I’d like to know how Dawn Butler would construct a model for making stop decisions. She wouldn’t use area or make of car. Wonder what might be better predictors instead.
I would love to see an explanation from the police, on how they define a suspicious car?
She’s been stopped 3 times yet is making out she can’t drive anywhere without being pulled over. Let’s forget the fact she wasn’t driving at all, and the driver doesn’t have the darkest shade of skin upon which the officers are supposedly making their decisions.
The Police claimed that the car was stopped because it wasnt registered locally. Therefore you can expect to be stopped when not driving locally.
There really is nothing to see here, apart from an MP trying to undermine police doing a difficult job.
Is this really a policy? Is the policy successful?
I would imagine stopping a random car not registered to the area vs stopping a random car registered to the area would achieve better outcomes.
People seem to think a model should always result in a positive match! If the expected outcome from a random search yields say 0.5% of arrests, and stopping out of town cars yields 1% it would be an incredibly useful detail, despite 99% of stops not resulting in arrest.
Other useful factors have been discussed before in this thread and they probably include Relative crime rate in area of stop Make/model/value of vehicle Driving behaviour, speed Driving behaviour, non-standard route Tinted windows Number of occupants Age of driver Time of day Probably others
I’m sure you’d realise that you could construct a scorecard based on the above and not need all boxes ticked to give you a better outcome than a truly random stop would do.
They’ve asked you to stop, don’t be offended, answer a couple of simple questions and go on your way. No need to fire up the video editing software and head to Twitter.
Note that unsuccessful stops are part of the process, but help to better train the model. This doesn’t account for user error in the inputs of course.
“The Police claimed that the car was stopped because it wasnt registered locally. Therefore you can expect to be stopped when not driving locally.”
Do you think the odds of getting pulled over out of town are >50%? Just because something makes something else more likely doesn’t mean you should expect the result.
My base risk of getting a cancer is 0.005%. I drink heavily and spend too much time on forums. My risk increases to 0.2%. I still don’t expect to get that cancer.
“The Police claimed that the car was stopped because it wasnt registered locally. Therefore you can expect to be stopped when not driving locally.”
Do you think the odds of getting pulled over out of town are >50%? Just because something makes something else more likely doesn’t mean you should expect the result.
My base risk of getting a cancer is 0.005%. I drink heavily and spend too much time on forums. My risk increases to 0.2%. I still don’t expect to get that cancer.
I have got fed up of this now.
We have discussed three stops on this thread.
The Police have apologised in two of the three cases.
I dont know if they did in the third, which was the bloke that locked himself in the car.
So lets just say they were wrong in two out of three cases.
These are facts on the latest stop.
The stop involved two cars.
They only made the stop as the registration was entered incorrectly.
Entering the registration incorrectly made them think that the owner lived in Yorkshire.
Hence the stop.
One of the officers pointed out that they couldnt see what was in the back of the car.
Can they ever see what is in the back of the car, that they are following?
They said they were targeting cars that were registered out of the area.
And that they were particularly concerned about gang and knife crime.
I wasnt aware that The Police could stop you based on where your car was registered.
Is this new or has it always been the case.
Why didnt they say to Dawn Butler that they only stopped them due to the car being registered in Yorkshire.
They could have then checked, realised their mistake, apologised, and it would be all over and done with quickly.
Why dont they tell the rest of us, that we can be stopped while travelling on business, going on holiday, or if you car is registered elsewhere etc, etc.
Dawn Butler didnt seem to be aware that they could do this, and I dont expect we have heard the last of it.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of these stops, The Police havent dealt with them in a professional way.
Lastly, I just cant for the life of me imagine numerous Police Officers being sent out on a shift to check car registrations in the hope of finding one that wasnt registered locally.
Do they have to find a suspicious car first, and then check if it is registered locally?
Or do they just keep checking cars until they find one that is not registered locally, and stop it anyway?
Do they let suspicious locally registered cars go?
What about a foreign one?
Say a German registration, probably being driven by someone on holiday?
Do they stop them?
Are there many Germans involved in gang, and knife crime in London?
Do they stop me on the way to the shops, because I have a company car, which is registered in Bristol?
What does a suspicious car look like?
Dont criminals drive all sorts of cars?
New flash ones for those that are good at it, and old bangers for those that arent.
How many Police Officers do you think we have regularly checking car registrations?
You’re right, nothing can be predicted and we’re better off never stopping anyone.
That’ll get results.
You’ve ignored all of the points about how a decision to stop might be made. Of course police will run a number plate, perhaps they will find that there is no tax MOT or insurance and stop for that, who cares? Perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed to run plates without lawyer-proof evidence?
What exactly do you think they do? Just spot skin colour and stick the lights on? I hear a lot about what they shouldn’t do, and not much about how to effectively police in high crime areas.
You’re right, nothing can be predicted and we’re better off never stopping anyone.
That’ll get results.
You’ve ignored all of the points about how a decision to stop might be made. Of course police will run a number plate, perhaps they will find that there is no tax MOT or insurance and stop for that, who cares? Perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed to run plates without lawyer-proof evidence?
What exactly do you think they do? Just spot skin colour and stick the lights on? I hear a lot about what they shouldn’t do, and not much about how to effectively police in high crime areas.
Dawn Butler: MP calls for 'system change' after police stop
The Met said the stop was a mistake caused by an officer incorrectly entering the car's registration number.
Ms Butler said the BMW that was stopped on Sunday was being driven by a black male friend and it was pulled over by two police cars.
She said officers said the car was registered in North Yorkshire and took the keys while checking the registration.
They then admitted there had been a mistake, that it was registered to the driver and apologised, she said.
Ms Butler told the BBC: "I still don't know why they punched the number plate into the system.
"I don't know what raised their suspicion. All I know is I'm black, my friend was black and he has a fairly decent car."
The force's statement did not explain why the car registration was entered in the first place.
The MP also said stop and search needed to be revised to a system with "better outcomes", but "it's going to take an intense amount of work".
Since raising the issue Ms Butler has been subjected to racist abuse on social media.
Police have the power to stop and search anyone, including stopping vehicles, if an officer has reasonable grounds to believe someone has been involved in a crime or is in possession of a prohibited item.
What were the reasonable grounds?
What rights do you have? You must comply if stopped by the police. However, they should also tell you: Why they are stopping you and under what law What they expect to find on you A receipt of the search, or information on how to get one
What is a stop and search? In England and Wales, stop and search is the power given to police to search an individual or vehicle if they have "reasonable grounds" to suspect the person is carrying: illegal drugs a weapon stolen property something which could be used to commit a crime, such as a crowbar
Police officers cannot stop you because of your race, gender or any previous criminal record. Instead, they must assess the situation based on current intelligence (for example, has there been a local robbery?) and on behaviour that - on balance - is suspicious. But what counts as "reasonable grounds" has sometimes been controversial. In 2017, police chiefs argued with the College of Policing - which sets guidance for police officers - after it said that the smell of marijuana alone did not always justify a stop and search.
Registered in Yorkshire wouldnt seem to break any law that I am aware of.
How many stop and searches are there? Stop and search has decreased considerably since its 2009 peak, when 1.5 million took place in England and Wales. That coincided with the Metropolitan Police's Operation Blunt II, which tackled knife crime in London, a scheme supported by then city mayor, Boris Johnson. Last year there were 380,000 searches, the first year-on-year increase in a decade. However, with knife crime increasing in recent years, some, including now Prime Minister Mr Johnson, have argued that it should be considered as a key way to tackle the rise.
Is stop and search racist? A black person is nine times more likely to be stopped and searched than a white person. Stop and search was mentioned as a key cause of tensions in reports after the 1981 Brixton riots and the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence. The inquiry into Mr Lawrence's murder led to the Metropolitan Police being labelled "institutionally racist". The debate on police practices and culture which followed led to better recording practices on ethnicity and stop and search. MP David Lammy's 2017 review of police and courts' treatment of black and minority ethnic groups (BAME), said those communities felt the justice system remained "stacked against them", with stop and search at the forefront.
Does the evidence back their use? A number of stop and search reports have questioned its impact, including ones commissioned by the government. A 2016 Home Office report into Operation Blunt II concluded that the tactic's widespread use had "no discernible crime-reducing effects", but did suggest that there could be greater impacts locally. In 2018, the government's Serious Violence Strategy made similar conclusions. In the same year, College of Policing found higher rates of Metropolitan Police stop and searches only slightly decreased crime immediately afterwards. Another way to measure stop and searches is by how likely they are to lead to an arrest. Since 2014, the proportion of stop and searches resulting in an arrest has doubled. But overall, the amount of arrests has dropped - it has become more effective in one way, but produced fewer overall arrests. It's worth pointing out though that not all searches where something is found will always result in arrest, such as small-scale drug possession.
Do they always require "reasonable grounds"? The majority of stop and searches are carried out under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, which requires "reasonable grounds." However, 4% of stop and searches are so called "Section 60s" and do not require this level of suspicion. A Section 60 can only happen in a set area (normally a neighbourhood or, sometimes a whole borough) for a set period of time. It must be approved by a senior police officer when there is a belief that a serious crime has been, or is about to be, committed. These Section 60s see lower arrest rates and target black people more. Recently, Mr Johnson reduced the threshold on the seniority of the police officer who can authorise a Section 60. However, their use was already increasing before that.
You’re right, nothing can be predicted and we’re better off never stopping anyone.
That’ll get results. Silly.
You’ve ignored all of the points about how a decision to stop might be made. Of course police will run a number plate, perhaps they will find that there is no tax MOT or insurance and stop for that, who cares? Perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed to run plates without lawyer-proof evidence?
No, I am questioning the reasonable grounds, which The Police often have difficulty in explaining? The officers in this case were involved in a task force. and focusing on gang and knife crime. They should have focused on older cars if they were checking on MoTs. They have been silent on reasonable grounds in this case
What exactly do you think they do? Just spot skin colour and stick the lights on? I hear a lot about what they shouldn’t do, and not much about how to effectively police in high crime areas.
No, I think they should be more open about what they are doing, and try to be more professional when dealing with the public. I would be very interested in knowing which of the reasonable grounds were applicable to Dawn Butler.
Stephen Lawrence murder probe ends There's disappointment at Scotland Yard's decision to close the investigation into the murder of Stephen Lawrence.
The Guardian thinks it's another sign of the Metropolitan Police "giving up after a long line of failures".
The Daily Mail agrees there's "bitter regret" that at least three of the teenager's alleged attackers have never been convicted, but says it's difficult to know what else the Met can do if it has run out of leads.
"Justice may have been cheated", writes Stephen Glover, "but shining a light on Stephen's murder has helped make Britain a fairer country".
You’re right, nothing can be predicted and we’re better off never stopping anyone.
That’ll get results. Silly.
You’ve ignored all of the points about how a decision to stop might be made. Of course police will run a number plate, perhaps they will find that there is no tax MOT or insurance and stop for that, who cares? Perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed to run plates without lawyer-proof evidence?
No, I am questioning the reasonable grounds, which The Police often have difficulty in explaining? The officers in this case were involved in a task force. and focusing on gang and knife crime. They should have focused on older cars if they were checking on MoTs. They have been silent on reasonable grounds in this case
What exactly do you think they do? Just spot skin colour and stick the lights on? I hear a lot about what they shouldn’t do, and not much about how to effectively police in high crime areas.
No, I think they should be more open about what they are doing, and try to be more professional when dealing with the public. I would be very interested in knowing which of the reasonable grounds were applicable to Dawn Butler.
I’m fed up with this now. The police want to release the bodycam footage, Dawn says she’d welcome it too, but the rules prevent them from doing this. Perhaps this was a section 60 stop due to the crime in the area. Perhaps it wasn’t and they had reasonable grounds, albeit based on an error. I think keying a number plate provides an input to reasonable grounds, I don’t think they require reasonable grounds to run the plate. But again, perhaps area, make of car, tinted windows, etc contributed to this. Maybe they were just bored and had a go. Who knows, and do we care?
Did the 9:1 racial disparity exist when they were checking 1.5million cars in 2009? Would we prefer more but less effective stops that do not discriminate by factors? 1/4 of the stops but twice the effectiveness, should we go further as per Dawn’s recommendation to do a lot of work to improve the outcomes. Perhaps just 1,000 stops but 90% accuracy? Would that be a deterrent?
You’re right, nothing can be predicted and we’re better off never stopping anyone.
That’ll get results. Silly.
You’ve ignored all of the points about how a decision to stop might be made. Of course police will run a number plate, perhaps they will find that there is no tax MOT or insurance and stop for that, who cares? Perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed to run plates without lawyer-proof evidence?
No, I am questioning the reasonable grounds, which The Police often have difficulty in explaining? The officers in this case were involved in a task force. and focusing on gang and knife crime. They should have focused on older cars if they were checking on MoTs. They have been silent on reasonable grounds in this case
What exactly do you think they do? Just spot skin colour and stick the lights on? I hear a lot about what they shouldn’t do, and not much about how to effectively police in high crime areas.
No, I think they should be more open about what they are doing, and try to be more professional when dealing with the public. I would be very interested in knowing which of the reasonable grounds were applicable to Dawn Butler.
I’m fed up with this now. The police want to release the bodycam footage, Dawn says she’d welcome it too, but the rules prevent them from doing this. Perhaps this was a section 60 stop due to the crime in the area. Perhaps it wasn’t and they had reasonable grounds, albeit based on an error. I think keying a number plate provides an input to reasonable grounds, I don’t think they require reasonable grounds to run the plate. But again, perhaps area, make of car, tinted windows, etc contributed to this. Maybe they were just bored and had a go. Who knows, and do we care?
Did the 9:1 racial disparity exist when they were checking 1.5million cars in 2009? Would we prefer more but less effective stops that do not discriminate by factors? 1/4 of the stops but twice the effectiveness, should we go further as per Dawn’s recommendation to do a lot of work to improve the outcomes. Perhaps just 1,000 stops but 90% accuracy? Would that be a deterrent?
Ive had enough too. Although it has raised questions. The guidelines seem clear. Yet The Police actions arent. I think you can discount a section 60 in this instance as it wasnt mentioned. Therefore they must have suspected the car occupants of carrying either, illegal drugs a weapon stolen property Which one did they suspect them of? Or could you plump for any of the above? How does the Yorkshire address fit in? How can you realistically suspect someone of carrying one of the above by looking at their car.
I think that stopping and searching in the street is a good thing. This is irrespective of arrest numbers, as I think that just doing this will discourage many from carrying knives, and other weapons. Harsher sentences may improve results further.
Stopping cars seems less productive and more annoying. The Police seem ill prepared when it comes to justifying their actions. When I was a youngster The Police often lied about why they had stopped you, making up stuff like your back light was out, you drove through a junction, or a red light etc. They cant get away with stuff like that these days.
I am all for The Police catching more criminals I suppose their hierarchy should decide how they spend their time. Although you would think that this should be results based.
When I first thought about this, I had visions of millions of coppers keying in car registrations daily, desperately trying to find one that was registered out of the area, in order to stop it.
Now the Yorkshire address seems to be a red herring.
As I said in my last post, I think it was a red herring anyway.
Maybe a bit like the old "your back light was out", until they they gave it a tap and it miraculously came back to life, before you were able to see that it wasnt out.
The "Yorkshire address is a modern version of that old classic.
Do you know how the Yorkshire address fit into the story?
Not specific to this case but Police nationwide do seem to have a stop and search policy (rightly or not) on vehicles registered outside of the 'local' area to find out the purpose of being in that area.The same situation occurred in the 1980's when drug runners hit upon the idea of using rental cars to transport their wares across the country's roads,so any Police number plate check came back to a fully legal hire vehicle,thus no reason to stop and check the vehicle or driver.However the Police soon cottoned on to that ruse and so then had an excuse to stop hire vehicles travelling the country's motorway networks.To this day there are drug gangs that are still being caught using this method.
Comments
Is the policy successful?
People seem to think a model should always result in a positive match! If the expected outcome from a random search yields say 0.5% of arrests, and stopping out of town cars yields 1% it would be an incredibly useful detail, despite 99% of stops not resulting in arrest.
Other useful factors have been discussed before in this thread and they probably include
Relative crime rate in area of stop
Make/model/value of vehicle
Driving behaviour, speed
Driving behaviour, non-standard route
Tinted windows
Number of occupants
Age of driver
Time of day
Probably others
I’m sure you’d realise that you could construct a scorecard based on the above and not need all boxes ticked to give you a better outcome than a truly random stop would do.
They’ve asked you to stop, don’t be offended, answer a couple of simple questions and go on your way. No need to fire up the video editing software and head to Twitter.
Note that unsuccessful stops are part of the process, but help to better train the model. This doesn’t account for user error in the inputs of course.
“The Police claimed that the car was stopped because it wasnt registered locally.
Therefore you can expect to be stopped when not driving locally.”
Do you think the odds of getting pulled over out of town are >50%?
Just because something makes something else more likely doesn’t mean you should expect the result.
My base risk of getting a cancer is 0.005%. I drink heavily and spend too much time on forums. My risk increases to 0.2%. I still don’t expect to get that cancer.
We have discussed three stops on this thread.
The Police have apologised in two of the three cases.
I dont know if they did in the third, which was the bloke that locked himself in the car.
So lets just say they were wrong in two out of three cases.
These are facts on the latest stop.
The stop involved two cars.
They only made the stop as the registration was entered incorrectly.
Entering the registration incorrectly made them think that the owner lived in Yorkshire.
Hence the stop.
One of the officers pointed out that they couldnt see what was in the back of the car.
Can they ever see what is in the back of the car, that they are following?
They said they were targeting cars that were registered out of the area.
And that they were particularly concerned about gang and knife crime.
I wasnt aware that The Police could stop you based on where your car was registered.
Is this new or has it always been the case.
Why didnt they say to Dawn Butler that they only stopped them due to the car being registered in Yorkshire.
They could have then checked, realised their mistake, apologised, and it would be all over and done with quickly.
Why dont they tell the rest of us, that we can be stopped while travelling on business, going on holiday, or if you car is registered elsewhere etc, etc.
Dawn Butler didnt seem to be aware that they could do this, and I dont expect we have heard the last of it.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of these stops, The Police havent dealt with them in a professional way.
Lastly, I just cant for the life of me imagine numerous Police Officers being sent out on a shift to check car registrations in the hope of finding one that wasnt registered locally.
Do they have to find a suspicious car first, and then check if it is registered locally?
Or do they just keep checking cars until they find one that is not registered locally, and stop it anyway?
Do they let suspicious locally registered cars go?
What about a foreign one?
Say a German registration, probably being driven by someone on holiday?
Do they stop them?
Are there many Germans involved in gang, and knife crime in London?
Do they stop me on the way to the shops, because I have a company car, which is registered in Bristol?
What does a suspicious car look like?
Dont criminals drive all sorts of cars?
New flash ones for those that are good at it, and old bangers for those that arent.
How many Police Officers do you think we have regularly checking car registrations?
That’ll get results.
You’ve ignored all of the points about how a decision to stop might be made. Of course police will run a number plate, perhaps they will find that there is no tax MOT or insurance and stop for that, who cares? Perhaps they shouldn’t be allowed to run plates without lawyer-proof evidence?
What exactly do you think they do? Just spot skin colour and stick the lights on? I hear a lot about what they shouldn’t do, and not much about how to effectively police in high crime areas.
The Met said the stop was a mistake caused by an officer incorrectly entering the car's registration number.
Ms Butler said the BMW that was stopped on Sunday was being driven by a black male friend and it was pulled over by two police cars.
She said officers said the car was registered in North Yorkshire and took the keys while checking the registration.
They then admitted there had been a mistake, that it was registered to the driver and apologised, she said.
Ms Butler told the BBC: "I still don't know why they punched the number plate into the system.
"I don't know what raised their suspicion. All I know is I'm black, my friend was black and he has a fairly decent car."
The force's statement did not explain why the car registration was entered in the first place.
The MP also said stop and search needed to be revised to a system with "better outcomes", but "it's going to take an intense amount of work".
Since raising the issue Ms Butler has been subjected to racist abuse on social media.
Police have the power to stop and search anyone, including stopping vehicles, if an officer has reasonable grounds to believe someone has been involved in a crime or is in possession of a prohibited item.
What were the reasonable grounds?
What rights do you have?
You must comply if stopped by the police.
However, they should also tell you:
Why they are stopping you and under what law
What they expect to find on you
A receipt of the search, or information on how to get one
What is a stop and search?
In England and Wales, stop and search is the power given to police to search an individual or vehicle if they have "reasonable grounds" to suspect the person is carrying:
illegal drugs
a weapon
stolen property
something which could be used to commit a crime, such as a crowbar
Police officers cannot stop you because of your race, gender or any previous criminal record.
Instead, they must assess the situation based on current intelligence (for example, has there been a local robbery?) and on behaviour that - on balance - is suspicious.
But what counts as "reasonable grounds" has sometimes been controversial.
In 2017, police chiefs argued with the College of Policing - which sets guidance for police officers - after it said that the smell of marijuana alone did not always justify a stop and search.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-47475566
Registered in Yorkshire wouldnt seem to break any law that I am aware of.
How many stop and searches are there?
Stop and search has decreased considerably since its 2009 peak, when 1.5 million took place in England and Wales.
That coincided with the Metropolitan Police's Operation Blunt II, which tackled knife crime in London, a scheme supported by then city mayor, Boris Johnson.
Last year there were 380,000 searches, the first year-on-year increase in a decade.
However, with knife crime increasing in recent years, some, including now Prime Minister Mr Johnson, have argued that it should be considered as a key way to tackle the rise.
Is stop and search racist?
A black person is nine times more likely to be stopped and searched than a white person.
Stop and search was mentioned as a key cause of tensions in reports after the 1981 Brixton riots and the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence.
The inquiry into Mr Lawrence's murder led to the Metropolitan Police being labelled "institutionally racist". The debate on police practices and culture which followed led to better recording practices on ethnicity and stop and search.
MP David Lammy's 2017 review of police and courts' treatment of black and minority ethnic groups (BAME), said those communities felt the justice system remained "stacked against them", with stop and search at the forefront.
Does the evidence back their use?
A number of stop and search reports have questioned its impact, including ones commissioned by the government.
A 2016 Home Office report into Operation Blunt II concluded that the tactic's widespread use had "no discernible crime-reducing effects", but did suggest that there could be greater impacts locally.
In 2018, the government's Serious Violence Strategy made similar conclusions.
In the same year, College of Policing found higher rates of Metropolitan Police stop and searches only slightly decreased crime immediately afterwards.
Another way to measure stop and searches is by how likely they are to lead to an arrest.
Since 2014, the proportion of stop and searches resulting in an arrest has doubled.
But overall, the amount of arrests has dropped - it has become more effective in one way, but produced fewer overall arrests.
It's worth pointing out though that not all searches where something is found will always result in arrest, such as small-scale drug possession.
Do they always require "reasonable grounds"?
The majority of stop and searches are carried out under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, which requires "reasonable grounds."
However, 4% of stop and searches are so called "Section 60s" and do not require this level of suspicion.
A Section 60 can only happen in a set area (normally a neighbourhood or, sometimes a whole borough) for a set period of time. It must be approved by a senior police officer when there is a belief that a serious crime has been, or is about to be, committed.
These Section 60s see lower arrest rates and target black people more.
Recently, Mr Johnson reduced the threshold on the seniority of the police officer who can authorise a Section 60. However, their use was already increasing before that.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-47475566
I would be very interested in knowing which of the reasonable grounds were applicable to Dawn Butler.
Stephen Lawrence murder probe ends
There's disappointment at Scotland Yard's decision to close the investigation into the murder of Stephen Lawrence.
The Guardian thinks it's another sign of the Metropolitan Police "giving up after a long line of failures".
The Daily Mail agrees there's "bitter regret" that at least three of the teenager's alleged attackers have never been convicted, but says it's difficult to know what else the Met can do if it has run out of leads.
"Justice may have been cheated", writes Stephen Glover, "but shining a light on Stephen's murder has helped make Britain a fairer country".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-53745809
Did the 9:1 racial disparity exist when they were checking 1.5million cars in 2009? Would we prefer more but less effective stops that do not discriminate by factors? 1/4 of the stops but twice the effectiveness, should we go further as per Dawn’s recommendation to do a lot of work to improve the outcomes. Perhaps just 1,000 stops but 90% accuracy? Would that be a deterrent?
Although it has raised questions.
The guidelines seem clear.
Yet The Police actions arent.
I think you can discount a section 60 in this instance as it wasnt mentioned.
Therefore they must have suspected the car occupants of carrying either,
illegal drugs
a weapon
stolen property
Which one did they suspect them of?
Or could you plump for any of the above?
How does the Yorkshire address fit in?
How can you realistically suspect someone of carrying one of the above by looking at their car.
I think that stopping and searching in the street is a good thing.
This is irrespective of arrest numbers, as I think that just doing this will discourage many from carrying knives, and other weapons.
Harsher sentences may improve results further.
Stopping cars seems less productive and more annoying.
The Police seem ill prepared when it comes to justifying their actions.
When I was a youngster The Police often lied about why they had stopped you, making up stuff like your back light was out, you drove through a junction, or a red light etc.
They cant get away with stuff like that these days.
I am all for The Police catching more criminals
I suppose their hierarchy should decide how they spend their time.
Although you would think that this should be results based.
When I first thought about this, I had visions of millions of coppers keying in car registrations daily, desperately trying to find one that was registered out of the area, in order to stop it.
Now the Yorkshire address seems to be a red herring.
Maybe a bit like the old "your back light was out", until they they gave it a tap and it miraculously came back to life, before you were able to see that it wasnt out.
The "Yorkshire address is a modern version of that old classic.
If you know any more, please do let us know.