In the same way that you cannot judge a book by its cover, you cannot judge a newspaper story from a headline. For example, take "Police gain new powers to seize thieves' 'bling'". Upon first reading this the law abiding might feel a sense of relief that the government was actually about to tackle crime. That is, if they know what bling is. So, we are talking about police powers to seize people's possessions. This is a frightening and draconian policy which should be resisted. The Observer headline does refer to 'thieves', however, before you start thinking that does not concern law-abiding people and your property is safe. Think again. Because the article goes on to say "police seizure powers would allow possessions to be taken even before they are charged with a crime". So, no charge, no thief. Police empowered to take innocent person's possessions. If the police do not charge anyone with a crime, anyone is then entitled to claim their property back. For centuries we have had the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Then along came New Labour with its arse backwards policy of guilty until proven innocent.
I would contest the assumption that "A hard core of 5,000 career criminals commit half of all crimes". If this was the case, it would be a simple matter with all the resources at the government's disposal to lock up these 5,000 individuals and reduce the crime statistics by 50% in one foul swoop. The government is not planning such drastic action. Rather, they will be sent junk mail from the police telling them that Big Brother is watching them. All the poor trees being chopped down just for this scary message to end up in the bin. As for planning surprise police visits to innocent people, haven't you heard about police harassment? In any event, as the article proceeds it goes from hard core to middlemen, so we are no longer after the mister bigs of the underworld.
The government is embarrassed that the national Asset Recovery Agency, set up by the government to seize ill-gotten gains from criminals, has spent £65M to recover £23M. Now, if it started targeting more and more innocent people it is estimated that this figure will go up to £125M by the end of this financial year. And this is what this is really all about. Looking good not actually being any good. Playing the numbers game. If it isn't the criminals taking your property, it's the police...
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
1 comment:
RE: the national Asset Recovery Agency
Well, they obviously know what they are doing, don't harrass them. They have to spend X amount of money per year to justify their budget, otherwise some of them would be out of a job and signing on to the sausage.
Post a Comment