Knife crime stop-and-search doesn’t work; media doesn’t care
A couple of weeks ago the Observer reported:
There is little connection between the use of stop and search powers by the Metropolitan police and reductions in knife crime, according to new figures analysed by a leading criminologist.
Professor Marian Fitzgerald says that in the case of one London borough – Southwark – a huge expansion in the use of “section 60″ stop and search powers has actually been accompanied by an increase in knife crime. The section 60 powers under the 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act allow the police to search anyone without needing to have grounds for suspicion in a designated area at a specific time where they believe there is threat of serious violence.
In other words the correlation between stop-and-search and reducing knife crime wasn’t clear at all. And this was only reported in the Guardian and the BBC.
When I point out that not only is this policy silly, but it’s also racial profiling – something right-wingers constantly say they are against – I’m told that we should accept it because it reduces crime. But the evidence doesn’t even stack up in London. Will the likes of the Daily Mail and ConservativeHome now accept the truth? Unlikely. Will Boris Johnson accept what’s going on?
In a now sadly typical display of arrogance Mayor Johnson dismissed FitzGerald, who worked at the Home Office under Tory ministers for years, as “some professor”. It seems that most of Britain’s media mainstream has little appetite for questioning the efficacy of stop-and-search, which seems to be acquiring sacred cow status.
That pretty much sums up right-wingers: against highlighting people’s race or religion except when they want to use that to lock people up. Dave points to this excellent article in Australia’s The Age, which does a much better job of reporting and discussing the issue than we’d get here.
[hat tip Dave Hill]
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: Civil liberties,Race politics
If stopping-’n-searching were privatised, with payments by results, the number of people arrested for knife crime would soar.
What’s needed is a training mission sent by the Goa police; they seem to be able to find drugs in the possession of the most improbable people.
imply a matter of finacial incentives, that’s all!
does the increase in crime in stop & search areas mean the crim’s have cottoned onto profiling & commit more crimes on the basis that they are at less risk of being stopped & searched & can commit the crimes because the police are occupied doing stop & searches…
Hmmmm, the lull before the inevitable storm.
Perhaps Sunny is still deciding what crap to throw at Andrew Gilligan. Watching the denialism and multiculturalist tantrum is going to be very funny indeed. Dont let me down Mr. H.
*Gets popcorn and comfy chair, let the comedy begin.
What’s needed is a training mission sent by the Goa police; they seem to be able to find drugs in the possession of the most improbable people.
I never had any problems in Goa. I suspect it’s just they’re good at spotting trouble makers.
Next you’ll be telling us we need some tactics and advice from the Saudi police?
Tory – is that tinfoil hat still on? You’re not even making sense any more.
Could be right, but when nobody knows the number of knives out there, it’s a difficult game.
And the profiling, well I don’t know the numbers in London, but in most other north european cities immigrant children, sorry to say, is engaged in crime (including street assault and robbery) by a factor 4-5 .
You need to identify what has brought down crime in the other boroughs to really get a good argument against stop and search.
I have tried to get an official answer to this question without any answer.
Sorry Off-Topic but an answer is needed:-
Police Force been told not to arrest burglars
Why have the Cleveland Police Force, (Teesside, UK), been told not to arrest burglars for a first offence.
Is this done to try to fool people into believing crime is less because crime figures are lower?