The World's Gone Mad...

disgruntledgoat

I love a bit of Daily Mail style sensationalism, however, am I the only one who find this more than a little sinister?

http://www.redragonline.com/2010/02/manchester-has-been-declared-police.html

If i'm going about my lawful business and refuse to go through the "safety arch", as the police have no reason to suspect me of any offence, what happens to me?

Pokerface

I would imagine you would just get turned away if you refused to go through. Not sent to the cells as far too many people suggest (in the comments after the article).


While it reeks of state control, there IS something comforting about being able to go out in one of the UKs largest cities with the risk of being stabbed or beaten to death slightly reduced.

As someone who grew up in Canada - the whole CCTV culture, where every square inch of the UK seems to be recorded on camera, seems like an invasion of privacy to me. And I'm not convinced it makes ANY difference to preventing/solving crimes.

But, as the mantra goes - if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't worry about going through, etc, etc.

nicensleazy

Whats the problem with walking through the 'Safety' Arch. Its there to protect 'lawful' people like yourself from becomnig a victim of knife or gun crime. Or, you could just cross the road!

disgruntledgoat

Ahhh the old "nothing to hide nothing to fear" defence.

If i am not suspected of any crime, the police have no right to turn me away from going about my lawful business whether i'm prepared to turn my pockets out for them or not. Enterprises like this treat all citizens as a potential threat and presume you have something to hide.

Pokerface

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Ahhh the old "nothing to hide nothing to fear" defence.

If i am not suspected of any crime, the police have no right to turn me away from going about my lawful business whether i'm prepared to turn my pockets out for them or not. Enterprises like this treat all citizens as a potential threat and presume you have something to hide.

Unfortunately that's the price you pay for being part of society. And in that society - there are those that flaunt the rules and spoil it for the rest of us "law abiding citizens".


It all comes down to the question of how much of your personal freedom are you willing to give up in order to have your safety and well-being protected.

And all citizens ARE a potential threat and may have something to hide.

Smokin Joe

"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear".

Anyone who has reached my age and never had anything to hide should have got out more.

OffTheBackAdam

Try refusing to go through the scanner at an airport.

shouldbeinbed

not only do I have nothing to hide, I've also got more important things to worry about, its metal detector that takes all of a moment to walk through.

the sad thing is that Manchester on a Friday and Saturday can get a bit leery.

its no different to being frisked or scanned by the bouncers and stewards to get into a pub, club or football match.

I don't see captain paranoid ranting at Man City for having showsec people go through bags and handbags at the turnstile or the English Lounge for having bouncers on the door. sense of perspective needed.

I'd rather not be a stabbing victim in the first place than have to hope for a prosecution afterwards.

nasahapley

I trust all glasses and bottles are going to be banned from Manchester city centre too then, since if there's a weapon used in drink-fuelled city-centre violence, that's usually it. And it's a bit different having to go through some kind of security check to get into a football ground/bar/club whatever, which are all private venues, and having to do so to enter a city centre, which is a very public one. If everyone's a potential threat and may have something to hide, then I suppose those in favour of this wouldn't mind the police putting one of these outside their front door and checking up on them every time they went out of their house? But then domestic violence is much more prevalent that stabbings, so we should probably just install CCTV in every house in the land.

Complete waste of time and money IMO, but I suspect it's being done in the hope of positive headlines rather than in the hope that it'll actually do any good.

Anonymous

I dont think everyone is a potential threat. if this stops some scrotes carrying knives, and dters them in the future, then where is the harm ? I'd rather spend 30 seconds waltzing through a barrier, than getting chibbed in a kebab shop by some pissed up ball-bag.

nasahapley

Well yes, dmc, IF it deters people from carrying knives and/or stabbing people, then it's not all bad. I just don't think it will. Firstly, if you were carrying a knife, would you walk up to one of these things in the first place in order to be caught? You may say that's good, because it'll keeps knives out of whatever area these things form a cordon around, but I don't think that police have the manpower to ensure entire city centres are effectively sealed off every weekend. Secondly, if you were the type of person who enjoys a bit of stabbing, you're probably partial to a bit of glassing or bottling too, which this will do nothing to prevent.

Having been stabbed myself I'm generally quite supportive of measures to deal with knife crime (not that I think it's nearly as big a problem as the press like to make out), but it doesn't mean I have to unthinkingly accept any hair-brained scheme the police come up with.

shouldbeinbed

nasahapley wrote:

I trust all glasses and bottles are going to be banned from Manchester city centre too then, since if there's a weapon used in drink-fuelled city-centre violence, that's usually it. And it's a bit different having to go through some kind of security check to get into a football ground/bar/club whatever, which are all private venues, and having to do so to enter a city centre, which is a very public one. If everyone's a potential threat and may have something to hide, then I suppose those in favour of this wouldn't mind the police putting one of these outside their front door and checking up on them every time they went out of their house? But then domestic violence is much more prevalent that stabbings, so we should probably just install CCTV in every house in the land.

Complete waste of time and money IMO, but I suspect it's being done in the hope of positive headlines rather than in the hope that it'll actually do any good.

you're mixing your arguments there. Yes the city centre is a public place (albeit one you have a choice to visit or not) but the pubs and clubs that provide the glasses and booze for your drink fuelled violence are private establishments so where's the problem of a bit of preventative security beforehand rather than far more time effort and resources expended sorting out the aftermath?

as for the argument about putting them outside your front door. now you really are confusing a public and private place. I don't tend to invite complete strangers into my home in vast numbers with the general intention of drinking heavily and taking my chances on the consequences.

how many people who object to these don't have a problem with Gatso's and other deterrants.

nasahapley

shouldbeinbed wrote:

nasahapley wrote:

I trust all glasses and bottles are going to be banned from Manchester city centre too then, since if there's a weapon used in drink-fuelled city-centre violence, that's usually it. And it's a bit different having to go through some kind of security check to get into a football ground/bar/club whatever, which are all private venues, and having to do so to enter a city centre, which is a very public one. If everyone's a potential threat and may have something to hide, then I suppose those in favour of this wouldn't mind the police putting one of these outside their front door and checking up on them every time they went out of their house? But then domestic violence is much more prevalent that stabbings, so we should probably just install CCTV in every house in the land.

Complete waste of time and money IMO, but I suspect it's being done in the hope of positive headlines rather than in the hope that it'll actually do any good.

you're mixing your arguments there. Yes the city centre is a public place (albeit one you have a choice to visit or not) but the pubs and clubs that provide the glasses and booze for your drink fuelled violence are private establishments so where's the problem of a bit of preventative security beforehand rather than far more time effort and resources expended sorting out the aftermath?

as for the argument about putting them outside your front door. now you really are confusing a public and private place. I don't tend to invite complete strangers into my home in vast numbers with the general intention of drinking heavily and taking my chances on the consequences.

how many people who object to these don't have a problem with Gatso's and other deterrants.

Not really mixing my arguments at all, SBIB. I've got nothing against clubs/pubs taking whatever security measures they wish; they're private establishments after all so it's up to them what they do. The scanners in the story, though, aren't there to check on someone entering a given private establishment, they're there to check on anyone who wants to go into a part of Manchester city centre for whatever reason.

And the thing about putting them on your front door: I meant that if everyone's a potenatial threat you should be checked on the way out of your house (i.e. when going into a public place), not that other people should be checked on the way in. I thought that would be pretty obvious tbh. And I'm not too keen on Gatsos either.

verylonglegs

So people think these will reduce crime in the same way CCTV has been so successful? :roll:

Pokerface

verylonglegs wrote:

So people think these will reduce crime in the same way CCTV has been so successful? :roll:

Well, last time I checked, CCTV didn't have X-Ray vision and couldn't see inside your pockets or purse, etc.


If the scanners prevent ANY person from taking a gun or knife into the city centre, then they are potentially preventing a death.

There will still be fights. There will still be deaths. There will still be drunkeness.

I don't see what the problem people have with this. It's not meant to be an ultimate solution.

I suspect it's just trying out a new idea.

bikey2009

We regulary have knive scanners at the tube and train stations around where I live, It does seem to deter certain people from either travelling to areas that they are not known in to commit knife crime, or to deter knife muggings on the train or tube. As far as I'm concerned that's ok. But, on the bigger debate about CCTV I'm not convinced that it is in the general publics benefit.

My local council has over a few years installed lots of cctv cameras along the main route from one part of the town to another. They initially jusified the expense by saying that public safety would be increased because the cameras would be watching mugging hot spots and anti social behavior, but it seems that they are using it for an easy way to generate money by going for the easy target.

See this link, 1.5 Million in fines http://www.harrowobserver.co.uk/west-lo ... -25647076/

My eldest son and at least 2 of his friends have been mugged of their mobile phones on this road, when I asked the police if they would look at the cctv they said they would but I shouldn't expect too much....I wonder why :roll:

edit..... I'm not a DM reader, honestly :oops:

pneumatic

unbelievable

bikey2009

pneumatic wrote:

unbelievable

What? the whole thread, or one post in particular :roll:

bikey2009

Oh! I know what you mean now, yeh totally unbelievable

Cressers

'Safety Arch'!

How do our freedoms become eroded? Bit by bit. and each time we're told that it's nothing to worry about, it's for our own safety, and those who object have something to hide. Where do you draw the line?

It's time to organise a mass boycott of any places where these scanners are installed.

Crapaud

Pokerface wrote:

... Well, last time I checked, CCTV didn't have X-Ray vision and couldn't see inside your pockets or purse, etc. ...

[tinfoil] I bet they still scan for cigarettes, your BMI, your five a day and salt content. [/tinfoil]

Pokerface

Cressers wrote:

'Safety Arch'!

How do our freedoms become eroded?

I'm curious - what freedom exactly is being infringed upon in this case? And what about MY freedoms to live in a city without fear of being stabbed to death on a Saturday night?

rick_chasey

Pokerface wrote:

Cressers wrote:

'Safety Arch'!

How do our freedoms become eroded?

I'm curious - what freedom exactly is being infringed upon in this case? And what about MY freedoms to live in a city without fear of being stabbed to death on a Saturday night?

I thought it was the freedom to walk about wherever you like without having to be accosted by police to go from one end of the street to another.

Pokerface

Rick Chasey wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Cressers wrote:

'Safety Arch'!

How do our freedoms become eroded?

I'm curious - what freedom exactly is being infringed upon in this case? And what about MY freedoms to live in a city without fear of being stabbed to death on a Saturday night?

I thought it was the freedom to walk about wherever you like without having to be accosted by police to go from one end of the street to another.

Yes - because that's clearly what was happening. Police systematically accosting pedestrians as they attempted to walk from street to street, all across town. There must be more police than citizens these days. :roll:

rick_chasey

Pokerface wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Cressers wrote:

'Safety Arch'!

How do our freedoms become eroded?

I'm curious - what freedom exactly is being infringed upon in this case? And what about MY freedoms to live in a city without fear of being stabbed to death on a Saturday night?

I thought it was the freedom to walk about wherever you like without having to be accosted by police to go from one end of the street to another.

Yes - because that's clearly what was happening. Police systematically accosting pedestrians as they attempted to walk from street to street, all across town. There must be more police than citizens these days. :roll:

No need for lots of police if everyone must walk through a 'safety arch'. Duh!

Porgy

I've been accosted by police in a tube station. It was late, I'd been on one of those management team building courses, running about in a woods in Croydon. Got covered in mud, and then the boss treated us to a load of free booze, so was a bit drunk too.

When I was attemtping to go home through my local tube station a dog ran up to me and jumped up. I flinched and tried to back away from the dog - I wasn't used to dogs running round free in tube stations. anyway cos of this two police officers came over and held me for questioning. Once they realsied I'd been drinking they got quite nasty. they took my name and address and radiod for info on me - there was none - but I was hedl there for 15 minutes and threatened with arrest a few times. Finally they let me go after filling out one of their forms. I was given a copy and it said I was a scruffy, dirty, long haired individual, drunk who acted suspiciously when stopped. I had declared myself to be autistic at which they laughed; as I knew my body language would be "wrong" and I could get into serious trouble very quickly.

I think the only reason I wasn't arrested tbh was that I phoned my wife who was a solicitor while they were holding me. she turned up in the nick of time.

Anyway - the only good thing about this continued infringement of our civil liberties is that I its turned me into a full time cycling commuter. One day though - they'll invent a "safety arch" for cyclists. Or just ban us outright.

Pokerface

Porgy wrote:

....and then the boss treated us to a load of free booze, so was a bit drunk too.

I thought public intoxication was a criminal offense? Or is it the national pastime?

Pokerface

Perhaps I should state for the record that the thought of HAVING to walk through a metal detector to simply get into the city centre would put my back up and annoy me to no end. I'm no fan of the police or state controls. I don't even like HAVING to wear a seatbelt (by law). I hate long security lines at airports and even worse is having to take my shoes and belt off. I'm all for as much personal freedom as possible.

But in the world in which I currently live, where danger is seemingly around every corner and it is quite easy to get hurt/killed by anyone from a drunken yob to terrorist, I am more than happy to forgo some of those personal freedom if it means my personal safety might somehow be enhanced.

So, if that means walking through a metal detector to go out on a Saturday night or taking my shoes off to get onto an airplane - then so be it.


I'm glad there are civil libertarians out there fighting the good fight and making sure the government doesn't get TOO much control over our lives and that as many of our personal freedoms are preserved as possible.

Porgy

Pokerface wrote:

Porgy wrote:

....and then the boss treated us to a load of free booze, so was a bit drunk too.

I thought public intoxication was a criminal offense? Or is it the national pastime?

So how do you get home from the bar then?

Pokerface

Porgy wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Porgy wrote:

....and then the boss treated us to a load of free booze, so was a bit drunk too.

I thought public intoxication was a criminal offense? Or is it the national pastime?

So how do you get home from the bar then?

I don't drink.

Porgy

Pokerface wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Porgy wrote:

....and then the boss treated us to a load of free booze, so was a bit drunk too.

I thought public intoxication was a criminal offense? Or is it the national pastime?

So how do you get home from the bar then?

I don't drink.

I'll rephrase it then - how does one legally get back from the bar after one has partaken in intoxicating beverages?