Met signal change of tack on Section 44

In an interview with the Daily Telegraph on Saturday, John Yates, Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, has suggested that it is time the police used more common sense methods of finding potential terrorists, as opposed to the indiscriminate methods of stop and search employed under Section 44.

Mr Yates admitted that while “profiling” was an “ugly and clumsy” term that had been mired in controversy it had to be utilised "in an intelligent manner".

The police chief said that stop and search powers have sometimes been used in a misguided way. Not every person can be treated as a threat and officers had to be more specific about those targeted – using “common sense” and “street-craft” to recognise suspicious behaviour.

He agreed that an “elderly white woman dressed in middle-class garb” was unlikely to be a terrorist – but added that there was no single profile of a terrorist and officers “could not focus on skin colour or religion”.

It is encouraging to see that the Met Police are finally recognising that Section 44 has done little to make Britain safer, and a lot to harm the relationship between the people and the police.
 
The simple fact remains: there have been no successful terrorism convictions resulting from Section 44.

Indiscriminate stop and search doesn't work and is an unnecessary invasion of privacy. The European Court has ruled it unnecessary and it is time the British police came into line.

By Dylan Sharpe

Comments

[LeChiffre]

"It is encouraging to see that the Met Police are finally recognising that Section 44 has done little to make Britain safer, and a lot to harm the relationship between the people and the police."

I agree but find it deeply embarrassing and disgraceful that we had to have a panel of foreign judges at the ECtHR to get the police in this country to look again at the virtues of "common sense" and "street craft".

[Lee]

"The police chief said that stop and search powers have sometimes been used in a misguided way."

No way !

I thought my little brother's broken finger - and now dead - video camera were a one off !!!

I am glad to hear John Yates join the queue of enforcement managers telling us 'this is simply not on' - I expect this latest message will put a close to this whole unseemly matter and we can - from tomorrow - go about our business unhindered by gangs of fluorescent violent and officious state goons - intent on our 'safety' even if that means we must be treated like not so much as shit and spoken to as if we had personally muddied the national waters.

Cheers Yates, but . . . . I can't help think an article (much less an edict) will go away way to change a culture built up over a generation.

[John Byrnes]

Profiling has failed us; we don’t need profiling to identify Individuals like the Christmas-Day Bomber or the Fort Hood Shooter! There is a better solution!

Virtually all media outlets are discussing whether we should be profiling all Arab Muslims; I will in the one-page explain why we don’t need profiling. Over 15 years ago, we at the Center for Aggression Management developed an easily-applied, measurable and culturally-neutral body language and behavior indicators exhibited by people who intend to perpetrate a terrorist act. This unique methodology utilizes proven research from the fields of psychology, medicine and law enforcement which, when joined together, identify clear, easily-used physiologically-based characteristics of individuals who are about to engage in terrorist activities in time to prevent their Moment of Commitment.

The Problem
Since the foiled terrorist attack by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian national on Northwest Flight 253 to Detroit, the President has repeatedly stated that there has been a systemic failure as he reiterates his commitment to fill this gap in our security. This incident, like the Fort Hood shooting, exemplifies why our government must apply every valid preventative approach to identify a potential terrorist.

The myriad methods to identify a terrorist, whether “no-fly list,” “explosive and weapons detection,” mental illness based approaches, “profiling” or “deception detection” - all continue to fail us. Furthermore, the development of deception detection training at Boston Logan Airport demonstrated that the Israeli methods of interrogation will not work in the United States.

All media outlets are discussing the need for profiling of Muslim Arabs, but profiling does not work for the following three reasons:

1. In practice, ethnic profiling tells us that within a certain group of people there is a higher probability for a terrorist; it does not tell us who the next terrorist is!

2. Ethnic profiling is contrary to the value our society places on diversity and freedom from discrimination based on racial, ethnic, religious, age and/or gender based criteria. If we use profiling it will diminish our position among the majority of affected citizens who support us as a beacon of freedom and liberty.

3. By narrowing our field of vision, profiling can lead to the consequence of letting terrorists go undetected, because the terrorist may not be part of any known “profile worthy” group – e.g., the Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh

The Solution
Our unique methodology for screening passengers can easily discern (independently of race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age, and gender) the defining characteristics of human beings who are about to engage in terrorist acts.

The question is when will our government use true “hostile intent” through the “continuum of aggressive behavior” to identify potential terrorists? Only when observers focus specifically on “aggressive behavior” do the objective and culturally neutral signs of “aggression” clearly stand out, providing the opportunity to prevent these violent encounters. This method will not only make all citizens safer, but will also pass the inevitable test of legal defensibility given probable action by the ACLU.

As our Government analyzes what went wrong regarding Abdulmatallab’s entrance into the United States, you can be assured that Al Qaeda is also analyzing how their plans went wrong. Who do you think will figure it out first . . . ?

Visit our blog at http://blog.AggressionManagement.com where we discuss the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted terrorist act on Flight 253.

[Nike Shox R4]

I believe that that more study we are, much more knowledge we possess. As long as we believe ourself, our dream will come true. I know this principle from your blog. Thank you so much.

[new balance]

In our efforts to adjust differences of opinion we should be free from intolerance of passion, and our judgements should be unmoved by alluring phrases and unvexed by selfidh interests.