Battling Hate Speech

David Cameron and the government have said they want to deal with Hate Speech as spouted by the extremists clerics and the EDL (English Defence League), a very good idea it should be fought, on both the internet and in public.

The idea and plan is great but yet again DC and a few minsters have opened their mouths with out really thinking it through. All it takes to mess the entire plan up is one cleric taking a banning order to court quoting the European Human Rights Act and the section on Free Speech.

Personally I am not a great supporter of the Act and how it is being used by criminals who have committed serious crimes here being allowed to stay and possibly commit further crimes just because they have a right to a family life. i do like the concept behind the act as we as law abiding people should have certain rights protected. I wish the government would right and enact something similar to the US’ Constitution and Bill of Rights, but at the same time make sure foreign criminals cannot use it to stay here at the end of their time in prison, allow the gagging of people who spout words that could turn people into people of violence who physically attack people just because they do not like what they stand for or believe. It should protect our right to protest against things that are wrong as this is sometimes the only way people can let those in power know the depth of feeling.

The latest deal with the criminal element

Aside

Yet again the ruling power comes out with a lets crack down on offenders and re-offending. Each government has done the same thing come out with let’s gets tough on the criminal element and yet again i predict it will have little effect on the crime figures.

This time the PM’s speech comes at a time when the police numbers are being reduced, which means fewer chances to catch criminals, unless the Cons intend to send us down the route shown in the films ‘Robo-Cop’. It does look like they are trying to quietly bring that in via the back door with all the governmental security contracts going to G4S and the other large security companies.

This is such a bad idea what with the other governmental contracts held and basically badly run and supervised. At least with the government doing what it should and properly fund and run the police and prison service we might get a reduction if the government actually talked to the rank and file rather than not and the entire plan is forgotten about and it like all the others fails to reduce crime.

The incoming police commissioners, the idea on the surface is a great one, but I feel with the lack of knowledge about the elections will badly effect their role as overseers of the police service. One aspect I hope they have is the job of overseeing the private contracts or are they going to be hog-tied by not being able to make sure they are doing just as good a job as the rest of the police.

The gun culture and British Police Service

I watched Sky News during the time of the two police women were murdered and throughout the afternoon and this morning they have had people on commenting and giving their opinion on the double murder.

As at least one commentator said ‘The vocal minority re-open the discussion into arming the police officers.’ [Unknown commentator, Sky News]. I was bordering on the side saying they should be armed, but looking at the bigger picture and the fact they only wore stab vests. This piece of equipment was good a few years ago when knife crime was rampant, but with the increase in gun crime it is no longer a good piece of equipment. Now officers should be equipped with ballistic armour not stab vests, another point which I think might be good is not to train them in how to use firearms, but how to react when one is pulled.

The news given yesterday spoke of no intelligence concerning the address where the two officers were sent, but today a window cleaner spoke of the owner dying and people being present inside. Alarm Bells people, I am not surprised though as the police today have a lot of paperwork which do take them from patrols, but do they not care about the area in which they work as knowing the people can be a good idea as intelligence gathering should happen everywhere. You never know when a person might let something slip in general conversation which might lead to an arrest of a criminal.

The person arrested, yes he might have been out on police bail but you hear about forces asking for more time to question an individual about crimes, etc. Police do have to go on the evidence discovered and if the answers to their questions do put I doubt on his involvement in their minds they have to release the person on police bail. At least with that they do have the ability, hopefully, to go back to the person to check his answers against the evidence. On the odd occasion the person does disappear and evidence found post the latest interview comes to light then you do get the situation like what was happening in Manchester, a man hunt. But if the area is under the pressure of a crime organisation then information is much harder to find out.

The French Murders

Reading the papers and watching Sky News on a number of occasions there have comments about why it took so long to find the four year old. Scenes like that scene are not normal and the local police forces do not have the knowledge concerning forensics, what they did to the car would have been the best course of action.

When the forensic experts arrived then they would have started at the edge and worked in towards the car. They would have taken impressions of tire treads, boot prints. There is a lot of evidence to be collected from the outside. The police also did not know where the people were staying so they could not go and question neighbours until pretty late and then they moved when they knew about the four year old and rescued her.

All the written about attempts would not have found her as she, from what has been said, hid under her mum’s legs surrounded by possibly cold bags and other bags including the car itself. All of those things would have stopped heat from escaping to be detected and when a body dies it still produces heat it does not go instantly cold and that would have also blocked the heat from the four year old. She did not help, but at four years old and to probably watched her mum, dad and grand mother getting killed would have very likely frozen here. Most people when they hear something like a gunshot stop and look around for the source, only trained people generally do not. When they knew about the youngest they moved and got her out.

Her questioning will be a very long slow process as at four she will likely not have the ability to articulate what happened. The nurses and other carers of her will gently probe her and quite possibly not see the answers to the questions are coming not from her mouth but from her drawings, paintings, etc. That is generally how the young deal with traumatic events.

The investigation will however be continuing with out the answers as from the reports there is a lot of background intelligence now coming forward and from the reports on the evidence that will be the first step. The amount of shell casings, some reports say 15, some 16, the number does not matter, finding the bullets will be a vital aspect as it is from them, either the casing or bullets will give them how many shooters and possibly the general aspect of the weapon and if a silencer was used. From reports it might have as the ex RAF guy would have likely heard gun shots as the site is remote and in the vicinity of the alps and sound echos. Work the motive out and you will likely find the source and maybe the shooter. There is a lot of work still to be done on the car and the four bodies will tell quite a bit as it is likely the car had things that might know things.

So there are a lot of things still to be looked at and analyzed, so it will take a while especially as they are dealing with two separate sites in two different countries.

Update – With the latest reports coming from France are indicating the mum, dad and grandmother were hit twice and the cyclist five times. That to me says the cyclist was in the wrong place at the wrong time, otherwise why basically spray fire at one target because he was trying to get away, the higher number of bullets the greater chance of death. Where being shot in the head twice is targeted with people unable to escape.

I am more interested with the fact the two kids were left alive, that does not sit quite right in my book unless them living is vital for something else. I think a lot of answers will come when the investigators can get to the bottom of the family problems.

Defending your home.

The current problem that a couple have with the law because they shot at a number of people who broke into their home should not be before the police or courts. The reason is very simple they are doing the same as the population of the UK would do if we were invaded by a second power. All of us would likely jump to defend our shores from the aggressors. Is there any difference between that and shooting at people who invade your home. In common sense no, but in reality and in the eyes of the law you cannot defend your home, so to take that to the extreme the British government could drag every person who defended the UK in front of the courts to face the same charges, rather than the way it would be celebrating the heroes that defended the UK.

We have the ability to defend our person, but that like the law above needs to be changed as you do not know who is holding a weapon or grabbing your bag, it might take longer than the time written into the law to sub-due or get your bag back. To me that is the same as defending your home. The people attacked or their home invaded should be protected from punishment for defending themselves or home not arrested and have finger prints, DNA and photo taken and then be worried about what the CPS will do.