Stop and search coming to Nelson

AndyClaret · Post by **AndyClaret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 4:59 pm

"Men fighting with machetes"

https://www.burnleyexpress.net/news/cri ... -1-9881023" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Belial · Post by **Belial** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:13 pm

Why announce it in the press...

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:16 pm

Belial wrote:Why announce it in the press...

Perhaps they have to by law ?????

theroyaldyche · Post by **theroyaldyche** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:20 pm

Full.of em

kentonclaret · Post by **kentonclaret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:27 pm

Nelson only had one eye and one arm which could hamper the search process somewhat.

claretnproud · Post by **claretnproud** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:33 pm

Anybody with information about the above incidents is asked to get in touch with police on 101, quoting log number 0096 of July 16th or independent charity Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

how about posting descriptions of the offenders they are looking for?

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:37 pm

Maybe they were just harvesting their crop.

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:26 pm

theroyaldyche wrote:Full.of em

Meaning ?

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:29 pm

Absolute sh1t whole of a place, and only getting worse ( I know theres nice parts before people get upset )
I avoid the place unless it's absolutely necessary.

theroyaldyche · Post by **theroyaldyche** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:41 pm

evensteadiereddie wrote:Meaning ?

Machetes

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:44 pm

Another freedom infringed upon. We can be searched by the police for literally no reason.

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:48 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Another freedom infringed upon. We can be searched by the police for literally no reason.

Go on then.... when was the last time you were stop searched? Or harassed by the police or "state"?

claretnproud · Post by **claretnproud** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:55 pm

they can search me whenever they like. Good that people should think twice about carrying weapons and drugs. Why would a law abiding person object to the police being able to do their job properly ?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:57 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:Go on then.... when was the last time you were stop searched? Or harassed by the police or "state"?

Whenever they want. No suspicion necessary.

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:00 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Whenever they want. No suspicion necessary.

So you have been searched then? May I ask what articles they were looking for?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:01 pm

claretnproud wrote:they can search me whenever they like. Good that people should think twice about carrying weapons and drugs. Why would a law abiding person object to the police being able to do their job properly ?

Because there are plenty of perfectly legal possessions a person might want to keep private. This police power is yet another attack on individual freedoms in the name of "public safety", and like every other infringement it will inevitably be misused.

MACCA · Post by **MACCA** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:05 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Because there are plenty of perfectly legal possessions a person might want to keep private. This police power is yet another attack on individual freedoms in the name of "public safety", and like every other infringement it will inevitably be misused.

Not subtle enough I feel.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:06 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:So you have been searched then? May I ask what articles they were looking for?

I don't need to be searched to no longer have the right to privacy when the government decides they can search me whenever they like.

You don't understand how liberties work if you think the only time they're infringed upon is when you personally are directly affected by them. I'll explain ti to you, not at all expecting you to try to understand, but here goes.

If the government makes it illegal to criticise the government that's a violation of free speech, right? Surely you understand that i don't have to be arrested for criticising the government for my right to criticise the government to be infringed upon. I have already lost the right before i even criticise the government. Understand? That's the same here. I have lost the right to privacy when the police gained the right to search me for no reason. I don't lose the right only when they search me. There's a little lesson of individual liberties from me to you. I'm going to have a little bet with myself that you don't understand.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:07 pm

MACCA wrote:Not subtle enough I feel.

There was nothing in my post that was intended to be subtle.

claretnproud · Post by **claretnproud** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:08 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Because there are plenty of perfectly legal possessions a person might want to keep private. This police power is yet another attack on individual freedoms in the name of "public safety", and like every other infringement it will inevitably be misused.

there is no perfect answer but the worst scenario is to allow people to carry weapons without fear of being done for it.

dougcollins · Post by **dougcollins** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:09 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Because there are plenty of perfectly legal possessions a person might want to keep private. This police power is yet another attack on individual freedoms in the name of "public safety", and like every other infringement it will inevitably be misused.

And some illegal ones.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:22 pm

claretnproud wrote:there is no perfect answer but the worst scenario is to allow people to carry weapons without fear of being done for it.

If the police have reasonable suspicion then there should be no reason not to search someone. My issue is that with there being no suspicion at all I can be stopped and searched no matter the reason, or for no reason at all other than the police just wanted something to do. Or perhaps i criticise the police too much and they want to harass me. Or maybe i criticise the government too much.

And of course, if they "find" something on me and some other people get their way, then it won't be too long before i don't have the right to a trial. I could just be locked in a cage somewhere without being charged with anything.

These things creep.

mill hill claret · Post by **mill hill claret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:22 pm

don't see the problem with stop and search .if it takes criminals off the street and saves lives it's done it's job

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:24 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I don't need to be searched to no longer have the right to privacy when the government decides they can search me whenever they like.

You don't understand how liberties work if you think the only time they're infringed upon is when you personally are directly affected by them. I'll explain ti to you, not at all expecting you to try to understand, but here goes.

If the government makes it illegal to criticise the government that's a violation of free speech, right? Surely you understand that i don't have to be arrested for criticising the government for my right to criticise the government to be infringed upon. I have already lost the right before i even criticise the government. Understand? That's the same here. I have lost the right to privacy when the police gained the right to search me for no reason. I don't lose the right only when they search me. There's a little lesson of individual liberties from me to you. I'm going to have a little bet with myself that you don't understand.

What a very condescending and unneccesary reply. I can tell you with a degree of certainty that I fully understand civil liberties; perhaps more than you. Several on here who know me, can vouch for my knowledge on the topic.
The article details serious violence, and there is reference to the utilisation of s. 60, which given the circumstances and level of weapon driven violence would seem to be an apppropriate tool for the police to use to deter further violence and to arrest those involved.
Do you have any other suggestions what the authorities may do to intervene or are you so luvvy that you would prefer a lawless "wild west"?

Personally I blame Trump!

Burnley1989 · Post by **Burnley1989** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:24 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I don't need to be searched to no longer have the right to privacy when the government decides they can search me whenever they like.

You don't understand how liberties work if you think the only time they're infringed upon is when you personally are directly affected by them. I'll explain ti to you, not at all expecting you to try to understand, but here goes.

If the government makes it illegal to criticise the government that's a violation of free speech, right? Surely you understand that i don't have to be arrested for criticising the government for my right to criticise the government to be infringed upon. I have already lost the right before i even criticise the government. Understand? That's the same here. I have lost the right to privacy when the police gained the right to search me for no reason. I don't lose the right only when they search me. There's a little lesson of individual liberties from me to you. I'm going to have a little bet with myself that you don't understand.

I sort of agree with what you're saying to be fair, its a tricky one though

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:34 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:What a very condescending and unneccesary reply. I can tell you with a degree of certainty that I fully understand civil liberties; perhaps more than you. Several on here who know me, can vouch for my knowledge on the topic.
The article details serious violence, and there is reference to the utilisation of s. 60, which given the circumstances and level of weapon driven violence would seem to be an apppropriate tool for the police to use to deter further violence and to arrest those involved.
Do you have any other suggestions what the authorities may do to intervene or are you so luvvy that you would prefer a lawless "wild west"?

Personally I blame Trump!

Complans about a condescending reply with a condescending reply.

I have 104 friends.

Longsidebogs · Post by **Longsidebogs** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:37 pm

What a **** tip that whole place is. Used to be a nice town many, many moons ago.

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:40 pm

ClaretAndJew wrote:Complans about a condescending reply with a condescending reply.

I have 104 friends.

Whats your friends got to do with anything?
Condescending? Don't think so. IT seems to have a plan how to tackle serious violence using passive means, I'd like to know what they are?

Suggesting that his civil liberties are being impeached by stop and search is a little dramatic and OTT. In my opinion.

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:42 pm

Its all about IT....yet again

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:53 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:What a very condescending and unneccesary reply. I can tell you with a degree of certainty that I fully understand civil liberties; perhaps more than you. Several on here who know me, can vouch for my knowledge on the topic.

This is clearly not true if you think that civil liberties can only be restricted when someone is physically and directly restricting them.

Rumbletonk · Post by **Rumbletonk** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:54 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I don't need to be searched to no longer have the right to privacy when the government decides they can search me whenever they like.

You don't understand how liberties work if you think the only time they're infringed upon is when you personally are directly affected by them. I'll explain ti to you, not at all expecting you to try to understand, but here goes.

If the government makes it illegal to criticise the government that's a violation of free speech, right? Surely you understand that i don't have to be arrested for criticising the government for my right to criticise the government to be infringed upon. I have already lost the right before i even criticise the government. Understand? That's the same here. I have lost the right to privacy when the police gained the right to search me for no reason. I don't lose the right only when they search me. There's a little lesson of individual liberties from me to you. I'm going to have a little bet with myself that you don't understand.

Don't fret yourself. If you're stopped it will be to usher you out of harms way

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:55 pm

randomclaret2 wrote:Its all about IT....yet again

No, it wasn't. Until you posted that it was. Up until you posted it was people with different opinions exchanging those opinions. But you want to make it all about me so that other people will join in and attack me. Because basically you're just a troll.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:56 pm

Hes virtue Signalling again

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:59 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:Whats your friends got to do with anything?
Condescending? Don't think so. IT seems to have a plan how to tackle serious violence using passive means, I'd like to know what they are?

Suggesting that his civil liberties are being impeached by stop and search is a little dramatic and OTT. In my opinion.

"dramatic and OTT."

Of course you think that. It's always "dramatic and OTT" when people are arguing in favour of not ending our personal freedoms, like privacy. Of course, the next time Count Dankula is fined for a joke no doubt you'll have a different tune when i point out that another of our civil liberties is being increasingly infringed upon.

TsarBomba · Post by **TsarBomba** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:08 pm

In my part of South East London, there have been two murders in the past month. In the immediate aftermath, it is to be expected that a Section 60 will be authorised.

The Police need to know, and quite quickly, who is responsible for the stabbing/murder, who is the victim, what gangs are they aligned to, and what is the likelihood of retaliation and where?

A section 60 will be authorised to try and assist with some of those questions, mainly in stopping a retaliation from taking place.

Yes, a Section 60 means I don’t need reasonable grounds to search, unlike Section 1. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to suddenly start getting my hands in the pockets of 75 year old ladies for the sheer hell of it.

This summer, I can count on 1 hand the amount of Section 60’s that have been authorised whilst I’ve been on duty. They are used proportionately and only when absolutely necessary to try and stop disorder from happening.

This thread really need not turn into a debate about civil liberties, and a perceived attack on them. This is about getting weapons off the streets and saving lives. That can only be a good thing.

bfccrazy · Post by **bfccrazy** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:32 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:So you have been searched then? May I ask what articles they were looking for?

About 10/12 of us got asked to step outside after we’d gotten our first drinks and lined up by a pub on an away day a while ago b cause police thought somebody had a smoke bomb.

They searched us all and didn’t find a smoke bomb (or any other illegal objects) but decided the best course of action was to take our details and give us a 24 hour ban from the town centre (which we managed to argue was stupid because the train station was in the centre for us to get home later)

If that isn’t a pointless abuse of power then I don’t know what is.

Also had a mate who was walking to the ground at another game and happened to be going to the ground 10 minutes after some trouble (which he wasn’t part of) - he got stopped and searched by the police because they said they were had suspicion he had something he shouldn’t..... they found nothing but ripped up his ticket and told him to head home.

These sort of laws just give more power to police which are open to be abused - if you’re in a pub on an away day with people you don’t know but they are also Burnley fans, don’t complain when you get lumped in with them and expect to be searched and dealt with like you’re a criminal anyway.

Top Claret · Post by **Top Claret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:32 pm

About time the police sorted out the local Asian yobs

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:33 pm

Oh look. Top Claret's posted a comment. I bet...

Top Claret wrote:About time the police sorted out the local Asian yobs

... yep. It's racist.

Top Claret · Post by **Top Claret** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:34 pm

I can see me getting a ban for the above comment but it is a fact

Stayingup · Post by **Stayingup** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:36 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:Go on then.... when was the last time you were stop searched? Or harassed by the police or "state"?

You have to go outside of your mothers sitting room to be stopped and searched.

Stayingup · Post by **Stayingup** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:37 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:Oh look. Top Claret's posted a comment. I bet...

... yep. It's racist.

Archetypal bore. Yawn. So predictable. You've again lost any shred of credibility you might have had with that and of courde any argument you thought you might have had.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:37 pm

ClaretAndJew wrote:Complans about a condescending reply with a condescending reply.

I have 104 friends.

103 of whom are pigments of your colourful imagination

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:44 pm

Top Claret wrote:I can see me getting a ban for the above comment but it is a fact

Won't be as long as the approximately 2 weeks you got for saying you wanted another forum member to be killed.

bfcjg · Post by **bfcjg** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:46 pm

TBH I would issue any nutter who wants to fight with another nutter a machete each and fight to the death.

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:47 pm

bfcjg wrote:TBH I would issue any nutter who wants to fight with another nutter a machete each and fight to the death.

Silly approach - that’d still leave one nutter

sox8595 · Post by **sox8595** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:48 pm

Top Claret wrote:About time the police sorted out the local Asian yobs

Would it also be racist if the ethnic origin of the yobs were changed to English in the statement?
(just a thought).

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:49 pm

sox8595 wrote:Would it also be racist if the ethnic origin of the yobs were changed to English in the statement?
(just a thought).

English isn't an ethnicity, but if it was then yes.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:56 pm

mybloodisclaret wrote:Go on then.... when was the last time you were stop searched? Or harassed by the police or "state"?

Ha, you're assuming Turtle leaves their house regularly enough to interact with the police.
They don't even visit Turf Moor on match day.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:01 pm

bfccrazy wrote:About 10/12 of us got asked to step outside after we’d gotten our first drinks and lined up by a pub on an away day a while ago b cause police thought somebody had a smoke bomb.

They searched us all and didn’t find a smoke bomb (or any other illegal objects) but decided the best course of action was to take our details and give us a 24 hour ban from the town centre (which we managed to argue was stupid because the train station was in the centre for us to get home later)

If that isn’t a pointless abuse of power then I don’t know what is.

Also had a mate who was walking to the ground at another game and happened to be going to the ground 10 minutes after some trouble (which he wasn’t part of) - he got stopped and searched by the police because they said they were had suspicion he had something he shouldn’t..... they found nothing but ripped up his ticket and told him to head home.

These sort of laws just give more power to police which are open to be abused - if you’re in a pub on an away day with people you don’t know but they are also Burnley fans, don’t complain when you get lumped in with them and expect to be searched and dealt with like you’re a criminal anyway.

With the introduction of body cameras on police officers these types of incidents will stop, because innocent people will have a right to complain.

Not aimed at you, but I'm assuming no one minds the police having cameras on them whilst on duty?

Cirrus_Minor · Post by **Cirrus_Minor** » Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:03 pm

MACCA wrote:Absolute sh1t whole of a place, and only getting worse ( I know theres nice parts before people get upset )
I avoid the place unless it's absolutely necessary.

Thank you for your feedback on your thoughts about the town that I live in.