UK Politics Thread VII: Wake me DUP inside [can't wake UUP]

[Ifreann]

How many times has the phrase "female ejaculation" been used in these threads now, I wonder?

Over 100 times, a quick search suggests.

Only a matter of time before this forum is banned in Britain for its pornographic content.

---

The BBC had an article on acid attacks yesterday, before last night's attacks. Then a couple of stupid teenagers copied the idea. The number of people attacked has really been quite small, by blowing it out of all proportion the coverage will increase attacks, not lessen them. Which is why I feel there is probably an ulterior motive.

I don't. Acid attacks are fucking horrific, and involve a level of malice up there with intentional torture.

The proposed change that I've heard isn't even that significant - having to state a "valid reason" for carrying strong acid. Very reasonable in theory,. but if a person's carrying out an acid attack, they're probably not going to let themselves be stopped by police in the first place.

"IC1 male carrying unidentified liquid"
"ARMED POLICE, DROP THE FUCKING BOTTLE!"

Shyamalan twist, it was Coca Cola and he gets done for carrying acid with intent.

---

How many times has the phrase "female ejaculation" been used in these threads now, I wonder?

lewd

[MERIZoC]

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/expulsion-calls-labour-friends-israel-chair

purgepurgepurgepurgepurge

[Frank Zipper]

The BBC had an article on acid attacks yesterday, before last night's attacks. Then a couple of stupid teenagers copied the idea. The number of people attacked has really been quite small, by blowing it out of all proportion the coverage will increase attacks, not lessen them. Which is why I feel there is probably an ulterior motive.

I don't. Acid attacks are fucking horrific, and involve a level of malice up there with intentional torture.

The proposed change that I've heard isn't even that significant - having to state a "valid reason" for carrying strong acid. Very reasonable in theory,. but if a person's carrying out an acid attack, they're probably not going to let themselves be stopped by police in the first place.

So more stop and search. Suspect was carrying a water bottle.

[Calladan]

I don't. Acid attacks are fucking horrific, and involve a level of malice up there with intentional torture.

The proposed change that I've heard isn't even that significant - having to state a "valid reason" for carrying strong acid. Very reasonable in theory,. but if a person's carrying out an acid attack, they're probably not going to let themselves be stopped by police in the first place.

So more stop and search. Suspect was carrying a water bottle.

Pfft. I can just see the statistics now. Within six months, the number of black and Asian people detained for carrying acid has radically increased, while mysteriously there has been no similar increase for the number of white people, and those white people who were stopped and found to be carrying acid all had reasonable excuses like they needed it for a school project or to fill up their car.

(Or is that too cynical about previous stop and search statistics?)

[Vassenor]

I don't. Acid attacks are fucking horrific, and involve a level of malice up there with intentional torture.

The proposed change that I've heard isn't even that significant - having to state a "valid reason" for carrying strong acid. Very reasonable in theory,. but if a person's carrying out an acid attack, they're probably not going to let themselves be stopped by police in the first place.

So more stop and search. Suspect was carrying a water bottle.

With reference to the Codes of Practice of the Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), Code A, 2015 revision:

2.2 Reasonable grounds for suspicion is the legal test which a police officer must satisfy before they can stop and detain individuals or vehicles to search them under powers such as section 1 of PACE (to find stolen or prohibited articles) and section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (to find controlled drugs). This test must be applied to the particular circumstances in each case and is in two parts:

(i) Firstly, the officer must have formed a genuine suspicion in their own mind that they will find the object for which the search power being exercised allows them to search (see Annex A, second column, for examples); and

(ii) Secondly, the suspicion that the object will be found must be reasonable. This means that there must be an objective basis for that suspicion based on facts, information and/or intelligence which are relevant to the likelihood that the object in question will be found, so that a reasonable person would be entitled to reach the same conclusion based on the same facts and information and/or intelligence. Officers must therefore be able to explain the basis for their suspicion by reference to intelligence or information about, or some specific behaviour by, the person concerned (see paragraphs 3.8(d), 4.6 and 5.5).

[...]

2.2B Reasonable suspicion can never be supported on the basis of personal factors.

This means that unless the police have information or intelligence which provides a description of a person suspected of carrying an article for which there is a power to stop and search, the following cannot be used, alone or in combination with each other, or in combination with any other factor, as the reason for stopping and searching any individual, including any vehicle which they are driving or are being carried in:

(a) A person’s physical appearance with regard, for example, to any of the ‘relevant protected characteristics’ set out in the Equality Act 2010, section 149, which are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation (see paragraph 1.1 and Note 1A), or the fact that the person is known to have a previous conviction; and

(b) Generalisations or stereotypical images that certain groups or categories of people are more likely to be involved in criminal activity

[Calladan]

So more stop and search. Suspect was carrying a water bottle.

With reference to the Codes of Practice of the Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), Code A, 2015 revision:

2.2 Reasonable grounds for suspicion is the legal test which a police officer must satisfy before they can stop and detain individuals or vehicles to search them under powers such as section 1 of PACE (to find stolen or prohibited articles) and section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (to find controlled drugs). This test must be applied to the particular circumstances in each case and is in two parts:

(i) Firstly, the officer must have formed a genuine suspicion in their own mind that they will find the object for which the search power being exercised allows them to search (see Annex A, second column, for examples); and

(ii) Secondly, the suspicion that the object will be found must be reasonable. This means that there must be an objective basis for that suspicion based on facts, information and/or intelligence which are relevant to the likelihood that the object in question will be found, so that a reasonable person would be entitled to reach the same conclusion based on the same facts and information and/or intelligence. Officers must therefore be able to explain the basis for their suspicion by reference to intelligence or information about, or some specific behaviour by, the person concerned (see paragraphs 3.8(d), 4.6 and 5.5).

[...]

2.2B Reasonable suspicion can never be supported on the basis of personal factors.

This means that unless the police have information or intelligence which provides a description of a person suspected of carrying an article for which there is a power to stop and search, the following cannot be used, alone or in combination with each other, or in combination with any other factor, as the reason for stopping and searching any individual, including any vehicle which they are driving or are being carried in:

(a) A person’s physical appearance with regard, for example, to any of the ‘relevant protected characteristics’ set out in the Equality Act 2010, section 149, which are age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation (see paragraph 1.1 and Note 1A), or the fact that the person is known to have a previous conviction; and

(b) Generalisations or stereotypical images that certain groups or categories of people are more likely to be involved in criminal activity

Again, I say "Pfffft"

[Imperializt Russia]

A strong acid would be really easy to define just by PH levels too. it's not as if they'll be scooping up people for lemon juice possession lol.

It's been a long time since I did A-level chemistry, but it's not just the pH, the concentration is also enormously important, since a low-pH acid that is highly concentrated is obviously much more dangerous than a moderate-pH acid well-diluted.

E: after doing a quick wiki crash course, pH and "strong acid" are not the same. The danger of an acid (or alkali!) is more related to its dissociation constant, and more critically, its baser chemical properties of corrosiveness.

These are all highly imperfect measures, save for corrosiveness. Hydrofluoric acid, popularised in Breaking Bad, is extremely corrosive but is weakly dissociating. Citric acid is also weakly dissociating with a high pH, but is not particularly corrosive.
"Battery acid" is usually 2-5% concentration sulphuric acid, strong enough to still have a very low pH (0-2) and is primarily dangerous due to being corrosive.

What constitutes a "dangerous acid" could really be fulfilled by a one-page awareness guide for officers in the field. While one could claim to have "good intentions" for carrying battery acid, there could be simple regulations placed on what sort of container is suitable for carrying it in public - failure to abide would result in seizure of the substance.
pH could make an interim identification for investigation, but citric acid would be flagged as a false positive by this measure.

[Imperializt Russia]

So more stop and search. Suspect was carrying a water bottle.

Pfft. I can just see the statistics now. Within six months, the number of black and Asian people detained for carrying acid has radically increased, while mysteriously there has been no similar increase for the number of white people, and those white people who were stopped and found to be carrying acid all had reasonable excuses like they needed it for a school project or to fill up their car.

(Or is that too cynical about previous stop and search statistics?)

The most high-profile acid attack recently, which really got the ball rolling on these debates, has been a perceived Islamophobic attack on an Asian man and his cousin.

[Calladan]

Pfft. I can just see the statistics now. Within six months, the number of black and Asian people detained for carrying acid has radically increased, while mysteriously there has been no similar increase for the number of white people, and those white people who were stopped and found to be carrying acid all had reasonable excuses like they needed it for a school project or to fill up their car.

(Or is that too cynical about previous stop and search statistics?)

The most high-profile acid attack recently, which really got the ball rolling on these debates, has been a perceived Islamophobic attack on an Asian man and his cousin.

And I am suggesting given the startlingly successful history of stop and search in our country, it is FAR more likely the victims would have been the subject of a stop and search in the hours before the attack than the perpetrators would.

But don''t just take my word for it : http://www.stop-watch.org/news-comment/ ... -2014-2015

The rate at which people from minority ethnic backgrounds (BME) were searched compared to whites has decreased compared to the year 2013/2014: 16 searches every 1,000 of the population instead of 27 every 1,000. However, BME groups are still searched 2 times - and black people 4.2 times- the rate of whites.

[Philjia]

Theresa May's former spin doctor says that May was talked into wearing the £995 leather trousers by her former aide Fiona Hill.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 42481.html

How do you possibly make wearing horrible leather trousers that cost a grand sound like a good idea?

[Imperializt Russia]

The most high-profile acid attack recently, which really got the ball rolling on these debates, has been a perceived Islamophobic attack on an Asian man and his cousin.

And I am suggesting given the startlingly successful history of stop and search in our country, it is FAR more likely the victims would have been the subject of a stop and search in the hours before the attack than the perpetrators would.

But don''t just take my word for it : http://www.stop-watch.org/news-comment/ ... -2014-2015

The rate at which people from minority ethnic backgrounds (BME) were searched compared to whites has decreased compared to the year 2013/2014: 16 searches every 1,000 of the population instead of 27 every 1,000. However, BME groups are still searched 2 times - and black people 4.2 times- the rate of whites.

This is because stop and searches are predominantly for "traditional" weapons and drugs, which do target BME groups. I would argue the specific victims of the attack I am referring would not have been likely candidates for stop-and-search, but that is a class issue, not a racial issue.

High-profile acid attacks in the UK are carried out by mostly white men, or orchestrated by white men.

[Calladan]

And I am suggesting given the startlingly successful history of stop and search in our country, it is FAR more likely the victims would have been the subject of a stop and search in the hours before the attack than the perpetrators would.

But don''t just take my word for it : http://www.stop-watch.org/news-comment/ ... -2014-2015

The rate at which people from minority ethnic backgrounds (BME) were searched compared to whites has decreased compared to the year 2013/2014: 16 searches every 1,000 of the population instead of 27 every 1,000. However, BME groups are still searched 2 times - and black people 4.2 times- the rate of whites.

This is because stop and searches are predominantly for "traditional" weapons and drugs, which do target BME groups. I would argue the specific victims of the attack I am referring would not have been likely candidates for stop-and-search, but that is a class issue, not a racial issue.

High-profile acid attacks in the UK are carried out by mostly white men, or orchestrated by white men.

*shrug* If the police are specifically going to split the stop and search into two types, then maybe it might work. But given the paranoia about terrorism sweeping the country as well, I don't think it is overly cynical to suggest it is likely that Muslim men are going to be increasingly targeted for "random" searches every now and then, especially those wearing long coats or warm jackets (that might hide something underneath).

And while there is a flurry of outrage in the news right now about this, I don't see a police operation that specifically seems to target white men (and, if you what you suggest is true, working class white men) being accepted by the right wing press for long. There will be an anti-immigrant back lash about how the British Bobbies are being used as jackbooted thugs to protect these foreign scum by harassing proud English men and women who've lived here all their lives and the same MPs who are currently wringing their hands about how bad these acid attacks are will run for cover and start sucking up to the right wing. Again.

(Sometimes I think I am way too cynical about this country, then I remember The EDL, Farage and Nick Griffin and realise I am not nearly cynical enough).

[Frank Zipper]

Theresa May's former spin doctor says that May was talked into wearing the £995 leather trousers by her former aide Fiona Hill.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 42481.html

How do you possibly make wearing horrible leather trousers that cost a grand sound like a good idea?

"Does my ass look strong and stable in these?"

"Yes"

[Imperializt Russia]

This is because stop and searches are predominantly for "traditional" weapons and drugs, which do target BME groups. I would argue the specific victims of the attack I am referring would not have been likely candidates for stop-and-search, but that is a class issue, not a racial issue.

High-profile acid attacks in the UK are carried out by mostly white men, or orchestrated by white men.

*shrug* If the police are specifically going to split the stop and search into two types, then maybe it might work. But given the paranoia about terrorism sweeping the country as well, I don't think it is overly cynical to suggest it is likely that Muslim men are going to be increasingly targeted for "random" searches every now and then, especially those wearing long coats or warm jackets (that might hide something underneath).

And while there is a flurry of outrage in the news right now about this, I don't see a police operation that specifically seems to target white men (and, if you what you suggest is true, working class white men) being accepted by the right wing press for long. There will be an anti-immigrant back lash about how the British Bobbies are being used as jackbooted thugs to protect these foreign scum by harassing proud English men and women who've lived here all their lives and the same MPs who are currently wringing their hands about how bad these acid attacks are will run for cover and start sucking up to the right wing. Again.

(Sometimes I think I am way too cynical about this country, then I remember The EDL, Farage and Nick Griffin and realise I am not nearly cynical enough).

As Sous pointed out earlier, if you are being stopped and searched, the officers have to be searching for a specific thing in order to stop you - drugs, weapons, stolen property, and in the future, maybe acid.

I see no reason why BME individuals would be stopped and searched in relation to acid, nor at a disproportionate rate.
Drugs and weapons searches (and stolen property I assume) are ethnically disproportionate due to stereotypes about those ethnicities and the self-fulfilling prophecy of catching more BME persons in possession of contraband, focusing more resources on BME persons in response to that, and via the extended dragnet happening to catch more BME persons in possession.
It's arguably a failure of statistics.

[Calladan]

*shrug* If the police are specifically going to split the stop and search into two types, then maybe it might work. But given the paranoia about terrorism sweeping the country as well, I don't think it is overly cynical to suggest it is likely that Muslim men are going to be increasingly targeted for "random" searches every now and then, especially those wearing long coats or warm jackets (that might hide something underneath).

And while there is a flurry of outrage in the news right now about this, I don't see a police operation that specifically seems to target white men (and, if you what you suggest is true, working class white men) being accepted by the right wing press for long. There will be an anti-immigrant back lash about how the British Bobbies are being used as jackbooted thugs to protect these foreign scum by harassing proud English men and women who've lived here all their lives and the same MPs who are currently wringing their hands about how bad these acid attacks are will run for cover and start sucking up to the right wing. Again.

(Sometimes I think I am way too cynical about this country, then I remember The EDL, Farage and Nick Griffin and realise I am not nearly cynical enough).

As Sous pointed out earlier, if you are being stopped and searched, the officers have to be searching for a specific thing in order to stop you - drugs, weapons, stolen property, and in the future, maybe acid.

I see no reason why BME individuals would be stopped and searched in relation to acid, nor at a disproportionate rate.
Drugs and weapons searches (and stolen property I assume) are ethnically disproportionate due to stereotypes about those ethnicities and the self-fulfilling prophecy of catching more BME persons in possession of contraband, focusing more resources on BME persons in response to that, and via the extended dragnet happening to catch more BME persons in possession.
It's arguably a failure of statistics.

*rolls eyes then walks away*

[Frank Zipper]

I suppose we are inevitably heading towards a future where all our purchases are tracked.

[Souseiseki]

I suppose we are inevitably heading towards a future where all our purchases are tracked.

are you looking forward to cyberpunk dystopia except we don't even get any of the cool shit

[Eastfield Lodge]

*shrug* If the police are specifically going to split the stop and search into two types, then maybe it might work. But given the paranoia about terrorism sweeping the country as well, I don't think it is overly cynical to suggest it is likely that Muslim men are going to be increasingly targeted for "random" searches every now and then, especially those wearing long coats or warm jackets (that might hide something underneath).

And while there is a flurry of outrage in the news right now about this, I don't see a police operation that specifically seems to target white men (and, if you what you suggest is true, working class white men) being accepted by the right wing press for long. There will be an anti-immigrant back lash about how the British Bobbies are being used as jackbooted thugs to protect these foreign scum by harassing proud English men and women who've lived here all their lives and the same MPs who are currently wringing their hands about how bad these acid attacks are will run for cover and start sucking up to the right wing. Again.

(Sometimes I think I am way too cynical about this country, then I remember The EDL, Farage and Nick Griffin and realise I am not nearly cynical enough).

I see no reason why BME individuals would be stopped and searched in relation to acid, nor at a disproportionate rate.

Really? All those stories from the subcontinent about women getting acid attacked by rejected guys not sound familiar?

[Frank Zipper]

I suppose we are inevitably heading towards a future where all our purchases are tracked.

are you looking forward to cyberpunk dystopia except we don't even get any of the cool shit

Consequence of a cashless society.

[Fartsniffage]

I see no reason why BME individuals would be stopped and searched in relation to acid, nor at a disproportionate rate.

Really? All those stories from the subcontinent about women getting acid attacked by rejected guys not sound familiar?

But we don't live on the subcontinent....

[Frank Zipper]

Soooooo anyway the richest 1% are getting richer, they now take 8.7% of the nation's income, while everybody else is pretty much struggling with incomes that haven't risen much in ten years. People can't afford to get on the housing ladder. Food bank usage is up, people go without meals. Homelessness is up. Public services have been cut so hard it is hurting, public libraries are disappearing, public parks and pre-school services are likely to follow. Vast numbers of peoples jobs are going to suddenly disappear. Life is about to get really shit for nearly al the population of this country.

It seems obvious to me that the very rich need to open up their wallets and pay more in taxes. Or the socialism might get really dangerous.

[Geilinor]

Theresa May's former spin doctor says that May was talked into wearing the £995 leather trousers by her former aide Fiona Hill.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 42481.html

How do you possibly make wearing horrible leather trousers that cost a grand sound like a good idea?

By being a terrible advisor.

[Ifreann]

Really? All those stories from the subcontinent about women getting acid attacked by rejected guys not sound familiar?

But we don't live on the subcontinent....

Maybe we should reclassify Britain as a subcontinent of Europe. And while the Kippers are celebrating that, quietly untrigger article 50.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

But we don't live on the subcontinent....

Maybe we should reclassify Britain as a subcontinent of Europe. And while the Kippers are celebrating that, quietly untrigger article 50.

Bah. If anyone's going to be "sub" it'll be Europe.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Welcome to the UK Politics Thread: A thread for politics, politics in the UK. PolitUKs.

Last time we checked off Theresa May called a snap election after repeatedly saying she wouldn't in anticipation of getting a stunning majority. Having proceeded to waste a 25+ point lead over the opposition and end up losing said majority, she has given the nation repeated assurances that she is "not owned, not owned" and stayed in power by negotiating a deal with the DUP, a party with "eccentric" views. This has lead to fun questions such as "does this violate the Good Friday Agreement", "did we just waste our first months of Brexit negotations on making our government even more unstable" and "did we seriously just pledge to spend £1.5bn pretty much entirely to prop up a government that couldn't get into power otherwise", all of which and more you will be able to discuss in the latest incarnation of the exciting UK Politics Thread. (For the record, my answers are "maybe", "yes" and "yes".)

Just as the UK enters a new era of post-election fun, we too shall celebrate the old thread hitting 500 pages by entering a new thread, a new age of funposting. How symbolic!

Whatever democratic governments the British people vote in an out of power at any time is not a waste, it is called multi political party democracy.