Skip to content or view screen version

FIT tactics to be extended to "problem estates"

Luther Blissett | 08.05.2008 09:04 | Culture | Repression

Jacqui Smith today urges police forces to adopt FIT harassment tactics against "anti-social" youths.

Following the example of Essex police, Jacqui Smith will today urge police to adopt tactics routinely used against protesters on "thugs" in "problem estates". As a new initiative to deal with "anti-social" behaviour, this relies not on conviction for crime, but on the harassment of young people who the police have identified as "troublemakers", regardless of their criminal record. This shows a level of authoritarianism unprecedented in Western Europe. The aim according to Smith, is to "create an environment where there is nowhere to hide" through relentless police harassment - filming, on the spot searches and so on. The implications of the police harassing people who have committed no crime for the role of the police in Britain is not part of the agenda.

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/may/08/police.ukcrime

Luther Blissett

Comments

Hide 2 hidden comments or hide all comments

Horrendous proposal

09.05.2008 03:30

What a horrendous proposal!

Firstly there are legal issues. Like what happened to the idea of 'innocence until proven guilty'? If this principle is thrown out, what will happen to our society. I believe we are already seeing the consequences of this trend, with the young losing all respect for their elders, and the elders losing all respect for _their_ young. Will the police be exempted from laws on harassment or will there just be a selective application of those laws (more hypocrisy)?

Social issues. As the article above asks - there will be consequences. People, especially the young copy their behaviour from their surroundings, peers, elders, those in authority. If neighbours and those in authority like the politicians such as Jacqui Smith & police are demanding harassment of those people they dislike then what do they expect will happen?

Moral issues - this would go against my beliefs to treat people in this way. If I was a policeman I would have to refuse orders to behave in this way, harassing innocent people, or anyone for that matter. Two 'wrongs' do not make a 'right'. If this is passed into law then my taxes will be spent on this harassment, just as they have been on killing innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq (and where is the bloody respect in that).

My question was going to be 'how long will it be until this is used against protesters?'. Just as ASBOs were, probably as intended when the law was introduced in the first place. That question has partly been answered by the above article, suggesting that harassment has already been used towards them.

Brian B
- Homepage: http://www.brianb.uklinux.net/antiwar-discuss/

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

reality check

10.05.2008 10:05

Just giving the proposal a quick think and I came up with this.

There are normally about 20 officers in an area nick, and there may be as many as 4+ estates on an area, without the use of a crystal ball then how else will they know who the local crooks are?

most criminal activity is committed by the same 1 - 5% of the population of an area (sorry but its a fact)

If they can find out who the regular crooks are, then they can deal with the problem with social services, housing associations, education, dss etc. (an arrest can lead to other agencies being alerted and can try and stop the core problem and hopefully lead to the person not needing to resort to crime)

I am no fan of FIT but in this case I think it can lead to an improvement in the general wellbeing of an area. Just as long as it is open to public scrutiny (maybe put the pics on a website for residents so that they are informed of who is the local burgler, say for 6 months?).






"knowledge is power, biased opinion is public masturbation"







Harry Purvis

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

"knowledge is power, biased opinion is public masturbation"

10.05.2008 10:13

So, Harry - if they're criminals why follow them around and harrass them? Why not arrest and charge them?

A charter for harrassing people that cops don't like, but who they can't FIT up in any other way.

Try thinking about it again - preferably somewhere else.

Halfzware Shag

Hide 2 hidden comments or hide all comments