -Knife crime could be targeted by giving police the ability to stop and search based on “reasonable suspicion” from previous convictions

    Apart from the proposal to “crush cars”, the rest of these proposals don’t seem particulary unreasonable. And they can be appealed to a court just like any other action by a police officer.

  8. Judge Dredd says:

    Frank, don’t be dense. You know exactly what I mean. How would you like to get pulled over for speeding and then get beating because the officer that you needed punishment.

  9. Improbus says:

    D’oh! I have been unmasked.

  10. Frank IBC says:

    Did you actually read the article, “Judge Dredd”?

  11. Improbus says:

    Yes, Frank, I read the article and all funny business aside putting judical powers in the hands of law enforcment is a BAD idea. Do you not care about due process? You should, with out due process you are living in a police state. You may be safer in such a place but your liberty will be dead.

  12. xrayspex says:

    Police already “impose roadside justice” everytime they write a traffic ticket.

    Not even close.

    When you recieve a traffic citation, you have been ACCUSED of a crime (or civil infraction, etc.) The “justice” part doesn’t come until you have either had your day in court, or choose to plead guilty by checking the appropriate box on a form and paying the fine.

    You’re thinking of “summary justice”, perhaps. I’m sure Limbaugh doesn’t see the difference either.

  13. Frank IBC says:

    So are you saying that police officers who write traffic tickets should not be able to levy a fine, and no points appear on a person’s driving record until a judge said so?

  14. Frank IBC says:

    My #13 was in response to #11.

  15. Improbus says:

    Frank, you are being deliberately dense. A traffic ticket IS NOT roadside justice. It IS a summons to appear in court, you know, before a judge.

  16. Improbus says:

    Frank, the short answer is yes.

  17. Gregory says:

    Frank – your point has been answered.

    Traffic Tickets are not Roadside justice.

  18. Frank IBC says:

    So should a police officer be able to impound the vehicle of a drunk driver, or not?

  19. Improbus says:

    Why not Frank? If you are arrested for drunk driving they are going to tow your car anyway. You know, there is a difference between a speeding ticket and a DUI. Why are you so quick to give the police all the power they want Frank? I don’t trust the cops any further than I can throw them.

  20. Mike Voice says:

    Seems like this would be tough to do in the US.

    Portland OR ran into problems with their attempts to “ban” people from certain downtown areas. Something about it is not illegal to be walking along a public street, or spending time in a public park.

    If they are committing a crime – arrest them & charge them.
    If they are not committing a crime – leave them alone.

    Reminds me of that “goddamn piece of paper” which blathers about things like “peaceably assemble” and other claptrap… 🙂

    The US is already having mixed results in “fighting” homeless people, panhandlers, etc:
    http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/crimreport/sources.html

  21. Frank IBC says:

    Why not Frank? If you are arrested for drunk driving they are going to tow your car anyway.

    What on earth is this supposed to mean? Who is “they”, other than the police who making the arrest?

    You know, there is a difference between a speeding ticket and a DUI.

    And you’re going to trust the police to make that kind of distinction? I’m impressed, Improbus. Maybe you have more confidence in the police than you’re willing to let on.

    Why are you so quick to give the police all the power they want Frank?

    I’m not, you’re just jumping to conclusions as usual. All I said is that I am OK with some, BUT NOT ALL of the proposal (which I summarized in #7).

  22. Improbus says:

    Frank, I think you just like to argue. By the way, I don’t trust the police to do anything but the police have guns and I have found that arguing with police officers is counter productive it can send you to a hospital if you aren’t careful. There is a difference between trusting (or respecting) the police and fearing the police.

  23. Frank IBC says:

    This is in England, Improbus. British police do not have guns.

  24. Improbus says:

    Then who killed that guy on the subway? MI*?

  25. joshua says:

    special tactic squads carry guns….everyday police (constables) don’t normally carry them.
    Menedez (sp) was shot by special tactics. The ones you see walking around with the automatic weapons at Heathrow are special tactics as well.

  26. Chris H says:

    Apart from the proposal to “crush cars”, the rest of these proposals don’t seem particularly unreasonable. And they can be appealed to a court just like any other action by a police officer.

    I think this is the only sensible proposal there (acutely it is law now).
    Driving is costly, why should people get of scot free when they endanger other peoples lives when driving without registration, insurance, no driving licence or MOT (all required). You are given a fixed number of days to produces evidence that you have this or the car gets crushed.

  27. Peter says:

    I cannot believe that of all people, you John, would be a hot linker… Bandwidth poaching is wrong. You should post images on your own server.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_linking

  28. Frank IBC says:

    Actually this was posted by Uncle Dave, Peter.

    (Yes, it took me a while to notice the different names in the “filed by” field, and John got a lot of misdirected rants from me. 🙂 )

  29. Frank IBC says:

    Not to mention some rants directed at Smartalix, when I didn’t even realize he was one of the hosts. 🙂

  30. Mark says:

    Police are armed in the certain areas, Nottingham some parts of East London. I don’t agree with any parts of the new legislation think we are stepping into dangerous grounds here.

    I mean wheres the justice for the Brazilian guy who was brutally executed and the brothers in East London in one case another innocent victim was shot for being an alledged terror suspect yeah right how repugnant “health and safety”. Any excuse to bring in more new powers what a joke.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 6831 access attempts in the last 7 days.