Brixton tube: metal detectors and machine-gun toting police!

[detective-boy]

I appreciate the need for safety, but there seemed to be plenty of surplus officers doing little more than milling around and hindering the flow of people.

I take your point - they do tend to do overkill sometimes - Health & Safety considerations don't help - there is a beliefe you have to be able to deal with every "what if .." no matter how unlikely.

And the downside of bored officers is they tend to get involved when the don't need to and escalate things - same principle ass a van full of eight or ten coppers turning up at a call which only needs one or two - strong supervisors keep the rest in the van, weak ones let them all out and suddenly they find problems that aren't really there.

 

[detective-boy]

Out of interest what happens if you are caught with a knife?? Are you arrested, or just the weapon conviscated?? And what constitutes a "knife"??

Having a "knife" is not an offence. Having an offensive weapon - anything MADE, ADAPTED or INTENDED for causing injury - is (most weapon type knive (flick, combat, lock) fall in the made category. All could fall in the intended with the necessary state of mind. Having a "sharply bladed article" is - only standard exceptuion is a folding pocket knife with cutting edge lass than 3".

That would probably cover your Swiss Army knife. Otherwise if you have a "reasonable excuse" (use for work, martial arts training, fishing, etc. (at appropriate times/places!!)) there is a general defence to both offences but it is up to you to prove it (on balance of probabilities).

And most people with offensive weapons would be arrested / charged. Some may just be confiscated, but not many as there is no real power to do that - it's arrest/report for summons or nothing

 

[detective-boy]

I'm as sure as I can be that they have to throw a switch or a catch to have it fire like sub machine gun.

I believe fully automatic is still blocked on police weapons - single shot or short burst (3, I think) are the only options.

 

[detective-boy]

Not to me, it wasn't

I didn't think aurora green was talking about the Brixton Tube Station thing - they mentioned seeing numerous black youths being stopped "on the way back from Hyde Park" - I'd assumed that it was nearer there than Brixton.

 

[William of Walworth]

That is the question that a Nottingham photographer will be putting to a court on 17 October...

poor old Tash eh?
Let's hope they don't go through with it. He'll have loads of support if they do though.

I want to keep an eye on that case and find out more about it.

About 15 years ago, Tash sued the Wilts (?) Police for labelling him a dealer in a private Police memo that was leaked to him, and then he WON. I can't believe this is unknown to the present cops ... Tash also has loads of stuff on his site about the extent the Police take pix themselves of protesters, Travellers, activists, etc. -- this latest thing seems to be all about him taking pictures of the Police, they don't like that ....
see 'Surveillance Gallery' on Tash's website here

</derail>

 

[William of Walworth]

I don't think anyone would argue with some visible activity as a wise precaution for carnival. I object, however, to the sheer scale and overbearing nature of the while operation.

It also struck me as hugely wasteful. There seemed so many policemen (armed and unarmed) that it was hard not to believe there wasn't a better way of deploying such a mini army, perhaps at different locations. I appreciate the need for safety, but there seemed to be plenty of surplus officers doing little more than milling around and hindering the flow of people. As far as I could see anyone walking towards the station would see the logjam of vehicles and police outside the station and wander towards Stockwell where no such deterrent seemed to be in place.

I suspect it was meant to be reassuring. One look at the faces around my fellow travellers suggested it wasn't. It kind of drains the enthusiasm for a street party when you're surrounded by numerous unsmiling policemen holding big guns, inefficiently shuffling people around.

Spot on -- not reassuring at all. I'm glad I wasn't around and didn't see it, I'd have been well pissed off.

 

[dogmatique]

Sniffer dogs at Oxford Circus today, seemingly concentrating on those of an asian or arab appearance (or at least when I went through they were questioning two asian youths, and searching two others.).

 

[Plastic Bathmat]

Aye, the whole thing was pretty nuts. Been living in Brixton over a year now and never seen anything on that scale - I agree with Tarranau, the number of police and their associated vans and cars was just ridiculous. They also had control over the streets up to 100m either side of the station according to the guy I spoke to when going through the metal detector. Not sure what the sniffer dogs were looking for exactly, but I had some smoke on me for carnival and despite standing less than a meter away from 2 of them they didn't react.

Still, most of the ones I saw were pleasant enough, and at the time I was there they seemed to be making some effort to ensure they passed a decent cross-section of society through the checks. Having said that though, if anyone was actually seriously carrying they'd have run off the instant they saw the mass of squad cars outside; I contemplated it but decided I couldn't be bothered walking up to Stockwell for the sake of a couple of spliffsworth.

 

[bluestreak]

The point is people were deterred from carrying once word got round which in itself is a success but hey Fuck the Police eh

how did word get around?

it was an honest question, and actually i was going to formulate my opinion on the validity of the operation based on the answer.

of course, the validity of your answer is somewhere around nil, so why not fuck off somewhere where morons are appreciated, eh?

 

[bluestreak]

Well done thats pretty much what happened except it was more organised than that, it actually provided a welcome excuse for a lot of kids not to take knives or guns to the carnival without losing face, dont underestimate the power of peer pressure.

so what you're saying is that kids have some sort of underground network whereby they all call round and ensure that no-one goes through station X when the rozzers are there? all the youth of brixton of course know each other.

 

[bluestreak]

so can anyone at all tell me if any dangerous potential criminals were caught?

and was the crime rate at carnival this year any different to give us an indicator of the effectiveness of these actions?

 

[detective-boy]

so can anyone at all tell me if any dangerous potential criminals were caught?

and was the crime rate at carnival this year any different to give us an indicator of the effectiveness of these actions?

You can never prove the effectiveness of this sort of activity which has a largely deterrent effect. Everyone knows that visible police activity does deter crime to some extent. No-one knows how much though, and you will NEVER prove it - you simply can't.

 

[Gixxer1000]

how did word get around?

it was an honest question, and actually i was going to formulate my opinion on the validity of the operation based on the answer.

of course, the validity of your answer is somewhere around nil, so why not fuck off somewhere where morons are appreciated, eh?

*PLONK*

 

[netbob]

I went to the CPCG (Lambeth Community Police Consultative Group) meeting earlier and this dominated what became a fairly electric meeting. Lambeth police were due to give their report on what they have been doing recently, but got stuck on the first power point slide when this came up (they only on slide 2 of 60 when I left an hour later). In summary:

It was a British Transport Police operation, aparently a result of human intelegence ordered by bronze comand (?), and in honour of the carnival. BTP were inside the station, the MET outside.

It is very unclear if Lambeth police knew anything about it in advance. Reading between the lines they didnt, and I would guess arent very happy about it. But that's just my reading of it. Lambeth seemed quite embaresed by the whole thing as far as I could tell, and noted the general resentment to the operation.

BTP apparently did a community assesment in advance (as required), but it doesnt seem to have worked in this case (given the general reaction).

The number of arrests was tiny (I think 2 were mentioned, but am not 100%)

There was particular focus at the meeting on what happened to a group of somali lads who were stopped and searched. When they were being searched the armed police approached them directly and shat the kids up a bit. Someone at the meeting asked for the benifit of the record if there was any specific intellegence on somali gangs or if they had been stopped for the hell of it. The questioner had attempted to take a picture of the iincident with the somalis, but were told not to by the police (you got off lightly Ed.)

Other things that came up were:

1) the general cleverness of this kind of operation <gangmember with big knife in pocket sees burly CO19 officers outside tube station and decides to get the bus instead>

2) what the fuck would have happened if a gun went off in a crowded train station

3) the general impact of this kind of operation onlocal people's attitudes to policing and stop and search.

4) Are we up for more of the same / was this a dry run etc.

5) Without the guns this kind of operation in Brixton would normally have been met with some kind of public display of disatisfaction, but with the guns many people were quite scared.

The thing I didnt get to ask, but wanted to (lots of people with hand in the air) was, even if this operation was justified why did the armed police have to be on the door rather than in their armed response unit?

The CPCG people are taking a few issues forward and there was talk about calling the firearms people in to talk aboout how they handle things like this in the future.

 

[laptop]

It all starts to make a lot more sense.

It was a British Transport Police operation,

Ah, that explains the belly

aparently a result of human intelligence ordered by bronze comand (?),

Eh? One of the third tier of BTP command for the day's operations ordered this? Andy Trotter (ex- Public Order at the Yard) wasn't informed?

BTP apparently did a community assesment in advance (as required), but it doesn't seem to have worked in this case

I vaguely recall a recent report about BTP promising to find a "community" to consult.

This operation kind of points up the reason for this - them behaving like a militia. Who do they see as their "community"? Evading-Standards-reading commuters?

Lambeth seemed quite embarrassed by the whole thing as far as I could tell.

You bet.

 

[Plastic Bathmat]

This operation kind of points up the reason for this - them behaving like a militia. Who do they see as their "community"? Evading-Standards-reading commuters?

I'm pretty sure that's exactly who most police see as their "community".

 

[laptop]

I'm pretty sure that's exactly who most police see as their "community".

Many... but the operational point is that the Met districts (as institutions at least) have been forced to recognise the reality of policing by consent - whereas BTP is institutionally a roaming pack of dullards.

 

[bluestreak]

You can never prove the effectiveness of this sort of activity which has a largely deterrent effect. Everyone knows that visible police activity does deter crime to some extent. No-one knows how much though, and you will NEVER prove it - you simply can't.

but surely there are indicators. for example, if the operation was designed not to catch criminals but deter gangs of armed kids from going to carnival, were crime rates noticably down this year? if so, you could say that this wide spread operation could hae had some use. if not, then there is no deterant effect really.

plus if they caught a handful of really nasty bastards or removed a few serious weapons from the streets even for an evening then they could also say that it had a good reason.

i'm not trying to say that visible policing doesn't work, nor request stats for something that no-one can count (how many crimes didn't happen today ) but something like this is more than jsut visible policing surely? or was it a coincidence that on carnival day there were numerous examples of this?

 

[bluestreak]

*PLONK*

i recognise that noise. that's the sound of a right-winger's brain trying to come up with something witty.

 

[detective-boy]

but surely there are indicators. for example, if the operation was designed not to catch criminals but deter gangs of armed kids from going to carnival, were crime rates noticably down this year? if so, you could say that this wide spread operation could hae had some use. if not, then there is no deterant effect really.

plus if they caught a handful of really nasty bastards or removed a few serious weapons from the streets even for an evening then they could also say that it had a good reason.

i'm not trying to say that visible policing doesn't work, nor request stats for something that no-one can count (how many crimes didn't happen today ) but something like this is more than jsut visible policing surely? or was it a coincidence that on carnival day there were numerous examples of this?

You can certainly provide indicators but they will never be proof - anyone minded to say "it was a waste of tinme / over the top" will simply say "yeah, but that bloke with the kinfe you nicked may never have committed an offence with it anyway" or "yeah, but there might have been less crimes this year because the stewards were better / the sun was out / whatever and it was nothing to do with your operation".

My understanding is that the operations were specifically designed to (a) deter people from carrying weapons to carnival and (b) to try and catch some people carrying weapons to carnival (they sometimes have plain clothes spotters watching peoples reaction as they see the obvious activity and anyone ditching anything / turning round and walking away or whatever gets pulled anyway - don;t know if they were doing that at Brixton or not). Haven't seen any results - perhaps a question could / should be asked at the CPCG ?

 

[bluestreak]

there will always be arguments, but surely it's up to each person to make their own mind up. some people will always think of a reason why the pigs were wrong, and some will argue that up is down if a copper says it is. most people i suspect will make up their own minds based on available evidence.

cos at the moment it looks like you're saying that "there is no evidence to suggest that these actions do anything but anyone who says they don't is wrong", which i think is a bit silly. IYSWIM.

 

[tarannau]

cos at the moment it looks like you're saying that "there is no evidence to suggest that these actions do anything but anyone who says they don't is wrong", which i think is a bit silly. IYSWIM.

And, let's be honest, anyone using the excuse 'but we can't really tell how effective it is' in a commercial environment and still dedicating such a huge amount of resources (and money) into an unproven deterrent would be crucified and out of a job faster than you can say 'boo'

Ok, so it's not America, but the phrase 'if you can't measure it, then it's not worth it' is still a prevalent business mantra. I can't believe they didn't have some measurables, no matter how interpreted and dubious, for an operation of this scale. That'd be, frankly, hugely unprofessional and entirely useless going forward.

 

[Gixxer1000]

Ok, so it's not America, but the phrase 'if you can't measure it, then it's not worth it' is still a prevalent business mantra. I can't believe they didn't have some measurables, no matter how interpreted and dubious, for an operation of this scale. That'd be, frankly, hugely unprofessional and entirely useless going forward.

Thats exactly why the NHS/police force is fucked, rake of middle management running around ticking boxes and "measuring things" Its why you dont see bobbies on the beat anymore -no measurable benefit you see.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Its why you dont see bobbies on the beat anymore -no measurable benefit you see.

Today I saw a lone policeman walking through my estate. I live in central Brixton and although I see plenty of police whizzing along the roads at high speed giving it plenty of blue + sirens, I see lots of policemen on the beat too.....

 

[detective-boy]

cos at the moment it looks like you're saying that "there is no evidence to suggest that these actions do anything but anyone who says they don't is wrong", which i think is a bit silly. IYSWIM.

Not quite. I'm saying there is evidence which suggests that they make a difference but, especially as lots of it is anecdotal, it certainly doesn't prove they do.

In such a case I believe it is reasonable to rely on the professional judgment of people working in the field - in this case professional police officers - and, in my experience, they without exception support the existence of the deterrent effect to some extent or another.

 

[detective-boy]

And, let's be honest, anyone using the excuse 'but we can't really tell how effective it is' in a commercial environment and still dedicating such a huge amount of resources (and money) into an unproven deterrent would be crucified and out of a job faster than you can say 'boo'

Which is why senior police officers who subscribe to business models (like Paul Condon) bin anything which can't be measured.

And which is why "bobbies on the beat" are constantly argued about - most people accept that they do make a difference in terms of deterrent but, because you can't prove that in any way, they are always on offer for business-oriented bosses.

 

[tarannau]

Which is why senior police officers who subscribe to business models (like Paul Condon) bin anything which can't be measured.

And which is why "bobbies on the beat" are constantly argued about - most people accept that they do make a difference in terms of deterrent but, because you can't prove that in any way, they are always on offer for business-oriented bosses.

That's a bit of a fallacy in my book. It's fairly easy to build a plausible 'case' for bobbies on the beat, if only because public opinion continually suggests that they'd like more officers on the street and more importantly that they feel 'reassured' by their presence. That needs to be balanced against, if I remember correctly a report I read a long time ago (DB may know more) that the chances of a beat bobby stumbling onto a crime are statistically tiny.

Besides it shouldn't be beyond the bounds of credibility to track the effectiveness of beat bobbies in some way. It shouldn't be impossible to compare the crime rates in 'safer neighbourhoods' (or whatever the latest terminology is) areas with beat patrols against those without such active coverage, weighted statistically across the region. It's not rudimentary, but it's not particularly advanced in methodology terms either - with a little commitment, forward planning and, crucially I guess, some accurate and coordinated information collection/infrastructure it should be more than possible. Failing that, even a regional test could provide important some important indications of the success of any deterrent effect.

Nobody is suggesting that qualitative or quantitative measurement should be what solely drives policy. However I'm wary of people who claim that what they do can't be effectively analysed, or that's it's simply inconvenient - generally that tends to imply a reluctance to change practices or there's a operational concern that needs hiding somewhere.

And, in the example of this specific thread, I don't believe that any responsible person, let alone what seems to be a Bronze Commander on a whim, should be able to kick off a massive military-style operation like this one at the station with no proof of effectiveness, or prior trial. Especially when it seems to have been done without the support of the local community and even the prior knowledge of the local police. It was a huge commitment of resources that I feel could have been more positively used elsewhere. If lessons weren't learnt or some form of proper appraisal about the operation's 'success' wasn't undertaken, then it was even more of a shambolic and insensitive kneejerk operation to carnival than I first thought.

 

[detective-boy]

However I'm wary of people who claim that what they do can't be effectively analysed, or that's it's simply inconvenient - generally that tends to imply a reluctance to change practices or there's a operational concern that needs hiding somewhere.

And, in the example of this specific thread, I don't believe that any responsible person, let alone what seems to be a Bronze Commander on a whim, should be able to kick off a massive military-style operation like this one at the station with no proof of effectiveness, or prior trial. Especially when it seems to have been done without the support of the local community and even the prior knowledge of the local police. It was a huge commitment of resources that I feel could have been more positively used elsewhere. If lessons weren't learnt or some form of proper appraisal about the operation's 'success' wasn't undertaken, then it was even more of a shambolic and insensitive kneejerk operation to carnival than I first thought.

I think the statistic you're remembering was something like a patrolling officer stubles across a crime in progress once every 17 years!

But that sort of statistic is exactly the sort of evidence which mitigates against the uniformed patrols which you (rightly) point out are massively popular with the public (but less so when they actually DO something rather than just wandering about - most of which is (inevitably) relatively minor in character!).

I'm not arguing that we couldn't or shouldn't research the effectiveness of different policing tactics - quite the contrary, I think there should be far MORE research into what works. My point is simply that the type of evidence for the deterrent effects of all sorts of tactics tends not to be accepted for the reasons I have posted previously.

As for the specific operation, I doubt very much whether it was the decision of "a Bronze Commander on a whim". A Bronze (operational) commander only exists if there is a formal command structure in place, with a Silver (tactical) and a Gold (strategic) commander in place. It would either be a routine deployment as part of a series of pretty random deployments of that group (there have been other threads about similar deployments at Kings Cross and Herne Hill (I think) in the past few months. Or it was a specific part of a much larger, pan-London operation aimed specifically at preventing / reducing Carnival violence. In either case the deterrent effect cannot be judged simply on that one deployment - the whole operation would need to be judged together.

And the fact that we don't know what, if any, statistics were gathered to judge the effectiveness of the operation doesn't mean there aren't any (which is why I suggested a question at the CPCG may shed some light). I doubt if there is anything too complex though - the gathering of statistics usually comes under the heading of "Additional Bureaucracy"! Would probably be something like number of stops / searches / arrests / charges.

 

[bluestreak]

Thats exactly why the NHS/police force is fucked, rake of middle management running around ticking boxes and "measuring things" Its why you dont see bobbies on the beat anymore -no measurable benefit you see.

i see bobbies on the beat every day actually. just wandering around brixton in their ones, twos and threes.

so how come you support the action this thread is about, which as d_b has said, the benefit of which cannot be measured, but mourn the loss of beat bobbies (which haven't actually been lost) blaming the same issue.

 

[bluestreak]

Not quite. I'm saying there is evidence which suggests that they make a difference but, especially as lots of it is anecdotal, it certainly doesn't prove they do.

In such a case I believe it is reasonable to rely on the professional judgment of people working in the field - in this case professional police officers - and, in my experience, they without exception support the existence of the deterrent effect to some extent or another.

fair enough