Jump to content

Am I just being stupid or is this a contradiction?


NO SUNSHINE

Recommended Posts

+ SECTION 43 OF THE TERRORISM ACT (2000):43 Search of persons(1) A constable may stop and search a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist to discover whether he has in his possession anything which may constitute evidence that he is a terrorist. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga...11_en_5#pt5-pb2+ THE MET'S WEBSITE - WHAT IT CLAIMS SECTION 44 GIVES THEM THE POWER TO DO:Section 44 Terrorism Act 2000 gives police the power to search vehicles and people for items that could be used to commit a terrorist act. Police can search anybody anywhere under this law, and they do not need reasonable suspicion to do so. It is under this law that police conduct random searches in train and tube stations.http://www.met.police.uk/stopandsearch/wha....htm#stopsearch-----------------------------------------------------------------Swear 99% of Met employees are absoltue morons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everytime I think about this it enrages meAll Im saying is protests>>Ive done it once before (for a different reason), we were probably 50 deep but we brought some main roads in south to a standstillCaused the police so much hassle, civilians jaws were on the floor & heads were heeding our reasons for protestingWhos really on this though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+ SECTION 43 OF THE TERRORISM ACT (2000):43 Search of persons(1) A constable may stop and search a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist to discover whether he has in his possession anything which may constitute evidence that he is a terrorist. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga...11_en_5#pt5-pb2+ THE MET'S WEBSITE - WHAT IT CLAIMS SECTION 44 GIVES THEM THE POWER TO DO:Section 44 Terrorism Act 2000 gives police the power to search vehicles and people for items that could be used to commit a terrorist act. Police can search anybody anywhere under this law, and they do not need reasonable suspicion to do so. It is under this law that police conduct random searches in train and tube stations.http://www.met.police.uk/stopandsearch/wha....htm#stopsearch-----------------------------------------------------------------Swear 99% of Met employees are absoltue morons
its not a contridiction the first is a section of statue thereford lawthe second is a misinterpretation of the following section of the above lawbut tbh the first quote in reality allows for the second theres a case that makes clear what is enough to cause reasonable suspicion in a police officer doesn't have to be the same as what would causes reasonable suspicion in a laymen (they have powers of deduction that we the average persons couldn't possibly fathom...apparently)as long as they say the right thing when under scrutiny, its all good
Link to comment
Share on other sites

eh....doesnt 1 say section 43 and the other section 44?
yeah so 43 says they need suspicion, then 44 right after says they don't - immediate contradictionPolice chat sh*tin section 44 it saysAn authorisation under subsection (1) or (2) may be given only if the person giving it considers it expedient for the prevention of acts of terrorism.subsections 1/2 say what can be searchedso technically if they think you're going to stab someone then they can search you, however i suggest the next time you are about to be searched you ask them "do you think I am going to commit an act of terrorism?", if they say no then you are under no obligation to allow them to search you... however if they arrest you and sh*t it's their word against yours
Link to comment
Share on other sites

eh....doesnt 1 say section 43 and the other section 44?
yeah so 43 says they need suspicion, then 44 right after says they don't - immediate contradictionPolice chat sh*tin section 44 it saysAn authorisation under subsection (1) or (2) may be given only if the person giving it considers it expedient for the prevention of acts of terrorism.subsections 1/2 say what can be searchedso technically if they think you're going to stab someone then they can search you, however i suggest the next time you are about to be searched you ask them "do you think I am going to commit an act of terrorism?", if they say no then you are under no obligation to allow them to search you... however if they arrest you and sh*t it's their word against yours
i have first hand experience of how bullshit this law isi walked into a train station with a white guy and an asian guy. 2 of us had rucksacks on.police walk up: "hi guys where are you going?""just to a makes house in cardonald""ok well we'd just like to have a quick look in your backs""what?""we are stopping you under section 44 of the anti terrorism act so we are going to have a quick look in your bags"long story short: they find weed on my boy, it goes to court, the judge throws the case out because between her and the lawyer they arent sure if the stop and search legislation was used in a lawful way and CBA arguing it over something minor like weed.my friend walks free, everyones time is wastedbasically, the transport police who stopped us are jumped up pricks most likely abusing this law.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets be serious now.If I was a police officer in Cumbria, I am stopping any old van being driven by an older male and checking its engine to make sure they aren't using red diesel.If I was a police officer working in Peckham, I am stopping any young boy or girl driving a car and searching the usual spots plus doing full insurance checks.If I was a police officer at Waterloo Station, I am stopping any male between 18-35 who has a rucksack and is dressed slighty scruffy.f*ck being politically correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

long story short: they find weed on my boy, it goes to court, the judge throws the case out because between her and the lawyer they arent sure if the stop and search legislation was used in a lawful way and CBA arguing it over something minor like weed.my friend walks free, everyones time is wastedbasically, the transport police who stopped us are jumped up pricks most likely abusing this law.
:lol: so basically, they found weed on your boy?cool.STOP THE POLICE USING THESE POWERS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

come like the communism act back in the day in 50 years there will be a next bullshit ting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

long story short: they find weed on my boy, it goes to court, the judge throws the case out because between her and the lawyer they arent sure if the stop and search legislation was used in a lawful way and CBA arguing it over something minor like weed.my friend walks free, everyones time is wastedbasically, the transport police who stopped us are jumped up pricks most likely abusing this law.
:lol: so basically, they found weed on your boy?cool.STOP THE POLICE USING THESE POWERS
come on streetsyes he had weedbut the point im trying to make isthe legislation which was passed under the guise of 'anti-terrorism' is being misused and even the judge was backing themedit: infact let me add - i had a laptop in my bag, and for some reason they said 'open it'. not even turn it on to make sure its really a working laptop, just open the lid. in my eyes that proves that it was bullshit coz if they really thought we could be terrorists, shouldnt they have some sort of protocol to follow escially with testing something like a laptop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets be serious now.If I was a police officer in Cumbria, I am stopping any old van being driven by an older male and checking its engine to make sure they aren't using red diesel.If I was a police officer working in Peckham, I am stopping any young boy or girl driving a car and searching the usual spots plus doing full insurance checks.If I was a police officer at Waterloo Station, I am stopping any male between 18-35 who has a rucksack and is dressed slighty scruffy.f*ck being politically correct.
Good thing youre just a tea boy ey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

long story short: they find weed on my boy, it goes to court, the judge throws the case out because between her and the lawyer they arent sure if the stop and search legislation was used in a lawful way and CBA arguing it over something minor like weed.my friend walks free, everyones time is wastedbasically, the transport police who stopped us are jumped up pricks most likely abusing this law.
:lol: so basically, they found weed on your boy?cool.STOP THE POLICE USING THESE POWERS
come on streetsyes he had weedbut the point im trying to make isthe legislation which was passed under the guise of 'anti-terrorism' is being misused and even the judge was backing themedit: infact let me add - i had a laptop in my bag, and for some reason they said 'open it'. not even turn it on to make sure its really a working laptop, just open the lid. in my eyes that proves that it was bullshit coz if they really thought we could be terrorists, shouldnt they have some sort of protocol to follow escially with testing something like a laptop
lol, shoulda got your boy to hold it and then shout "turn it on NOOOW!!" see if the police would run away or something
Link to comment
Share on other sites

long story short: they find weed on my boy, it goes to court, the judge throws the case out because between her and the lawyer they arent sure if the stop and search legislation was used in a lawful way and CBA arguing it over something minor like weed.my friend walks free, everyones time is wastedbasically, the transport police who stopped us are jumped up pricks most likely abusing this law.
:lol: so basically, they found weed on your boy?cool.STOP THE POLICE USING THESE POWERS
come on streetsyes he had weedbut the point im trying to make isthe legislation which was passed under the guise of 'anti-terrorism' is being misused and even the judge was backing themedit: infact let me add - i had a laptop in my bag, and for some reason they said 'open it'. not even turn it on to make sure its really a working laptop, just open the lid. in my eyes that proves that it was bullshit coz if they really thought we could be terrorists, shouldnt they have some sort of protocol to follow escially with testing something like a laptop
I don't think they're allowed access to your machine without a warrant.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...