The usual suspects, is it?
The usual suspects, is it?
Rentamob. The people who don't protest about the Kims and think that Mao's great leap forward won him the Olympic long jump.
The best bit is it all kicked off in Rinkeby last night (an area with almost 100% immigrant population). Cars were set on fire and when the police showed up they were pelted with stones and had to fire off shots to disperse the crowd and get out of there. The fire crews were then unable to get to the scene because the police wouldn't go back in. This coming a day after the leading tabloid over here did a special piece in English rubbishing the FOX news report, with the part about "no-go zones" being one they were very keen to play down :hehe:
Just seen this. A good read. I should add, a good read in the sense you get an idea of the self loathing rather than looking at the real problem.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/h...e-immigration/
But if law-enforcement authorities use the data to identify that 90% of burglaries are committed by Irish, for example, they might be able to address the issues within the Irish community which lead to them being drunken, belligerent, sectarian, wife-beating thieves.
Down with racial stereotyping.
There is new European wide DP legislation coming into play next year, I am sure you are all aware of it under the term GDPR. One of the key issues within personal data, and the capture and holding of such data, is that it is relevant.
I may take a challenge against your so called “law-enforcement organisations” to your High Court on this.
So if, for instance, 85% of gun crime were being committed by a particular ethnicity, you wouldn't see that as valuable information in the sense of causing you to feel that perhaps there is a particular issue with gun violence among certain communities and perhaps addressing it? You think it would be sensible to treat that community in exactly the same way as you do a community that commits 0% of the gun crime?
Nope, it happens to be true. Judging how someone may or may not behave based on which 'community' we think they belong to is just too close to racial/religious/whatever stereotyping for me, Burney.
We must all be treated equally by the authorities with no preconditions or anarchy is not far away. It's part of being civilized.
I've just left a Facebook message for Ian Harvey which I expect will provoke a typical Ian Harvey response shortly. Ian likes to reduce complex problems down to an absurdly simplified form that suits the narrative that he's seeking to defend. In this case, the GBP exchange rate is currently being controlled solely by the financial markets view of Theresa May, whom Ian hates.
It's nonsense, of course, but Ian can only really deal with simplified forms of the problem because that is all he is capable of understanding and because his narrative is far more important to him than actually understanding the problem.
Kinda like you, Monty.
Actually, I'm almost certain we both feel exactly the same way about the subject of racial/ethnic profiling - that it is a necessary evil, but must always be done in a sensitive, tactful and moderate way.
Because I do not believe you truly think we should be trying to stop jihadists by equally profiling non-muslims, given that 100% of jihadists are muslims
No, it's head-in-the-clouds idiocy driven by a fundamentally misguided idea of what law enforcement bodies are there to achieve. You also don't believe it for a second.
Judging and policing are two different things. We should all be equal before the law, but we most certainly should not be equal before law enforcement bodies. Their job is to prevent and solve crime and that means looking where it is most likely to happen and at those people who are most likely to commit it. If law enforcement bodies behaved as you suggest, they would waste vast resources, crime rates would soar and their clear-up rates would plummet.
Seriously, though, why on earth am I arguing with someone who's already conceded his approach to crime prevention and policing makes no practical sense? Fückssake! :hehe: