Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat
A crushing blow
Skibum346:
So.... whne your caught speeding...not that anyone EVER speeds... and recive a fixed penalty notice, a fine and three points...what is that...?
Or... you recieve a parking ticket... what is it £40 fine these days...?
These are examples and there are others, of juducial decision that have gone through the political process and been set up such that if person A is caught doing act B then punishment C will be applied.
This does not remove the right to "a fair trial" it simplifies the process. In each case evidence has to be provided by expert witnesses (the police).
Please those of you who disagree... quote me the legislation that says once PC Toobigforhisboots makes the decision there is NO appeal.
I hear peole going on at great length about how "bad" the police are. It really cheeses me off. YES, they are a slice of humanity like any group and there are specific dangers if a bad apple exists (Serious Crime Squad of the 20-30 years ago, course... nothing has changed in the intervening years has it?). But, we as a sociaety have organised such that they are the people we ask to do that job. the great majority of them deserve our support.
As for fairness, or blind application of law, there are plenty of these shows following the police on the satellte channels, I have lost count of the number of times police officers have given six, seven eight or more warnings of the consequences of particular behaviour continueing. If that's not making sure individuals have the opportunity to AVOID a punishment, what is?
Back to the topic in hand however as yet again, we have gone too global in this discussion. I am fairly certain, though I've not done the research (please provide evidence to the contrary if necessary) that this legislation (remember, due political process and all that) was put in place because OTHER methods had failed. Now it might be that this youth had never been there before, never done anything wrong in his life etc etc. Tough. Agian, to repeat a theme, personal responsibility.
Og course... I might be wrong... after all... it's all a conspiracy...!
Bob696:
--- Quote from: "Skibum346" ---
This does not remove the right to "a fair trial" it simplifies the process. In each case evidence has to be provided by expert witnesses (the police).
--- End quote ---
I will just answer that with a quote found on sky news today
--- Quote ---Liberty's Shami Chakrabarti told the paper: "Surely the many officers who are proud of our consent-based policing tradition will resent the idea of being legislator, judge and jury on the cheap?"
--- End quote ---
America has a wonderfull system of plea bargining. If you plead guilty you get a much reduced sentence. Many innocent people plead guilty as they cant afford a solictor .... sounds like you want the same system.
:
As someone has already said, in this country you are INNOCENT until proven guilty. The right to a fair trial is one of the basic principles of a democracy and one that many people have fought and died to preserve.
Some of you think that the comparison with Nazi Germany is OTT but the erosion of basic rights is how that kind of thing started. Just because you (and I) don't like some little toe-rag riding around on a motorcycle (in this case)and causing a nuisance you think it aceptable for punishments to be handed out by the Police because you would not do that and your vehicles are taxed, tested, insured etc. That's how the Nazis got away with it - "Oh well it doesn't affect me I'm not a Jew..."
Well, what will you think when the Police are given greater powers - things that may result in someone recieving a far greater punishment that a motorcycle being crushed? Don't think it will happen? It is the thin end of the wedge we are looking at here!
Another reason for the Police to not be allowed these powers is the very fact that they are dealing day-to-day with criminal suspects. They will be biased against individuals that they have had dealings with and cannot possibly be impartial in the way a magistrate or a jury can. Also, it is a charter for corruption - officers whose integrity is not all it should be will use these powers to their own advantage.
--- Quote from: "Terminus" ---Police simply enforce the law they don't have a choice - they can't pick and choose what law to uphold
--- End quote ---
Mr. Terminus - I take it from your stance in all this that you are a serving Police officer? Well, you DO have a choice - if you feel that a law is unjust and you do not wish to enforce it you can resign. Or of course you can continue to uphold unjust laws to preserve you own personal livelihood at the expense of the freedom of others.
The attitude of "I was only obeying orders" - where have we heard that before?[/quote]
rangerider:
--- Quote from: "Bob696" ---
But who judges the evidence? "12 good men and true"? Or the local PC and his chain of command. Which would you prefer to be tried, judged and sentenced by?
--- End quote ---
rubbish, I cant attribute the quote correctly, but it was once said that 12 people without the nous to get out of jury duty are no peers of mine :)
the only differences between a jury trial (on the rare occasions you are allowed one) and (excuse the expression) summary judgement by a police officer at the scene are that the police officer likely makes his mind up as soon as he has seen the facts in front of him, the jury generally make their mind up without facts the minute you enter the dock.
In short, give me the cop on the street, where I can apologise humbly promise to be a good boy in future and never do it again, and hopefully if the wind is blowing right walk away with a well deserved stern warning:)
ATT, I to have dealt with law enforcement both sides of the Atlantic and dare i say it, the carrying of guns has nothing to do with it, (I speak mainly from the southern states) there is still a modicum of respect for others and their property regardless of uniform. I walk into the corner shop there and am called Sir, even the children of the people I stay with address me with similar respect.
BOB696, as with this country the US has a system of court appointed legal counsels for those without the financial means, and from experience they seem to be a darn heap more passionate about what they do than the legal aid monkeys here (on the subject of which, try getting legal aid - its a joke)
DAVE2A, My current boss is "ex-job" He left in the mid 80s as things started getting silly and the financial descicion was easy to make, lots more money in the private sector, the moral choice of upholding laws he felt silly, or having nobody to uphold the law at all was much harder (in the end forced retirement on medical grounds solved that dilemma).
Would you put on that uniform today? I wouldnt, not for triple what terminus may earn today, even tax free! Many of those that do put on the uniform deserve, and recieve my utmost respect, no matter if I have transgressed the law of the land or not.
Next time i am in scotland terminus, theres a few on me for you.
Bob696:
--- Quote ---but it was once said that 12 people without the nous to get out of jury duty are no peers of mine Smile
--- End quote ---
or perhaps they just have more sense of civic duty and a respect for justice.
Dave2a has hit the nail on the head with the thin end of the wedge.
I look forward to reading the outrage when a legal 4x4 is crushed because they got lost, just dont forget that the policeman is ALWAYS right.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version