Police "stop and search" powers
suslaws | 14.11.2003 01:49
Sorting the facts and justifications from the myths
With the debate about race and policing re-ignited recently by the 10th anniversary of the murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence by an alleged gang of racists, it is of vital importance that the public is given the truth about the subjects being debated. One of the hottest topics in the debate on race and policing is the use of police stop and search powers, and the fact that blacks are more likely to be stopped and searched than whites in many areas.
One thing this article will not be is a big debate about the murder of Stephen Lawrence. But just to get it into perspective, many young men of the same age as Stephen Lawrence have been attacked or even murdered by racists, they happened to be white and the attackers black. Not one of them has had a memorial built for them guarded 24 hours a day by CCTV. In fact, barely any have made it onto the national news. No racist attacks are justifiable, they are yet another unfortunate side-effect of the multiracial society.
The liberal-left media have been whinging constantly for the past week about the stop and search powers used by the police, especially in London. The main bone of contention has been the figure that black men are eight times more likely to be stopped than white men. This is a fact from the police's own statistics. According to the media, this makes the police racist and they must reduce the number so that the searches are "proportional" (in-line with liberals obsession with "proportionality"). One thing that has been largely ignored by the media is the fact that the rate of criminality is more or less proportional to the rate of being stopped and searched, in other words, the reason why blacks are eight times more likely to be stopped and searched is because they are eight times more likely to commit crime. This can be demonstrated, from Home Office documents and figures, as follows:
"714,000 stops and searches were recorded on persons by the police under a range of legislation including the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) of which 12% were of black people, 6% Asian and 1% 'other' ethnic origin. Black people were 8 times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. ...Published research by the Home Office has indicated that resident population figures give a poor indication of the population observed in public places when and where police carry out searches, and therefore do not provide a good basis for assessing ethnic biases in officer search practice"
To understand stop and search it is important to be aware that it is a very specific tactic used by the police against street crime. Under PACE (Police And Criminal Evidence Act) powers, the police must have a specific grounds to search someone. Blacks commit 80% of street crime offences in London (this figure was also quoted by former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police - Sir Paul Condon, before left wing hysteria prevented such truths being aired), and using the logic and figures above, it can be deduced that black people are eight times more likely to commit street crime offences, strangely enough they are also eight times more likely to be stop-searched. So much for "racism" being responsible for the figures!
The left wing media have long had it in for the police but don't be fooled by the media suggesting that the police just go around searching anyone black. Officers have to fill out forms which include the ethnicity of the people they have been searching, and in today's politically correct climate they are liable to be asked to explain these if their "vital stats" don't add-up. For instance, a traffic officer with over 20 years experience pulled a black motorist over who was driving a BMW over the speed limit, and the following day was asked to go and see the Inspector where he was asked if he "had a problem with black people" - fancy that, for just doing his job. Officers stop and search statistics are monitored, which is just as well because these statistics provide yet more good reasons why stop and search is useful. For instance, the myth is that black people are disproportionately stopped, which has already exploded - they're stopped in proportion to their criminality - and that they are innocent. The truth is far more white people are stopped needlessly, as can be seen:
12% of black stop and search suspects are subsequently arrested for a notifiable offence.
7% of white stop and search suspects are subsequently arrested for a notifiable offence.
Source:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/s95racetables0001.xls
Despite blacks being searched at a higher rate, they are still far more accurate. In other words, police searches of black people are nearly twice as likely to be justified than searches of white people. This indicates that the police are using good grounds for searching black people more often. Yet more evidence against the liberal-left's "racism" argument.
It would be useful to explore other areas of criminality to get some perspective. The following examples are from the Home Office's own statistics.
Violence against the person
Whites: 86.5% Blacks 7.2%
Blacks over three times more likely to commit violence against the person. Prison population figures indicate that they are 5 times more likely, and/or that the offences are more serious so as to warrant a higher proportion of custodial sentences.
Sexual offences
Whites: 83.5% Blacks: 8.0%
Blacks are four times more likely to commit sexual offences. These are reflected exactly in prison population figures of 8%.
Robbery
Whites 62.4% Blacks 29.9%
Blacks fifteen times more likely to commit robbery. Robbery covers both street muggings and conventional robbery of shops/banks etc. However, to reach proportionality with this offending rate and the arrest rate, police would have to stop and search black suspects 15 times more than whites rather than 8 times more. In other words, they search them at half that rate. The prison figures are lower, at 20% (10 times more likely), indicating that blacks are possibly committing more less serious robberies (such as muggings rather than bank robberies) and are less likely to be caught or imprisoned (especially as the policy of the judiciary has been to allow muggers to walk free from court with paltry fines or community service).
Burglary
Whites 89.9% Blacks 6.3%
Blacks three times more likely to commit burglary which dispells the myth that it is a "white crime. The prison rates show slight increase on the arrest figures at 7.5%, possibly indicating that they are more likely to commit an offence severe enough to warrant prison or to repeat-offend.
Theft and handling
Whites 88.0% Blacks 6.7%
Blacks three times more likely to commit theft and handling. The prison rates more or less reflect this exactly at 7%.
Fraud and forgery
Whites 73.6% Blacks 13.2%
Blacks over six times more likely to commit fraud and forgery, another crime that many would associate with white men. This is reflected more or less exactly in the prison statistics at 13.5%.
Criminal damage
Whites 91.1% Blacks 4.9%
Blacks over twice as likely to commit criminal damage. Criminal damage is not listed in the prison statistics as very few are probably sent to prison for this.
Drugs Whites 82.6% Blacks 10.5%
Blacks are five times more likely to commit drugs offences. The prison statistics double this to 22%. Making the black more likely tally 10 times on average, or indicating more severity to their offending.
Source: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/s95racetables0001.xls
Sheet 5.5 for offending figures.
Prison figures referred are from Sheet 8.5
In other words, the facts, and the facts alone, indicate that the police have not been using this power with "bias" or "racism" but have merely been doing their jobs effectively. The liberal-left are desperate to try and excuse this disgraceful criminality by attacking the police rather than the criminals, because it is embarrassing for them in their attempts to make the British people swallow multiculturalism. The truth is plain to see, blacks are more likely to commit crime. Rather than excusing this, perhaps responsible members of the black community should denounce the criminals among them and help the police bring them to justice. A great diservice has been done to both the honest members of the black community (who suffer from the criminality in many black areas) and to the rest of the British people who should never have to put up with this in their country.
When the anti-law and order lobby are really on the retreat they attempt to put a case that stop and search is not an effective tool. If stop and search wasn't effective, or at least, wasn't useful or helpful in keeping crime levels down, why on earth would senior police commanders advocate it? Racism? Somehow I doubt every single senior police officer, who all agree with stop and search, are racists, especially in todays climate. We saw the results of the drastic drop in stop and search after the MacPherson report - a dramatic and shocking increase in street crime. The criminals who previously might have worried about carrying knives or other weapons soon caught-on that the police were on the retreat rather than on the offensive, and duly upped their activities and became more brazen than ever before, in the knowledge that the police would be hesitant about daring to stop these individuals. It became safe to carry drugs, knives and guns around because the only deterrant had been emasculated.
To those who think stop and search is ineffective, I ask this, when you board an international flight you walk through a metal detector, your luggage is X-ray'd, and security staff can search individuals baggage if they are suspicious. Do you also think this is unfair and ineffective? Would you want to remove these safeguards for the sake of "rights" when it's your life thats on the line? If security had been tighter at US airports 9/11 may not have even happened. The paralel is this, when you walk down the street in the evening in many poorer areas of London you are potentially putting your life on the line. If the police were prevented from using stop and search powers, or leaned-on to cut down on searching of specific groups regardless of their justification to search these groups, then you would be at an even greater risk than the already unnacceptably high one. In an estate in Camden, drug dealers carrying knives and crack cocaine frequent the stairwells of many blocks of flats, making old people and young mothers prisoners in their own homes for fear of what might happen if they dare open the door. This is a disgraceful situation, and more common than the left wing press will dare to print. Why on earth is this allowed to happen? Why on earth do drug dealers cruise by in BMWs carrying handguns and drugs? The situation is bad enough as it is let alone without stop and search, which regularly nets hundreds of people carrying lethal weapons and large quantities of drugs. Just imagine the hell if this limited power was removed. If the socialists really represented the working class, they would advocate tough measures against the scumbags who destroy poor communities.
The only solution is to find the political will to ensure that criminals of every colour are dealt with vigorously by appropriate sentencing to discourage others from turning to crime. We would ensure police are busy fighting the criminals head-on rather than stuck behind desks filling out pointless forms for every stop they make, and going on politically correct courses. The job of the police under a sane government would be to stamp out crime and make life very difficult for those who insist on walking around with weapons and drugs, not to act as some sort of 2nd social service. With this in mind, any party worth electing must have a sensible and effective law and order policy, and unlike any of the present offerings, has the will to stamp out this epidemic.
With the debate about race and policing re-ignited recently by the 10th anniversary of the murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence by an alleged gang of racists, it is of vital importance that the public is given the truth about the subjects being debated. One of the hottest topics in the debate on race and policing is the use of police stop and search powers, and the fact that blacks are more likely to be stopped and searched than whites in many areas.
One thing this article will not be is a big debate about the murder of Stephen Lawrence. But just to get it into perspective, many young men of the same age as Stephen Lawrence have been attacked or even murdered by racists, they happened to be white and the attackers black. Not one of them has had a memorial built for them guarded 24 hours a day by CCTV. In fact, barely any have made it onto the national news. No racist attacks are justifiable, they are yet another unfortunate side-effect of the multiracial society.
The liberal-left media have been whinging constantly for the past week about the stop and search powers used by the police, especially in London. The main bone of contention has been the figure that black men are eight times more likely to be stopped than white men. This is a fact from the police's own statistics. According to the media, this makes the police racist and they must reduce the number so that the searches are "proportional" (in-line with liberals obsession with "proportionality"). One thing that has been largely ignored by the media is the fact that the rate of criminality is more or less proportional to the rate of being stopped and searched, in other words, the reason why blacks are eight times more likely to be stopped and searched is because they are eight times more likely to commit crime. This can be demonstrated, from Home Office documents and figures, as follows:
"714,000 stops and searches were recorded on persons by the police under a range of legislation including the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) of which 12% were of black people, 6% Asian and 1% 'other' ethnic origin. Black people were 8 times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. ...Published research by the Home Office has indicated that resident population figures give a poor indication of the population observed in public places when and where police carry out searches, and therefore do not provide a good basis for assessing ethnic biases in officer search practice"
To understand stop and search it is important to be aware that it is a very specific tactic used by the police against street crime. Under PACE (Police And Criminal Evidence Act) powers, the police must have a specific grounds to search someone. Blacks commit 80% of street crime offences in London (this figure was also quoted by former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police - Sir Paul Condon, before left wing hysteria prevented such truths being aired), and using the logic and figures above, it can be deduced that black people are eight times more likely to commit street crime offences, strangely enough they are also eight times more likely to be stop-searched. So much for "racism" being responsible for the figures!
The left wing media have long had it in for the police but don't be fooled by the media suggesting that the police just go around searching anyone black. Officers have to fill out forms which include the ethnicity of the people they have been searching, and in today's politically correct climate they are liable to be asked to explain these if their "vital stats" don't add-up. For instance, a traffic officer with over 20 years experience pulled a black motorist over who was driving a BMW over the speed limit, and the following day was asked to go and see the Inspector where he was asked if he "had a problem with black people" - fancy that, for just doing his job. Officers stop and search statistics are monitored, which is just as well because these statistics provide yet more good reasons why stop and search is useful. For instance, the myth is that black people are disproportionately stopped, which has already exploded - they're stopped in proportion to their criminality - and that they are innocent. The truth is far more white people are stopped needlessly, as can be seen:
12% of black stop and search suspects are subsequently arrested for a notifiable offence.
7% of white stop and search suspects are subsequently arrested for a notifiable offence.
Source:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/s95racetables0001.xls Despite blacks being searched at a higher rate, they are still far more accurate. In other words, police searches of black people are nearly twice as likely to be justified than searches of white people. This indicates that the police are using good grounds for searching black people more often. Yet more evidence against the liberal-left's "racism" argument.
It would be useful to explore other areas of criminality to get some perspective. The following examples are from the Home Office's own statistics.
Violence against the person
Whites: 86.5% Blacks 7.2%
Blacks over three times more likely to commit violence against the person. Prison population figures indicate that they are 5 times more likely, and/or that the offences are more serious so as to warrant a higher proportion of custodial sentences.
Sexual offences
Whites: 83.5% Blacks: 8.0%
Blacks are four times more likely to commit sexual offences. These are reflected exactly in prison population figures of 8%.
Robbery
Whites 62.4% Blacks 29.9%
Blacks fifteen times more likely to commit robbery. Robbery covers both street muggings and conventional robbery of shops/banks etc. However, to reach proportionality with this offending rate and the arrest rate, police would have to stop and search black suspects 15 times more than whites rather than 8 times more. In other words, they search them at half that rate. The prison figures are lower, at 20% (10 times more likely), indicating that blacks are possibly committing more less serious robberies (such as muggings rather than bank robberies) and are less likely to be caught or imprisoned (especially as the policy of the judiciary has been to allow muggers to walk free from court with paltry fines or community service).
Burglary
Whites 89.9% Blacks 6.3%
Blacks three times more likely to commit burglary which dispells the myth that it is a "white crime. The prison rates show slight increase on the arrest figures at 7.5%, possibly indicating that they are more likely to commit an offence severe enough to warrant prison or to repeat-offend.
Theft and handling
Whites 88.0% Blacks 6.7%
Blacks three times more likely to commit theft and handling. The prison rates more or less reflect this exactly at 7%.
Fraud and forgery
Whites 73.6% Blacks 13.2%
Blacks over six times more likely to commit fraud and forgery, another crime that many would associate with white men. This is reflected more or less exactly in the prison statistics at 13.5%.
Criminal damage
Whites 91.1% Blacks 4.9%
Blacks over twice as likely to commit criminal damage. Criminal damage is not listed in the prison statistics as very few are probably sent to prison for this.
Drugs Whites 82.6% Blacks 10.5%
Blacks are five times more likely to commit drugs offences. The prison statistics double this to 22%. Making the black more likely tally 10 times on average, or indicating more severity to their offending.
Source:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/s95racetables0001.xls Sheet 5.5 for offending figures.
Prison figures referred are from Sheet 8.5
In other words, the facts, and the facts alone, indicate that the police have not been using this power with "bias" or "racism" but have merely been doing their jobs effectively. The liberal-left are desperate to try and excuse this disgraceful criminality by attacking the police rather than the criminals, because it is embarrassing for them in their attempts to make the British people swallow multiculturalism. The truth is plain to see, blacks are more likely to commit crime. Rather than excusing this, perhaps responsible members of the black community should denounce the criminals among them and help the police bring them to justice. A great diservice has been done to both the honest members of the black community (who suffer from the criminality in many black areas) and to the rest of the British people who should never have to put up with this in their country.
When the anti-law and order lobby are really on the retreat they attempt to put a case that stop and search is not an effective tool. If stop and search wasn't effective, or at least, wasn't useful or helpful in keeping crime levels down, why on earth would senior police commanders advocate it? Racism? Somehow I doubt every single senior police officer, who all agree with stop and search, are racists, especially in todays climate. We saw the results of the drastic drop in stop and search after the MacPherson report - a dramatic and shocking increase in street crime. The criminals who previously might have worried about carrying knives or other weapons soon caught-on that the police were on the retreat rather than on the offensive, and duly upped their activities and became more brazen than ever before, in the knowledge that the police would be hesitant about daring to stop these individuals. It became safe to carry drugs, knives and guns around because the only deterrant had been emasculated.
To those who think stop and search is ineffective, I ask this, when you board an international flight you walk through a metal detector, your luggage is X-ray'd, and security staff can search individuals baggage if they are suspicious. Do you also think this is unfair and ineffective? Would you want to remove these safeguards for the sake of "rights" when it's your life thats on the line? If security had been tighter at US airports 9/11 may not have even happened. The paralel is this, when you walk down the street in the evening in many poorer areas of London you are potentially putting your life on the line. If the police were prevented from using stop and search powers, or leaned-on to cut down on searching of specific groups regardless of their justification to search these groups, then you would be at an even greater risk than the already unnacceptably high one. In an estate in Camden, drug dealers carrying knives and crack cocaine frequent the stairwells of many blocks of flats, making old people and young mothers prisoners in their own homes for fear of what might happen if they dare open the door. This is a disgraceful situation, and more common than the left wing press will dare to print. Why on earth is this allowed to happen? Why on earth do drug dealers cruise by in BMWs carrying handguns and drugs? The situation is bad enough as it is let alone without stop and search, which regularly nets hundreds of people carrying lethal weapons and large quantities of drugs. Just imagine the hell if this limited power was removed. If the socialists really represented the working class, they would advocate tough measures against the scumbags who destroy poor communities.
The only solution is to find the political will to ensure that criminals of every colour are dealt with vigorously by appropriate sentencing to discourage others from turning to crime. We would ensure police are busy fighting the criminals head-on rather than stuck behind desks filling out pointless forms for every stop they make, and going on politically correct courses. The job of the police under a sane government would be to stamp out crime and make life very difficult for those who insist on walking around with weapons and drugs, not to act as some sort of 2nd social service. With this in mind, any party worth electing must have a sensible and effective law and order policy, and unlike any of the present offerings, has the will to stamp out this epidemic.
suslaws
Comments
Display the following 3 comments