Author |
Message |
timark_uk
Moderator
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm Posts: 12143 Location: Belfast
|
Independent ClickyHalle-bloody-lujah. Mark
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:45 am |
|
 |
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 7173
|
The ACPO have been reminding ordinary coppers about this for ages. I suppose they're that sick of the public backlash they're going to start coming down on this behaviour very hard.
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 9:56 am |
|
 |
timark_uk
Moderator
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:11 pm Posts: 12143 Location: Belfast
|
I know, but it's seemingly done no good. In fact I'd go as far to say it's gone in the reverse direction. There's been a few very high profile cases of professional photographer being stopped just recently. It really is about time that the S44 abuse was reigned in. Mark
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:13 am |
|
 |
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 7173
|
What really narks me about S.44 is that the public apparently have 'no right' to know where such areas are. If I ignore for the moment the ludicrous notion of people being subject to a law but somehow aren't allowed to know if it applies in their area, how are ordinary members of the public supposed to know if Police Officers are truly acting lawfully if they are using S.44 powers? If you don't know if the area is actually designated under S.44 or not, there is no way of knowing whether the PC is actually acting within his/her authority. I recently wrote to my MP about this, and the response I got from the Home Office is appalling. They had no problem whatsoever with being in position where people ware subject to a law but are not allowed to know where such draconian powers can actually legally be used.
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:23 am |
|
 |
belchingmatt
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 3:16 am Posts: 6146 Location: Middle Earth
|
I first read that as casual terrorist.
_________________ Dive like a fish, drink like a fish!
><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º> •.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
If one is diving so close to the limits that +/- 1% will make a difference then the error has already been made.
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 11:40 am |
|
 |
pcernie
Legend
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm Posts: 45931 Location: Belfast
|
 Very casual 
_________________Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:11 pm |
|
 |
JJW009
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:58 pm Posts: 8767 Location: behind the sofa
|
Ignorance is no defense in law. Sadly there seem to be many examples of laws which are immoral, inconsistent and even contradictory. Writing to your MP was the correct first course of action. If enough people do this, then the weight of public opinion becomes apparent. It's far more effective than voting in some poll.
_________________jonbwfc's law: "In any forum thread someone will, no matter what the subject, mention Firefly." When you're feeling too silly for x404, youRwired.net
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:55 pm |
|
 |
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 7173
|
Agreed - ordinarily - but taking it to the point where the public have no option but to be ignorant about the law is a step too far. You must then ask if that's fair and in the interests of justice.
|
Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:08 pm |
|
|