Return the Police to a ‘force’ not a ‘service’

 

The only way to stop criminals is to stop giving them leeway and to actually DO something (harsher punishments, more power to police) productive.

The change in the name of the "Police Force" to "Police Service" ten or so years ago ironically reflects the 'usefulness' of the Police. The Police need to be a force, they are there to uphold the law, which, in some cases, requires force.

Why is this idea important?

 

The only way to stop criminals is to stop giving them leeway and to actually DO something (harsher punishments, more power to police) productive.

The change in the name of the "Police Force" to "Police Service" ten or so years ago ironically reflects the 'usefulness' of the Police. The Police need to be a force, they are there to uphold the law, which, in some cases, requires force.

STOP POLICE BEING ABLE TO SEIZE PASSPORTS WITHOUT A SPECIFIC COURT ORDER

Currently the police can seize a persons passport without an order of the court specifically allowing them to do so. Without a passport a person is  prevented from going abroad, prevented from ,saddly today, getting a bank acccount, prevented from getting or changing their job, prevented from getting a solictor to act for them, prevented from getting a mortgage.

Why is this idea important?

Currently the police can seize a persons passport without an order of the court specifically allowing them to do so. Without a passport a person is  prevented from going abroad, prevented from ,saddly today, getting a bank acccount, prevented from getting or changing their job, prevented from getting a solictor to act for them, prevented from getting a mortgage.

Repeal section 110 of Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005

Section 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 has increased police powers of arrest dramatically and removed the distinction between arrestable and non-arrestable offences.

In order to restore the balance between citizen and state, the idea of offences that cannot result in arrest must be restored.

Why is this idea important?

Section 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 has increased police powers of arrest dramatically and removed the distinction between arrestable and non-arrestable offences.

In order to restore the balance between citizen and state, the idea of offences that cannot result in arrest must be restored.

Withdraw Police Power of Arrest without Evidence

During the reign of the previous government they introduced a 'Power of Arrest' by the Police which covers just about every law on the statute book and even some which are not.

This immediately had the effect of turning our Police from a 'Police Service' to a 'Police Force'.

Now every time there is a complaint made against someone the Police arrest that person and take them to the Police Station where they have their fingerprints and DNA etc taken.

Police should only be able to make an arrest if there is evidence to support the offence and not just because someone has made an allegation.

As a result of the above I can only assume that there have been thousands of innocent people arrested and released after providing the obligatory fingerprint and DNA samples.

This practice has to stop and is not required in a free democratic society.

Why is this idea important?

During the reign of the previous government they introduced a 'Power of Arrest' by the Police which covers just about every law on the statute book and even some which are not.

This immediately had the effect of turning our Police from a 'Police Service' to a 'Police Force'.

Now every time there is a complaint made against someone the Police arrest that person and take them to the Police Station where they have their fingerprints and DNA etc taken.

Police should only be able to make an arrest if there is evidence to support the offence and not just because someone has made an allegation.

As a result of the above I can only assume that there have been thousands of innocent people arrested and released after providing the obligatory fingerprint and DNA samples.

This practice has to stop and is not required in a free democratic society.

Repeal RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) “snoopers bill”

We should repeal the entire RIPA bill and ban every public body (except Polic, Security Services MI5/MI6 and GCHQ) from accessing any personal or private data of individuals unless authority by the individual is given.

Local Authorities should be limited to providing local services (social care, bin collection, highway maintenance etc,,) only and not be used extend the police state.

Why is this idea important?

We should repeal the entire RIPA bill and ban every public body (except Polic, Security Services MI5/MI6 and GCHQ) from accessing any personal or private data of individuals unless authority by the individual is given.

Local Authorities should be limited to providing local services (social care, bin collection, highway maintenance etc,,) only and not be used extend the police state.

The United Commonweath – A Law By Sam Johnston

I wish for a new Law to be passed which protects all the peoples in the United Kingdom, not only in freedoms but in liberties and powers too. At all times the Commonwealth peoples are entitled to:

  1. Freedom of Speech – The freedom to express an idea or believe without scrutiny or persecution.

  2. Freedom of Choice – The freedom to do as one chooses. Without scrutiny or persecution. Unless in a manner that threatens these laws.

  3. Freedom of Life – The freedom to live. Citizens, Governments, Police etc. should never restrict this.  

  4. Freedom to Settle –  The people of the United Kingdom should be allowed to settle on public or unused land and property without prosecution. So long as other laws are not broken.

Other areas of our law must be rewritten to ensure liberties and freedoms are not restricted, these include.

  1. Drugs – Prohibition has never worked, and the people of the UK should be given information and advice regarding drugs rather than a useless classification system which implies “these are safe and these are not.” Taking a substance in my eyes is not a criminal offence.

  2. Fees and Fines – The people of the UK should not be subject to fines and fees at any point. With driving; CCTV and Local Police should be the only means of identifying reckless driving and drivers should be penalised accordingly with points and removal of licenses. Not with pety fines and "slaps on the wrist." People can speed and pay a fine, but can't speed when they've had their license taken away. The same applies to Privately owned companies like National Rail, Banks and Others alike who seem to be PLC's able to issue fines for services rendered.

  3. Police Powers – Innocent until proven guilty. Police should not be allowed to stop and search without good reason. If a warrant for search is not issued, police should not be able to search a persons person or house without permission this includes by method of helicopter and CCTV. No Warrant – No Right!

  4. Entrapment – The Police or Government should never be able to put a citizen in a position of Entrapment. Police should not be allowed to drive unmarked cars or wear casual clothes whilst on the beat. Tempting criminals with dummy houses for robbery or with fast unmarked cars should not be allowed and is un ethical crime fighting.

  5. The Right to Protest – If a group or population are unhappy with choices made by their business or political institution they should be able to appeal by method of peaceful protest.


 

Why is this idea important?

I wish for a new Law to be passed which protects all the peoples in the United Kingdom, not only in freedoms but in liberties and powers too. At all times the Commonwealth peoples are entitled to:

  1. Freedom of Speech – The freedom to express an idea or believe without scrutiny or persecution.

  2. Freedom of Choice – The freedom to do as one chooses. Without scrutiny or persecution. Unless in a manner that threatens these laws.

  3. Freedom of Life – The freedom to live. Citizens, Governments, Police etc. should never restrict this.  

  4. Freedom to Settle –  The people of the United Kingdom should be allowed to settle on public or unused land and property without prosecution. So long as other laws are not broken.

Other areas of our law must be rewritten to ensure liberties and freedoms are not restricted, these include.

  1. Drugs – Prohibition has never worked, and the people of the UK should be given information and advice regarding drugs rather than a useless classification system which implies “these are safe and these are not.” Taking a substance in my eyes is not a criminal offence.

  2. Fees and Fines – The people of the UK should not be subject to fines and fees at any point. With driving; CCTV and Local Police should be the only means of identifying reckless driving and drivers should be penalised accordingly with points and removal of licenses. Not with pety fines and "slaps on the wrist." People can speed and pay a fine, but can't speed when they've had their license taken away. The same applies to Privately owned companies like National Rail, Banks and Others alike who seem to be PLC's able to issue fines for services rendered.

  3. Police Powers – Innocent until proven guilty. Police should not be allowed to stop and search without good reason. If a warrant for search is not issued, police should not be able to search a persons person or house without permission this includes by method of helicopter and CCTV. No Warrant – No Right!

  4. Entrapment – The Police or Government should never be able to put a citizen in a position of Entrapment. Police should not be allowed to drive unmarked cars or wear casual clothes whilst on the beat. Tempting criminals with dummy houses for robbery or with fast unmarked cars should not be allowed and is un ethical crime fighting.

  5. The Right to Protest – If a group or population are unhappy with choices made by their business or political institution they should be able to appeal by method of peaceful protest.


 

Repeal all laws that are specifically written by MPs for MPs and Peers

MPs should have no legal priveleges that the average citizen of Britain does not have.Therefore all the special laws applying to MPs and Peers must be be repealed.

Why is this idea important?

MPs should have no legal priveleges that the average citizen of Britain does not have.Therefore all the special laws applying to MPs and Peers must be be repealed.

Police abusing their powers

Please prevent the police from:

Arresting and fining motorists for taking a drink of water or a soft drink at a red traffic light

Arresting and fining motorists for taking a bite of an apple or other food at a red traffic light

Arresting and fining motorists for smoking in the car.

Why is this idea important?

Please prevent the police from:

Arresting and fining motorists for taking a drink of water or a soft drink at a red traffic light

Arresting and fining motorists for taking a bite of an apple or other food at a red traffic light

Arresting and fining motorists for smoking in the car.

That we return to the culture that people are innocent until proven guilty

THAT WE RETURN TO THE CULTURE THAT PEOPLE ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

The plain clothes police are not interested in the truth of any situation in which a person has been accused. Once they have apprehended a person who has been accused, by using the most up to date serious criminal arrest systems, they are then only interested in arranging words and personal interpretations that will lead to convictions, a pursuit that clearly abandons the concept of innocent until proven guilty. They do not seek the truth they seek only a conviction which attempt to fit into targets agreed by their bosses has if in a factory working on a bonus system chasing targets set by top bosses.

 

It seems the peoples Justice System is locked into a persecution culture, that like a personal bonus system, rewards conviction targets which means it has forgotten its purpose— which is to protect the people from injustice based upon compassion and understanding.

 

This was when I was wrongfully arrested upon arriving at Newcastle Airport and taken to jail. I was accused of not appearing at a court when demanded to do so. Apparently there had been a warrant issued for my arrest for not attending this court hearing. This court appearance demand had been sent to an address I had not lived in for nearly two years despite the fact that they had my correct address on file.    I was handcuffed so many times I lost count and after a horrible night in a cell I was taken 90 miles to Leeds being the only one taken by police lorry which contained 8 cells. I have full disability because of my left leg is badly damaged and unable to bend fully. When I stated that I could not sit down in this small cell I was told “Get in – we will sort it out later” it never was sorted and upon arriving to Leeds three hours later, I found great difficulty in walking. The judge found I had done nothing wrong and I was realised with my heavy case which I had to fill from the plastic bags that all my belongings had been placed in.   I asked “How do I get home?” I was told “There is the back door” and I was released to find my own way home. It was difficult with a big case that a policeman had previously complained about its weight – – and I am 71 years of age.

 

People should be treated has innocent until proven guilty. Yet I witnessed were people, particularly young people had been locked into cells and were treated WORSE than animals. I was even told by the jailer, when stating his negligence to duty, just has he was placing hand cuffs upon me, that “You will not change it, for many have tried”.

 

I have also found previously and I have definite proof of this that the plain clothes police and uniformed police protocols are acting has the first department of the CPS. That is they are not the defenders of the faithful but an extension of the CPS – this is wrong.

 

 I will bring to your notice far more evidence has to these facts at the end of July, when I can speak more freely.

 

So yes!  We have entered “covertly” into a culture in which people are guilty until they can be proven innocent.

Why is this idea important?

THAT WE RETURN TO THE CULTURE THAT PEOPLE ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

The plain clothes police are not interested in the truth of any situation in which a person has been accused. Once they have apprehended a person who has been accused, by using the most up to date serious criminal arrest systems, they are then only interested in arranging words and personal interpretations that will lead to convictions, a pursuit that clearly abandons the concept of innocent until proven guilty. They do not seek the truth they seek only a conviction which attempt to fit into targets agreed by their bosses has if in a factory working on a bonus system chasing targets set by top bosses.

 

It seems the peoples Justice System is locked into a persecution culture, that like a personal bonus system, rewards conviction targets which means it has forgotten its purpose— which is to protect the people from injustice based upon compassion and understanding.

 

This was when I was wrongfully arrested upon arriving at Newcastle Airport and taken to jail. I was accused of not appearing at a court when demanded to do so. Apparently there had been a warrant issued for my arrest for not attending this court hearing. This court appearance demand had been sent to an address I had not lived in for nearly two years despite the fact that they had my correct address on file.    I was handcuffed so many times I lost count and after a horrible night in a cell I was taken 90 miles to Leeds being the only one taken by police lorry which contained 8 cells. I have full disability because of my left leg is badly damaged and unable to bend fully. When I stated that I could not sit down in this small cell I was told “Get in – we will sort it out later” it never was sorted and upon arriving to Leeds three hours later, I found great difficulty in walking. The judge found I had done nothing wrong and I was realised with my heavy case which I had to fill from the plastic bags that all my belongings had been placed in.   I asked “How do I get home?” I was told “There is the back door” and I was released to find my own way home. It was difficult with a big case that a policeman had previously complained about its weight – – and I am 71 years of age.

 

People should be treated has innocent until proven guilty. Yet I witnessed were people, particularly young people had been locked into cells and were treated WORSE than animals. I was even told by the jailer, when stating his negligence to duty, just has he was placing hand cuffs upon me, that “You will not change it, for many have tried”.

 

I have also found previously and I have definite proof of this that the plain clothes police and uniformed police protocols are acting has the first department of the CPS. That is they are not the defenders of the faithful but an extension of the CPS – this is wrong.

 

 I will bring to your notice far more evidence has to these facts at the end of July, when I can speak more freely.

 

So yes!  We have entered “covertly” into a culture in which people are guilty until they can be proven innocent.

Repeal/Scrapping of Police DNA Database for innocent people

I would like to see the scrapping of retention of DNA by the police of innocent people not convicted of an offence.

Further i would like to see a maximum time limit that the police can retain DNA of people convicted of relatively minor offences.

Why is this idea important?

I would like to see the scrapping of retention of DNA by the police of innocent people not convicted of an offence.

Further i would like to see a maximum time limit that the police can retain DNA of people convicted of relatively minor offences.

Police common sense and the duty to investigate

Why is it the police do not seem to exercise common sense when presented with trivial matters brought to their attention? I have come across examples over the years but the most ridiculous was their investigation when a child threw a slice of cucumber from their lunch at another child at school. The police got involved for this supposed assault. There was no injury so why could they have have let the school to sort the problem out as part of their own disciplinary procedures?

Often the standard excuse given by the police for their involvement is that they have a duty to investigate a complaint or allegation. Why can't they adopt a common sense approach and refuse to get involved in trivia? Haven't they got anything better to do or are they driven by targets, another solved crime for their statistics?

Sometimes these cases end up in court. Fortunately many are thrown out by judges or magistrates or the CPS suddenly decide, after public outcry, they have no evidence or a realistic chance of a prosecution. This is a waste of police time and public money.

Interestingly I reported a senior Labour figure to the police after he appeared in a documentary and flouted the seat belt rules. Instead of exercising a duty to investigate they told me they had other priorities!

Why is this idea important?

Why is it the police do not seem to exercise common sense when presented with trivial matters brought to their attention? I have come across examples over the years but the most ridiculous was their investigation when a child threw a slice of cucumber from their lunch at another child at school. The police got involved for this supposed assault. There was no injury so why could they have have let the school to sort the problem out as part of their own disciplinary procedures?

Often the standard excuse given by the police for their involvement is that they have a duty to investigate a complaint or allegation. Why can't they adopt a common sense approach and refuse to get involved in trivia? Haven't they got anything better to do or are they driven by targets, another solved crime for their statistics?

Sometimes these cases end up in court. Fortunately many are thrown out by judges or magistrates or the CPS suddenly decide, after public outcry, they have no evidence or a realistic chance of a prosecution. This is a waste of police time and public money.

Interestingly I reported a senior Labour figure to the police after he appeared in a documentary and flouted the seat belt rules. Instead of exercising a duty to investigate they told me they had other priorities!

Curb the powers of the Police, and make them more accountable

While I am certain that everyone agrees on the need for an effective police force, I do feel that their powers need to be curbed as they have had to much discretion given them under labour to dole out fines and issue cautions without due process having taken place. I beleive that in this country when accused of a crime one is meant to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, and it is the job of the police to find enough evidence to secure a conviction, not to become judge and jury as well.

And as has been reported on the news of late, the apparent disregard they themselves have for the law when controlling peacefull protests etc leaves a lot to be desired, thinking of the death of innocent bystanders here, and yet they always seem to get away with it., often with complete disregard and contempt against anyone who should dare to even question their apparent complete lack of morals.

Why is this idea important?

While I am certain that everyone agrees on the need for an effective police force, I do feel that their powers need to be curbed as they have had to much discretion given them under labour to dole out fines and issue cautions without due process having taken place. I beleive that in this country when accused of a crime one is meant to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, and it is the job of the police to find enough evidence to secure a conviction, not to become judge and jury as well.

And as has been reported on the news of late, the apparent disregard they themselves have for the law when controlling peacefull protests etc leaves a lot to be desired, thinking of the death of innocent bystanders here, and yet they always seem to get away with it., often with complete disregard and contempt against anyone who should dare to even question their apparent complete lack of morals.

Strike down section 44

It is obvious that the stop and search powers within this act are not working.

I think I am correct that in one year in London over one thousand children where stopped using anti terror laws, the police will abuse everything given to them.

It is time to try and get the police back under control

I think I am also correct that of the many thousands stopped under this act, the conviction rate is less than one percent of one percent.

Why is this idea important?

It is obvious that the stop and search powers within this act are not working.

I think I am correct that in one year in London over one thousand children where stopped using anti terror laws, the police will abuse everything given to them.

It is time to try and get the police back under control

I think I am also correct that of the many thousands stopped under this act, the conviction rate is less than one percent of one percent.

Stop using mobile phones as tracking devices

Mobile phone companies are required by law to track the location of every phone and store those location details for 12 months. This applies to everyone, no matter how innocent.

Mobile phone companies should be forbidden from retaining location data for any longer than is required to provide their services (minutes or hours), unless the customer has opted-in to longer retention, or where surveillance has been authorised by a court warrant.

Why is this idea important?

Mobile phone companies are required by law to track the location of every phone and store those location details for 12 months. This applies to everyone, no matter how innocent.

Mobile phone companies should be forbidden from retaining location data for any longer than is required to provide their services (minutes or hours), unless the customer has opted-in to longer retention, or where surveillance has been authorised by a court warrant.

Repeal Penalty Notices of Disorder for Section 5 Public Order Act

Penalty Notices of Disorder are a quick way of dealing with disruptive behaviour in our strteets, however Section 5 of the Public Order Act is catch all, which police officers too often use as a catch all.

It is sufficient for a Police Officer or PCSO to say that there were other people in the street who "MAY" have been witness to Disorderly Behaviour and hence issue the ticket. This enables a PCSO of limited experience and training the capability to act as judge and jury on a fellow citizen.

The route of a court appearance is available to citizens issued with a PND for Section 5 Public Order Act, however your would either have to be highly principled or very stupid to risk pitting your word against a police officer in a magistrates court (who generally side with the police) and getting a criminal record.

Why is this idea important?

Penalty Notices of Disorder are a quick way of dealing with disruptive behaviour in our strteets, however Section 5 of the Public Order Act is catch all, which police officers too often use as a catch all.

It is sufficient for a Police Officer or PCSO to say that there were other people in the street who "MAY" have been witness to Disorderly Behaviour and hence issue the ticket. This enables a PCSO of limited experience and training the capability to act as judge and jury on a fellow citizen.

The route of a court appearance is available to citizens issued with a PND for Section 5 Public Order Act, however your would either have to be highly principled or very stupid to risk pitting your word against a police officer in a magistrates court (who generally side with the police) and getting a criminal record.

Remove information from police records if no charges are made

I believe that the removal of information about a person from police records when no charges have been brought should be mandatory.  We are supposed to live in a country which believes in the system of "innocent until proven guilty".  I speak from personal experience with regards to this matter, having been arrested as part of a huge countrywide operation carried out by the police.  The matter in question related to alleged downloading of child pornography from the web.  Over seven thousand people in this country alone were rounded up by the police in early morning raids to be accused of this heinous act, to be told that they were paedophiles and worse.  Congratulations to the police you might say, however when looked at more closely one begins to realise that all was not as it seemed.  Out of the seven  thousand plus people arrested only a handful were  actually charged.  The rest of us it would seem were actually the victims of credit card fraud and identity theft.  This conclusion was not reached lightly by the police, in fact speaking from personal experience, I was investigated for approx six months.  I had my home invaded and ransacked, my computer was taken away for the six months and extensively searched (apparently they would find find all of these pictures or whatever that I had downloaded or shared, so I should just admit to it and save them the bother of looking!)  Only to be told at the end of the six month period that it was actually a mistake and that my credit card details had been used without my knowledge.  There was absolutely nothing at all found linking me to the crimes I was accused of and I was therefore let go with no further action being taken by the police with nothing more than  a somewhat poorly given apology for the problems it caused me.  The problem now though is that because I was arrested for this it now shows on my police record albeit as an NFA (no further action) but it is still there for the world to see.  It will seriously hinder my chances of getting certain jobs due to CRB checking.  It will also dis-allow me froom volunteering for activities in my childrens school.  In effect it is restricting my whole life and being and all because of a mistake made not by myself but by an over zealous police force.  I am and always have been against people who commit crimes but there is a difference between committing a crime and being accused of it.  this should be taken into account with regards to police record keeping.

Why is this idea important?

I believe that the removal of information about a person from police records when no charges have been brought should be mandatory.  We are supposed to live in a country which believes in the system of "innocent until proven guilty".  I speak from personal experience with regards to this matter, having been arrested as part of a huge countrywide operation carried out by the police.  The matter in question related to alleged downloading of child pornography from the web.  Over seven thousand people in this country alone were rounded up by the police in early morning raids to be accused of this heinous act, to be told that they were paedophiles and worse.  Congratulations to the police you might say, however when looked at more closely one begins to realise that all was not as it seemed.  Out of the seven  thousand plus people arrested only a handful were  actually charged.  The rest of us it would seem were actually the victims of credit card fraud and identity theft.  This conclusion was not reached lightly by the police, in fact speaking from personal experience, I was investigated for approx six months.  I had my home invaded and ransacked, my computer was taken away for the six months and extensively searched (apparently they would find find all of these pictures or whatever that I had downloaded or shared, so I should just admit to it and save them the bother of looking!)  Only to be told at the end of the six month period that it was actually a mistake and that my credit card details had been used without my knowledge.  There was absolutely nothing at all found linking me to the crimes I was accused of and I was therefore let go with no further action being taken by the police with nothing more than  a somewhat poorly given apology for the problems it caused me.  The problem now though is that because I was arrested for this it now shows on my police record albeit as an NFA (no further action) but it is still there for the world to see.  It will seriously hinder my chances of getting certain jobs due to CRB checking.  It will also dis-allow me froom volunteering for activities in my childrens school.  In effect it is restricting my whole life and being and all because of a mistake made not by myself but by an over zealous police force.  I am and always have been against people who commit crimes but there is a difference between committing a crime and being accused of it.  this should be taken into account with regards to police record keeping.

Stop and Search, Stop and Account

The current practice of Police officers stopping law-abiding members of the public and demanding information is, in my opinion, unjust and repressive.  In particular, the stopping of people innocently engaged in photography for whatever reason is of great concern.  I suggest that these powers are removed altogether, and that Police can only formally request information if there is genuine suspicion of criminal activity.

Why is this idea important?

The current practice of Police officers stopping law-abiding members of the public and demanding information is, in my opinion, unjust and repressive.  In particular, the stopping of people innocently engaged in photography for whatever reason is of great concern.  I suggest that these powers are removed altogether, and that Police can only formally request information if there is genuine suspicion of criminal activity.

Return to Due-Cause

To return to a general law of "due-cause" for any officials, including police, to be able to stop, inspect, search, or otherwise impede the free movement of law abiding citizens, rather than the increasing culture of treating everybody as "guilty until proven innocent"!

Let's just find another way (nothing wrong with covert), or even live wit the risk?

For example (say), indiscriminative, or random, use of "whole body monitors" at airports, better still scrap those, any form of random bag search, or search of person, and of course, most of the thousands of CCTV cameras, particularly for the likes of councils!

Why is this idea important?

To return to a general law of "due-cause" for any officials, including police, to be able to stop, inspect, search, or otherwise impede the free movement of law abiding citizens, rather than the increasing culture of treating everybody as "guilty until proven innocent"!

Let's just find another way (nothing wrong with covert), or even live wit the risk?

For example (say), indiscriminative, or random, use of "whole body monitors" at airports, better still scrap those, any form of random bag search, or search of person, and of course, most of the thousands of CCTV cameras, particularly for the likes of councils!