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.
Yes I think that is the section 60 referred to above.
I believe it came up due to incorrect typing in. Perhaps the ANPR service was down for that vehicle.
If you know any more, please do let us know.
No my point is this. You are a Police Officer following a car. You have your genuine suspicions that the occupants may be guilty of possession of one of the three things you are allowed to stop them for. Drugs, weapons, or stolen goods. Therefore you are surely going to stop the car. Why wouldnt you? In this case one of them obviously asked for assistance, as 2 cars turned up. Unless of course they were patrolling in tandem. So my point is that you surely must have suspicion before checking the registration address. Once you have suspicion you must surely stop the car anyway. You wouldnt say "Oh its registered in Hackney, lets let them go, with their drugs, weapons, or stolen goods." So how does Yorkshire get involved?
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.
Yes I think that is the section 60 referred to above.
I thought a Section 60 was only implemented during a specific time and area which had to be authorised by a senior ranking officer for a specific reason?
Then again it goes back to your 'Back light out so we stopped you' post earlier,if the Police want to stop and search they will.
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.
Yes I think that is the section 60 referred to above.
I thought a Section 60 was only implemented during a specific time and area which had to be authorised by a senior ranking officer for a specific reason?
Then again it goes back to your 'Back light out so we stopped you' post earlier,if the Police want to stop and search they will.
I wouldnt disagree they just get in more trouble with it these days, and dont seem able to deal with it very well.
Priti Patel in 'racist' French storm: Home Secretary enrages Paris by telling Tory MPs migrants want to cross Channel to escape prejudice
The Home Secretary Priti Patel's (pictured left on Monday on a visit to Dover) inflammatory remarks, in which she said that migrants were crossing the Channel to escape 'racist' France where they feared they would be tortured in a private meeting with Tory MPs, infuriated French politicians. One blasted: 'Madam Patel is not a politician who does much thinking.' But the row came as Europe's top judges condemned France for 'degrading and inhumane' treatment of asylum seekers (pictured right arriving in Dover today) in forcing them to sleep rough for months in 'constant fear of being attacked or robbed'.
The borders thing is a bit of an issue and has been for many years.
I'm never sure with politicians and they are always agendas in the equation.
There seems to be a suggestion (if the sources are to be believed) that the HS believes the French are more racist than the UK. They say they aren't racist. Played as expected by the French officials.
The borders thing is a bit of an issue and has been for many years.
I'm never sure with politicians and they are always agendas in the equation.
There seems to be a suggestion (if the sources are to be believed) that the HS believes the French are more racist than the UK. They say they aren't racist. Played as expected by the French officials.
You would have hoped we could have learnt to police our borders by now.
I believe it came up due to incorrect typing in. Perhaps the ANPR service was down for that vehicle.
If you know any more, please do let us know.
No my point is this. You are a Police Officer following a car. You have your genuine suspicions that the occupants may be guilty of possession of one of the three things you are allowed to stop them for. Drugs, weapons, or stolen goods. Therefore you are surely going to stop the car. Why wouldnt you? In this case one of them obviously asked for assistance, as 2 cars turned up. Unless of course they were patrolling in tandem. So my point is that you surely must have suspicion before checking the registration address. Once you have suspicion you must surely stop the car anyway. You wouldnt say "Oh its registered in Hackney, lets let them go, with their drugs, weapons, or stolen goods." So how does Yorkshire get involved?
I believe it came up due to incorrect typing in. Perhaps the ANPR service was down for that vehicle.
If you know any more, please do let us know.
Dawn Butler police stop 'rooted in bias', says UK chief of black police officers Exclusive: Andrew George calls for urgent reform of system that views black people as ‘criminals or drug dealers’
George questioned the grounds for the stop last Sunday in east London, after police said said they had wrongly noted the car’s registration plate and believed it to be registered to northern England. He said: “I would ask why a vehicle being registered in Yorkshire and driving in a global hub like London is enough, by itself, to warrant checking the owner details.”
Shocking moment white man is knocked clean out with single punch after racist rant where he told black Tube passengers they are ‘all going back’ White man shouts 'you're all going back' at a group of black tube passengers Footage shows him in explicit rant as passengers say he must have 'death wish' Black man knocks out the white man with one punch while leaving the train Did you witness this incident? Email katie.feehan@mailonline.co.uk
The white man yelled 'they're lesser than us' and 'they're my pets' in the direction of black passengers and when they got up to leave, the white man squared up with clenched fists
Hmm ok, no immediate views offered from the well worth it viewing. In my mind the comments and aggressive nature of his behaviour are disgusting and I hate to see it. But I’d take that as read and assume most agree, so here are some other questions you might have a view on:
1. How many crimes do you see being committed in this video? 2. What do you think he is referring to when he says “it’s popular now isn’t it”? 3. Do you agree with the lady who says “don’t help him, leave him there, he deserves it he’s a racist” 4. Would he deserve to die here, if say he’d hit his head and was left? a. If not where would you draw the line? Long term damage? Short term damage? Hospitalisation? Other? 5. Do you think this guy was drunk or under the influence of drugs, is this any defence for his behaviour? a. Are there any defences? Mental illness? Brain tumour? 6. Did you think it was well worth viewing because you thought it was funny, or because you thought the violence was justified? Something else? 7. If he had died would you want to see the guy who threw the punch prosecuted? 8. Have you seen the unedited video which shows him out cold with his eyes open, does this matter at all? 9. Do you think this is evidence that the UK or London is full of racists? Does he represent the majority white voice? a. Did you see the fuller video which shows a white man challenging him and saying that no one wants to hear his vile rantings? (Search Billy Steel on Twitter for fuller and uncensored video)
If you don’t want to discuss these things I don’t know why you post them. I’m very close to never responding to you posting articles ever again, as you don’t seem to want to be questioned on anything, but intrigued to know what you find ‘well worth watching’ in this horrific video.
Hmm ok, no immediate views offered from the well worth it viewing. In my mind the comments and aggressive nature of his behaviour are disgusting and I hate to see it. But I’d take that as read and assume most agree, so here are some other questions you might have a view on:
1. How many crimes do you see being committed in this video? 2. What do you think he is referring to when he says “it’s popular now isn’t it”? 3. Do you agree with the lady who says “don’t help him, leave him there, he deserves it he’s a racist” 4. Would he deserve to die here, if say he’d hit his head and was left? a. If not where would you draw the line? Long term damage? Short term damage? Hospitalisation? Other? 5. Do you think this guy was drunk or under the influence of drugs, is this any defence for his behaviour? a. Are there any defences? Mental illness? Brain tumour? 6. Did you think it was well worth viewing because you thought it was funny, or because you thought the violence was justified? Something else? 7. If he had died would you want to see the guy who threw the punch prosecuted? 8. Have you seen the unedited video which shows him out cold with his eyes open, does this matter at all? 9. Do you think this is evidence that the UK or London is full of racists? Does he represent the majority white voice? a. Did you see the fuller video which shows a white man challenging him and saying that no one wants to hear his vile rantings? (Search Billy Steel on Twitter for fuller and uncensored video)
If you don’t want to discuss these things I don’t know why you post them. I’m very close to never responding to you posting articles ever again, as you don’t seem to want to be questioned on anything, but intrigued to know what you find ‘well worth watching’ in this horrific video.
You havent got lost on the way to The Oxford Union have you?
One day it will dawn on you that this is a poker forum.
You seem to be determined to prove you are the cleverest person on here.
Let me make something absolutely clear. I couldnt give a toss whether or not you reply to any of my posts.
Back to the post in question.
I posted it because I thought his behaviour was shocking.
It was so bad that there is a rumour that Priti Patel wants to reshoot it, with him speaking with a French accent.
I thought the guy got his just deserts, as did many on the tube.
End of.
I dont have a view on your questions.
I havent looked into getting him some therapy, whether his teeth are intact, or if the guy that punched him damaged his hand.
I dont even know if The Police intend to prosecute him for not wearing a mask.
Although had I been expecting a cross examination, I might have done a bit more homework, but probably not.
I havent seen the unedited video, I just like the end bit where he gets knocked out.
Just dawned on me that this is a poker forum. All the non-poker tripe that you post every single day must have confused me. I only ever used to look at Poker Chat and occasionally pop into Poker Clinic, but since someone pointed out the Discussions button I have the misfortune of seeing it all.
You don’t have to be the cleverest on here to know that a forum is a place where ideas and views are exchanged and challenged, but it’s clear now that’s not why you’re posting.
You should find the video without the blurred face, you’ll get much more out of seeing him laying there with his unresponsive glazed eyes open. Well worth watching if you’re into that kind of thing.
Comments
You are a Police Officer following a car.
You have your genuine suspicions that the occupants may be guilty of possession of one of the three things you are allowed to stop them for.
Drugs, weapons, or stolen goods.
Therefore you are surely going to stop the car.
Why wouldnt you?
In this case one of them obviously asked for assistance, as 2 cars turned up.
Unless of course they were patrolling in tandem.
So my point is that you surely must have suspicion before checking the registration address.
Once you have suspicion you must surely stop the car anyway.
You wouldnt say "Oh its registered in Hackney, lets let them go, with their drugs, weapons, or stolen goods."
So how does Yorkshire get involved?
Then again it goes back to your 'Back light out so we stopped you' post earlier,if the Police want to stop and search they will.
In the unprovoked racist attack, a white man crosses the road in Galway and aggressively shouts the n-word at the woman in broad daylight.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
The Home Secretary Priti Patel's (pictured left on Monday on a visit to Dover) inflammatory remarks, in which she said that migrants were crossing the Channel to escape 'racist' France where they feared they would be tortured in a private meeting with Tory MPs, infuriated French politicians. One blasted: 'Madam Patel is not a politician who does much thinking.' But the row came as Europe's top judges condemned France for 'degrading and inhumane' treatment of asylum seekers (pictured right arriving in Dover today) in forcing them to sleep rough for months in 'constant fear of being attacked or robbed'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
I also think that she would be better focusing on, and solving the problem.
The problem is that they cant apply for asylum until they are on British soil.
Change that and you probably solve the problem, as I suggested above.
I'm never sure with politicians and they are always agendas in the equation.
There seems to be a suggestion (if the sources are to be believed) that the HS believes the French are more racist than the UK. They say they aren't racist. Played as expected by the French officials.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/channel-crossings-migrants-priti-patel-france-racist-country-a9672821.html
HS says the people mention racism and she merely explained the "pull factors"
Exclusive: Andrew George calls for urgent reform of system that views black people as ‘criminals or drug dealers’
George questioned the grounds for the stop last Sunday in east London, after police said said they had wrongly noted the car’s registration plate and believed it to be registered to northern England. He said: “I would ask why a vehicle being registered in Yorkshire and driving in a global hub like London is enough, by itself, to warrant checking the owner details.”
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/16/dawn-butler-police-stop-rooted-in-bias-says-black-police-officers-chief-andrew-george
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8633157/Moment-white-man-knocked-racist-rant-telling-black-passengers-theyre-going-back.html
Shocking moment white man is knocked clean out with single punch after racist rant where he told black Tube passengers they are ‘all going back’
White man shouts 'you're all going back' at a group of black tube passengers
Footage shows him in explicit rant as passengers say he must have 'death wish'
Black man knocks out the white man with one punch while leaving the train
Did you witness this incident? Email katie.feehan@mailonline.co.uk
The white man yelled 'they're lesser than us' and 'they're my pets' in the direction of black passengers and when they got up to leave, the white man squared up with clenched fists
1. How many crimes do you see being committed in this video?
2. What do you think he is referring to when he says “it’s popular now isn’t it”?
3. Do you agree with the lady who says “don’t help him, leave him there, he deserves it he’s a racist”
4. Would he deserve to die here, if say he’d hit his head and was left?
a. If not where would you draw the line? Long term damage? Short term damage? Hospitalisation? Other?
5. Do you think this guy was drunk or under the influence of drugs, is this any defence for his behaviour?
a. Are there any defences? Mental illness? Brain tumour?
6. Did you think it was well worth viewing because you thought it was funny, or because you thought the violence was justified? Something else?
7. If he had died would you want to see the guy who threw the punch prosecuted?
8. Have you seen the unedited video which shows him out cold with his eyes open, does this matter at all?
9. Do you think this is evidence that the UK or London is full of racists? Does he represent the majority white voice?
a. Did you see the fuller video which shows a white man challenging him and saying that no one
wants to hear his vile rantings? (Search Billy Steel on Twitter for fuller and uncensored video)
If you don’t want to discuss these things I don’t know why you post them. I’m very close to never responding to you posting articles ever again, as you don’t seem to want to be questioned on anything, but intrigued to know what you find ‘well worth watching’ in this horrific video.
One day it will dawn on you that this is a poker forum.
You seem to be determined to prove you are the cleverest person on here.
Let me make something absolutely clear. I couldnt give a toss whether or not you reply to any of my posts.
Back to the post in question.
I posted it because I thought his behaviour was shocking.
It was so bad that there is a rumour that Priti Patel wants to reshoot it, with him speaking with a French accent.
I thought the guy got his just deserts, as did many on the tube.
End of.
I dont have a view on your questions.
I havent looked into getting him some therapy, whether his teeth are intact, or if the guy that punched him damaged his hand.
I dont even know if The Police intend to prosecute him for not wearing a mask.
Although had I been expecting a cross examination, I might have done a bit more homework, but probably not.
I havent seen the unedited video, I just like the end bit where he gets knocked out.
Just dawned on me that this is a poker forum. All the non-poker tripe that you post every single day must have confused me. I only ever used to look at Poker Chat and occasionally pop into Poker Clinic, but since someone pointed out the Discussions button I have the misfortune of seeing it all.
You don’t have to be the cleverest on here to know that a forum is a place where ideas and views are exchanged and challenged, but it’s clear now that’s not why you’re posting.
You should find the video without the blurred face, you’ll get much more out of seeing him laying there with his unresponsive glazed eyes open. Well worth watching if you’re into that kind of thing.