Theresa May accused live on TV of lying about numbers of police

[Earl Aelfheah]

Woman's hour debate really good. Emily Thornberry is very good.

[JohnL]

Sadiq Khan has commented on Police Numbers now.

I see a U turn coming.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/sadiq-khan-breaks-cover-after-10568339

[JohnL]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> steveo Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Seen this?

> >

> >

> https://twitter.com/Jamin2g/status/871812244014862

>

> > 336

>

> Jeez. Why on earth do they let her on TV?

It's rather sad but I think Corbyn's close to letting her go (to a more junior role).

Apparently she "doesn't go through the leaders office when booking TV appearances"

[Mark]

Expanding on JohnL's point above I thought, how much will it cost to watch those 'known to police'?

*gets back of a fag packet and writes down the low end estimate numbers*

2,000 on the watch list (an estimate given by the head of Met Police on the radio at the weekend)

Per individual, say, 10 police - 2 officers watching them for 24 hours means 3 lots on an 8 hour shift) + 1 support/control/backup = 7 police

7 police x 2,000 watchees = 14,000 x ?20,000 (basic police starting salary) = ?280 million per annum in wages.

And that's not taking into account the recruitment, training, equipment, detention etc

Conclusion: Watching and knowing an individual is easy for me to relate to therefore I initially thought it's cheap and easy however policing them is a complex kettle of fish which costs lots of money, at least ?280 million a year. Having said that, that new resource won't stop street robberies and city fraud which I should be more concerned about because they are more likely to affect me and those around me.

[Jules-and-Boo]

I don't think it means literally sitting outside their house/ following them 24hours every day.

[JohnL]

Can't "secret policemen" set up there own networks of "snitches"

or am I being a bit Sweeney Todd

[Mark]

Yes guv' it would be cheaper to pay people ?100,000 to inform on a terrorist. And wasn't Sweeney Todd the barber, ah I see, send the known people to the barber for a shave and, ahem, somehow they'll disappear and will no longer be of interest. Wink.

Jules-and-Boo, how else do you watch a known person if you don't literally keep an eye on them?

[Borky]

is a stasi like structure really the way forward ?

[JohnL]

I meant Regan and Carter (they used to have loads of 'contacts' in the underworld).

More seriously - there seems no point in keeping someone on a "watch" list if they aren't having some tabs kept on them.

You can see why Farage and Hopkins call for internment (and even Fox News disowned that idea)

[JohnL]

Borky Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> is a stasi like structure really the way forward ?

No - but I'm playing Devils Advocate a bit because there will be calls for that sort of thing (and internment).

We seem to have got it more or less right on terrorism to be honest - but I do think other crime needs more bodies.

(it seems to be forgotten we had another fatal stabbing in Peckham the other day)

[rendelharris]

Mark Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Expanding on JohnL's point above I thought, how

> much will it cost to watch those 'known to

> police'?

>

> *gets back of a fag packet and writes down the low

> end estimate numbers*

>

> 2,000 on the watch list (an estimate given by the

> head of Met Police on the radio at the weekend)

>

> Per individual, say, 10 police - 2 officers

> watching them for 24 hours means 3 lots on an 8

> hour shift) + 1 support/control/backup = 7 police

>

> 7 police x 2,000 watchees = 14,000 x ?20,000

> (basic police starting salary) = ?280 million per

> annum in wages.

>

> And that's not taking into account the

> recruitment, training, equipment, detention etc

>

> Conclusion: Watching and knowing an individual is

> easy for me to relate to therefore I initially

> thought it's cheap and easy however policing them

> is a complex kettle of fish which costs lots of

> money, at least ?280 million a year. Having said

> that, that new resource won't stop street

> robberies and city fraud which I should be more

> concerned about because they are more likely to

> affect me and those around me.

Well, from 2010-2015 17,000 police posts were cut, along with 15,877 support staff and 4,587 PCSOs - more than enough for your watch list requirements (which seems about right). There have been several "get your retaliation in early" posts above suggesting that anyone relating police cuts to these attacks is somehow having a go at the police or even in one case "being disrespectful." In terms of the police reaction at the time it couldn't have been better - an amazingly swift and effective job by highly skilled and courageous officers, doubtless saving dozens of lives. But notwithstanding what's been written above, it is relevant at least to investigate if the ability of the police to monitor and preemptively intervene in the case of known potential terrorists has been handicapped by the loss of manpower, both frontline and clerical. That's not disrespectful or sanctimonious, it's just common sense to ask if we have the resources to guard against these sort of attacks and if we don't (as many police officers are saying we don't) deciding what we're going to do about it.

[Lordship 516]

with internment you only create guerrilla academies which these type of people would love to have. Some prisons have this facility for extremists already & it is very difficult to interrupt this effect. The only effective method is to remove them from the UK entirely - revoke their right to stay in the UK & deport them to wherever they came from - if they weren't born in the UK. Pass emergency laws & temporarily derogate from the Human Rights conventions for particular purposes. If they have were born in the UK have them commit to a contract & relocate them in some secure manner.

Difficult problem but has to be approached with a robust solution - otherwise other Manchesters & London Bridges await us for the future.

[BrandNewGuy]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I meant Regan and Carter (they used to have loads

> of 'contacts' in the underworld).

And they met one of their snitches at DHFC's old Champion Hill ground...

 

[uncleglen]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> with internment you only create guerrilla

> academies which these type of people would love to

> have. Some prisons have this facility for

> extremists already & it is very difficult to

> interrupt this effect. The only effective method

> is to remove them from the UK entirely - revoke

> their right to stay in the UK & deport them to

> wherever they came from - if they weren't born in

> the UK. Pass emergency laws & temporarily

> derogate from the Human Rights conventions for

> particular purposes. If they have were born in the

> UK have them commit to a contract & relocate them

> in some secure manner.

>

> Difficult problem but has to be approached with a

> robust solution - otherwise other Manchesters &

> London Bridges await us for the future.

I would imagine ALL these solutions would have been considered, but you can bet your bottom dollar they would have ALL been rejected by the EU Laws.

[Jules-and-Boo]

well, there is that.

Protection of Human Rights.

[JohnL]

Theresa May on Liar Liar

"Well, I?ve heard bits of it and to be perfectly honest I?m not very happy about it. I don?t much like it, I don?t think anybody would when they heard a song about themselves like that."

Assuming she always lies this must logically mean she liked it.

[Lordship 516]

Not just EU laws but UN conventions & UK laws also.

The Human Rights of others have also to be considered - we all have the right to a reasonable secure life. Derogation from conventions can be made if a national emergency is declared. I think we have reached that stage.

All sectors of the greater community ought to subscribe to that so we can live in peace & security. Any foreigner who commits a crime against humanity ought to be automatically removed after a period of detention for their crime.

[steveo]

How about if everyone who isn't a Jihadi has to shave their beard off?

[Borky]

Internment of both Jihadis and Hipsters. Sounds good to me

[adonirum]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Can we be sure that the police are *always* being

> deployed sensibly? I sometimes see what I think is

> an OTT response to relatively small incidents (4

> vehicles, eight officers for an RTA, officers

> patrolling in threes) and wonder why this is the

> case. Would a national police force make better

> sense, or the amalgamation of certain forces to

> save resources? And, before I get shouted down, I

> acknowledge that all the services do very good

> jobs and should be applauded for their efforts and

> that I know people working in different police

> forces.)

Nigello, this has been mooted around time after time throughout the years, particularly looking at geographical amalgamations, such as Norfolk, Suffolk & Cambs becoming East Anglia, North, West & South Yorks becoming Yorkshire and so on and so forth. The last time around, it was proposed to reduce England and Wales down from 43 to between 12-15. These recurring ideas always get soundly rejected in the final analysis.

[Green Goose]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course even when talking about terrorism - this

> guy was known

>

> Why wasn't he watched

Our liberal democracy only allows us to lock up convicted offenders.

The police can be alerted about countless dangerous Jihadis but until one of them breaks the law then there is not much they can do. If its just a matter of having hate DVDs the they get a warning slap on the wrist.

The Liberals and Labour Luvvies have campaigned for years against strong measures on terrorists. Corbyn is a prime example of never blaming terrorism on the terrorists. He even got pally with them - from the IRA tho' to the PLO and a ragbag of other killers.

Blair and Brown allowed Abu Hamza to spread his poison outside Finsbury mosque for years and did nothing about it. Same with Choudry.

These recent incidents are just the very first indications of what is to come. Strong and decisive measures need to be taken NOW at the very first signs of potential trouble. Deportation, isolation and ultimately.......... You speculate.

When we get a car bomb every day and London, Manchester, B'ham etc start to look like Beirut, it will be too late.

[Winder]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course even when talking about terrorism - this

> guy was known

>

> Why wasn't he watched - resources of course.

>

[JohnL]

Theresa May has said she is going to rip up the human rights laws.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/theresa-may-terrorism-human-rights_uk_5936ec0be4b0099e7fafd14d?utm_hp_ref=uk

She's also put security back on the table in the Brexit negotiations.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/eu-security-brexit-article-50_uk_5936b9cce4b0cfcda917af2c?utm_hp_ref=uk

[JohnL]

Winder Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Of course even when talking about terrorism -

> this

> > guy was known

> >

> > Why wasn't he watched - resources of course.

> >

>

> OK, just tell us what resouces would you need to

> watch 3,000 known Jihadis on a 24/7 basis.

>

> Even if you did and three of them went out and

> rented a Renault van from Avis, what would you do?

> If you asked them waht they were doing, they would

> say they were moving furniture. They can also get

> kitchen knives anywhere. That is what they did.

>

> Doing what they did was easy to do and no ammount

> of "watching " could prevent it.

>

> Watching is as usefull as a chocolate tea pot.

>

> Think about it and kindly stop making cheap

> political shots out of a tragedy.

Theresa May will stop them going out apparently

?And we should do even more to restrict the freedom and the movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they present a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court. ?If our human rights laws stop us from doing it, we will change the laws so we can do it. If I am elected as Prime Minister on Thursday, I can tell you that this vital work begins on Friday.?

[JoeLeg]

The potential terrorists seem - so far - to have been neutralised - so far - insofar as their access to seriously killing equipment is concerned.

The Manchester murders stand out because the guy actually managed to make a bomb, and I wonder if it will emerge that he succeeded because he worked alone and didn't attract attention.

Most of the rest can't get hold of guns or bombs - so far. We know this because they haven't used them (you aren't going to employ a van and knives of you can get a shotgun). This suggests, to me, that the security services have the upper hand overall. I hope we will not see a car bomb, and to be honest I think that if they could've done that they would've by now. That doesn't mean they won't in the future.

Of course at some point one of them is going to get lucky. That's the problem, and I don't mean to diminish the recent tragedies, but if all they can do is survive 8 minutes and kill less than ten people, resulting in a further hardening of opinion against them, then I don't think they're generally very effective.

So what's my point as I ramble on? Simply that we can't watch them all, and we aren't going to stop them all. But they've gone from 9/11, Madrid, 7/7 and all the other attempts that have been shut down to hitting people with a van and trying to stab as many as possible before being shot. They're pathetic, they're losing.

I hope that neither myself nor my family are ever victims, indeed I hope none of you lot are. I hope no one else is in the future. But I'm also realistic enough to know that they don't stop trying, and we don't stop resisting them. Perhaps we share some of the blame for their rise, that's an argument academic and pub bores alike will never stop having, and not one I want to have now. As I said on another thread, we need intelligence, we need information, and we need to try and change the minds of those who haven't gone the whole way down the rabbit hole. As for the rest? Well, they made their choice. I don't want to see internment, or other extreme measures, because ultimately I think it's counter-productive; but I also am not about to second guess security services who think that killing someone is the only way to stop them.