Policing hate, extremism and terror

0
3 weeks ago (12:21 PM)
To join this discussion please register or log in

Comments:

sbiplu

Such schemes as prevent and the strategies involved or used only divide communities, building tension and hate; as the programmes are targeting faith. Engaging heads of places of worship along with the diverse force of ethnic officers in the planning of a directive programme with engagement of local schools, faith groups and the local authority and approach can prevent causes of extremism. First stop would be engaging with the media to select headlines and titles that does not class all of a faith as terrorist!

London is nothing without its diverse background of its population and their languages, the business that contribute towards London success attract and employ these vibrant people and as such those who prevent or seek to prevent people from different backgrounds; sex, race or faith should be banned from London, also banned from airing their views on social media platforms as a whole and engagement of hate groups should be banned in all forms.

greybeard

some good suggestions, but a few questionable ones...
one of the great strengths of UK society is tolerance, even of those with views we find objectionable. Censorship of the press would be a mistake, a free press represents a wide range of views in society and is a useful barometer telling you what a proportion of the society thinks. Even if you don't like those thoughts it is better to know and then engage to try and change misguided perceptions and reduce ignorance.
Similarly banning people from London (not really possible) just because you disagree with their views does not seem sensible.

Targetting faith? This does not seem likely. The dictionary definition of faith is
"strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof."
Various forms of faith have always been part of human society and while logic and reason seem a preferable basis for belief I don't see any concerted attempt to eliminate faith.

What has to be addressed is behaviour that causes harm to others; the causes of such behaviour are varied but religious dogma has often been one such factor.
So yes, "leaders" of faith groups do have a great responsibility to ensure hate and intolerance are not part of their "teaching" and to publicly denounce it at every opportunity.

Eric G

Why are 'extremism' and 'terror' crimes being lumped together with 'hate' crimes? Terror crimes are by their very nature extreme violence and life threatening. A single terrorist crime, such as the tube bombings, can kill dozens or even hundreds of people and leave many mutilated. These crimes, and the extremism that leads to them, should be afforded a unique and top priority by the police.

As 'hate' crimes are clearly generally much lower level offences, they should be considered separately and dealt with appropriately, ie with reduced priority and resources. Name calling, annoying as it is, isn't in the same league as terrorism.

Clearly there's a need for an enhanced firearm capability within the Met. I am however concerned with the concept of "working with communities" as this blatantly means only working with BME and deviant communities. Why doesn't the Met have a policy which includes working with the white Christian community?

London clearly isn't a place where people of different backgrounds get on well together. Where would 'white flight' fit into this false picture? The concentration of different ethnic/religious groups into various ghettos further supports this. Much of the violent street crime arises from the divisiveness of wonderful diversity and there's clearly a need for the Met to either police in a genuinely universal manner, or tailor policing to the crime profiles of the different ethnic/religious groups. The former would clearly be preferable.

I'm concerned that a muslim Asian Mayor will skew policing in favour of this ethnic group, and the conflation of 'terror' and 'hate' crimes into a single strand will lead to disproportionate deployment of police resources.

michaelgcook

Little can be as frightening as terrorism, but I assume you have never been the victim of a hate crime as you regard it as 'annoying' rather than a genuine threat. But how can you be sure? And your comments about the ethnicity of the mayor suggest you hold your own prejudices. I am white and British and I count people from a number of different races and religions among my friends. I don't feel threatened by differences.

Rather, I feel more frightened of people who hold views such as yours. Violent street crime is linked to poverty. Poverty is often the result of people not getting a chance in life and this can be because of the prejudice of others. So open your mind and meet people from different cultures. Then put yourself in their shoes, read your post again and see how you feel.

hugh hunter

You have a view educated by your experience, and profess a tolerant and generous attitude to criminal activity, as if some groups are not different in their experience, and so are just like you. The evidence that some cultures are more likely the victims, as well as the perpetrators of say- knife crime, speaks for loud and clear, but the Police are under Political pressure to change perceptions and so they are not taking appropriate action. You, amongst your reasonable friends are not facing the dangers and you simply dont understand them

Eric G

“Thank you for your patronising and childishly simplistic advice.

You don't seem to understand the nature of 'hate' crime. I don't regard most 'hate' crime as a significant threat because the crime statistics don't identify them as such and the courts treat most of them as minor. The vast majority of 'hate' crimes are prosecuted as aggravated 'Causing Public Fear, Alarm or Distress' and only a tiny percentage of the 'hate' convictions result in custodial sentences. Clearly, the courts don't see the same threat in these offences that you do.

Lutfur Rahman was a minority group Mayor, are you aware of his activities?

Your comments suggest that you don't feel threatened by differences, and seem to glibly assume that means that nobody does, but you're frightened by the thought that the police should be required to talk to all London communities rather than just to your approved subset. Also, that you're in denial that London has suffered white flight and has become ghettoised with various 'communities' at each other's throats.

You're frightened at the thought of the police treating everyone in the same manner without mysterious self interest pressure groups and secret deals. I saw on Sunday Politics TV show at the weekend that the Met have a known extremist on their IAG in one Borough, strange eh, I wonder what advice he’s giving them?

If you're capable of opening your eyes, you will see that violent street crime is linked to far more than just poverty, this is merely an excuse. There's lots of places with poverty and low crime levels. I thought everyone, including the police, accepted that ethnic street and gun crime was a serious problem.

Grow up, do some reading, find out what's going on in London outside of your bubble.”

tanyad

Love this guy ^^^ Well said

Clintonj

Well stated Eric G

Clintonj

I agree, hate crimes can range wildly from basic prejudiced insults and discriminatory behaviour to acts of terrorism in the name of some ethnic or religious ideology however I think lumping this all together is a bad approach.
Petty hate crimes should be handled as such, along with pick pocketing, and asb.

Sure, victims of hate crimes can become disenfranchised extremists but that generally only results from being a victim of systematically applied hate crimes which may often stem from ghetto and enclaves communities being passively aggressive or disdainful of others, particularly when communities are transforming. You cannot change how people consume and invest in the city but you can prevent consolidation and reinforcement of ghettos and enclaves by rethinking how the city provides social and community services, grants permits and manages or influences communities.

Extremism feeds into the Terrorism phenomenon for the most part and is a community and national security concern, as such it should be given laser focused attention by the necessary agencies, but is the met really equipped to do this and should this not be the responsibility of specialised security agencies?

Naina

Totally Agree

ipsofacto

"As 'hate' crimes are clearly generally much lower level offences"

Is that true? Look up the case of Ian Baynham. Hate crimes are amongst the worst.

Eric G

"Generally", they are not serious, that doesn't mean they're all not serious. Where they're serious they should be treated as such, the vast majority aren't.

kscterry

It's impossible to protect the general public from terrorism without the freedom to stop and search any individual deemed to be suspicious. I have no objection to being stopped and searched as and when the police feel I may be a threat to others. I have nothing to hide - a stop and search will find nothing on me. Politicians have got their noses stuck in and are defending a small minority of individuals who object because they are up to something. Can we please protect ordinary Londoners once and for all? We are at the moment basically asking the police to go and do their jobs in handcuffs!

Clintonj

Right on

Naina

Well said police is there for protecting the innocent public so give them the freedom to do so within reasons. And not hold them back.

Tony Sammut

When a political campaign was run using racism (to the level that many associated the campaign with similar propaganda used in Nazi Germany during WWII, even a Tory MP resigned compairing it to this). Why hasn't the politicians who headed this hateful campaign been investigated and now face charges for incitement of racial hatred? since the Reforendum countless minorities have been the victim to violence and in some cases murder. Aren't these politicians responsible? I thought under the Blair government new laws were brought in making this type of racial hatred an illegal offence here in the UK.In recent months the racists are openly subjecting their poisonous views to the rest of us - look at the shameful things said on that radio station and worse the views in the comments below. England is now being seen as a racist country and that will take genertions to correct.

tanyad

Do you think its better anywhere else??? Get real! Look at the US, look at France, look at Germany, look at Hungary, look at Australia....the list goes on. People will always look to protect their domain when they feel their way of life is being threatened; whether that threat is real or not; perception is reality for most people.

tanyad

Since terrorism and extremism are already well managed by intelligence services, this is the Mayor posturing about things above his station. Hate crimes are bad but again, name calling is being treated more seriously than people being hijacked in broad daylight. There are now several incidents such as this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXFvlsdu1yU&feature=youtu.be and when it happened to someone I know, he called the police angry and furious and used a derogatory term for his attackers and while his attack was not pursued due to lack of evidence, they then turned around and threatened him with prosecution for his name calling under the banner of it being a hate crime! The Mayor is picking a topic that affects one small group rather than focussing on crimes that affect us all...its the flavour of the day to make headlines rather than something that would be beneficial to all.

kscterry

I would like to see the mayor do more about the HUGE spike that has taken place over the last few months in moped gangs riding up on the pavement and grabbing phones straight out of people's hands. Public awareness just isn't there about this.
I first learned about this in June after walking out of Angel Tube Station on my phone and being approached by a police officer informing me that there was a large amount of these offences going on and to be wary of the wider issue.
After reading in to it I realised this is a huge problem across London
Public awareness is weak on this. Why?

Talk London

Thank you for your comments so far. A couple of you have mentioned the particular nature of hate crime and how this is different to extremism or terror. It is important that all sections of London’s population feel safe from crimes motivated by prejudice against a person’s race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or identity, or disability.

What role do you think the police should play in tackling hate crime? Are there things that officers can do to prevent hate crime occurring, or should their role focus on when it has already occurred? Do you think London celebrates diversity in a way that lessens the risk of hate crime, or not?

Eric G

The police should be treating this crime in exactly the same way that they treat other crime. As I have mentioned in an earlier post, most hate crime is presumably regarded as low level by the government & the judiciary, as custodial sentences are rare and average sentences are small. Yet a CPS agent was devolved to each Borough especially to deal with these cases. I find it astonishing, looking at the incidence of 'hate' crime relative to other crimes, that this should be so.

Giving special interest groups special police favour, denied to others, is divisive and damages confidence in the police. It is also not clear how the police decide where to acquire the information they need to give special protection to privileged groups. The Sunday Politics TV show identified that one Borough used a known extremist on their IAG! Come to that, why do the police need specially appointed, not elected, minority group members in IAGs at all?

The police must be, and be seen to be, treating all ethnic, religious, deviant etc groups equally and openly with no special arrangements for anyone or any subset of the population. If this is deemed to give insufficient protection to any subset, the laws of the land need to changed to offer those groups special protection. This is the only way to afford favours in a democracy and would give an open process for special treatment and a chance for others to scrutinise and monitor the process.

julesandlola

agree 100%

Clintonj

Yes!

tanyad

That was exactly my point, its OTHER organisations like MI5 intelligence and the Police anti-terrorism unit that focus on extremist and terrorist cells so this just shows the Mayor up as not having a clue as to how this is already been managed.

Hate crime is bad but I can honestly say its not something I or anyone else I know has ever experienced and yet the crimes that I do know many people to have experienced are being ignored! If you solely focus on a small group, I think it also builds resentment across the rest of the population because I feel like "Hang on, Mr Mayor, why do you care more about a small minority rather than all of us? Are you expressing bias towards people you identify with? Are you more interested in scoring political points by choosing something trendy to care about?" If your average person feels that their concerns are being ignored in favour of another group, that to my mind just gives them more reasons to direct their hate at that group. Sorry, but his focus should be on crimes that affect that majority, not the minority. I think when it comes to minority crime, I would like to think that Londoners as a progressive group would not allow that to happen. I have witnessed a few occasions where I or others have stepped in to defend someone being aggravated due to their colour or sexual preference

Maud

Why should London celebrate diversity ? I think diversity makes people unhappy. We're stuck with it and so it makes sense to try to get along with each other - but there is nothing to celebrate (especially for the few remaining English Londoners)

Anonymous

well said

julesandlola

agree 100%

Clintonj

People don't really care about diversity unless it positively or negatively impacts them in a sustained way. For the most part people simply want to be able to lead their lives while being minimally impacted by their neighbours. In the end they want clones of themselves. That won't happen but that's what they would like. My neighbours are three twenty somethings, they are occasionally raucous or behave selfishly. I don't have a high tolerance level but I don't call them out on their behaviour otherwise I become the curmudgeon and get labelled. They live there, I live here, we have to get along. That's diversity, old living next to young people but I don't celebrate it just as I don't celebrate my Asian neighbours downstairs with their cooking odours that waft up to my place, my Afro-Caribbean neighbours with their characteristics or my south Asian neighbours with theirs. We don't interfere with each other, we don't negatively impact one another's lives but then none of us outnumbers or threatens each other, none of us break the unwritten community rules of socially acceptable sustained behaviour. What is to celebrate? This is not some Disneyesque movie.

Maria11

I think that everybody who lives in London should treat each other with RESPECT that very important point on first place, because its so many backgrounds of diffrent people from all over the world!!!!Its not even funny.Everybody want keep it own culture and traditions i discover that her in London.Its not very easy make friends her.

david.m

What's to celebrate? How about the influence that diversity has had on things that we all enjoy, such as culture, the arts, fashion, cuisine; and the way it has challenged us to learn more about the world and human existence - enabling us to become more open-minded, so today we no longer live in a society where you can get locked up for being gay, or turned away by landlords or employers for being black. I'd say there's a lot to celebrate!

tanyad

I agree that there are benefits to diverse groups coming to this country but my concern, and I hope that this is most people's, is the rate at which it is thrust upon us; we get no chance to adjust and the infrastructure cannot grow at the same rate. And the bizarre reluctance for certain groups to assimilate is frustrating. I wish someone could explain to me why anyone who shares none of the UKs values would want to live here. If you are staunchly Muslim and believe in Sharia law, why not move to Saudi Arabia??? I would never choose to live somewhere where it wasn't a natural cultural fit for my beliefs. I don't see anything wrong with saying to immigrants its our way or the high way if they are going to be intolerant and disruptive to the local population. By the way, I am an immigrant, and I love this country, feel so proud to be part of it, joined the military here whereas I would never have done that in my home country, and out of all the countries I have lived in, there is nowhere I would rather live permanently. The irony of the Mayor indicating that he wants to protect the minorities is that in London, based on the last census, it is English people that are in the minority as we only make up 45% of the population.

tanyad

wish you could edit comments. Apparently I so strongly identify with being English that I said "we make..." rather than "they make..." :-)

Eric G

Hello Talk London Censors, what's the Mayor's reaction to Professor Ted Cantle's report? Does he see a need to do anything about it? Does he think that this should have any impact on policing? Will he be proposing special police ethnicity, tactics and consultation? It's seems logical that ghettoization will reduce hate crime. Under his current policies, does he see any need to modify his policies in the light of the report?

Maria11

Not celebrate Diversity.Whay???

Eric G

Hi Talk London. I've just looked at the MPS crime stats for June 2016 (the latest figures presented), taken from their website. An extract follows.

Total Offences 64012
Violence 20488
Violence with Injury 6438
Female victims of Robbery 3612
Rape 534
Knife Crime 930
Knife Crime with Injury 349
Gun Crime 198
Sex Offences 1484

Hate Crime

Homosexuals 182
Race & Religion 1379
Faith Hate 173
Disability 43
Transexuals 19

All 'hate' crimes amount to:- 1796.
Gun, Knife, Rape, homicide
& sex crimes amount to:- 3522

Therefore:-
'hate' crimes amount to about 0.02% of total crimes.
The number of gun, knife, Rape, homicide & sex crimes are almost double the number of 'hate' crimes.
There are more than 2 times as many Female Victims of robbery, than there are 'hate' crimes.
There are 15 times more violence crimes that there are 'hate' crimes.
All of the 'hate' crimes are self defined by the victim, (apparently, possibly on a whim). All the other crimes are determined by the police.
The vast majority of 'hate' crimes do not incur significant sentences. Most of the other crimes mentioned above incur significant penalties.

It seems to me, that in addition to 'hate' crimes being seen as trivial by the law & the courts, they are only half of the number of VERY serious crimes and only 0.02% of all crime. This clearly implies that the MOPA are acting grossly disproportionately in prioritising 'hate' crimes against far more numerous, devastating and better defined offences.

I don't believe that if the crime statistics were given better exposure to the electorate, there would be significant support for determining 'hate' crimes to be given the precedence that they are.

tanyad

What a shame the Mayor hasn't done the basic research that you have and has just gone at topic that the media likes to sensationalise. Eric for Mayor! :-)

tanyad

...for a topic...

Talk London

Hi Eric G,

Yes, the Metropolitan Police makes available crime figures sortable by type and geography on their website. The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) also publishes dashboards monitoring crime levels. Other Talk Londoners may find it useful to take a look to find out about crime in their area.

The Mayor is kept fully up-to-date on crime levels at regular intervals, while the London Assembly’s Policing and Crime Committee also examines and scrutinises the work of MOPAC, the Met Police and wider issues relating to crime in London.

Hate crime itself does not just cover religion or ethnicity, but also other characteristics such as sexuality, disability or gender. Hate crime itself is also just one priority area among a wide range of others. The current Police and Crime Plan 2013-16 - upon which all the proposed priorities for the new plan are based – also covers many of the types of crimes you highlight. Tackling violence against women and girls is one such issue, in addition to keeping people safe from serious offences like knife and gun crime. A range of studies have also shown that many hate crime offences go unreported, with many victims feeling unable to come forward for various reasons. Under the previous Mayor, MOPAC published a specific plan to address hate crime

The impact of crime also goes beyond the numbers of recorded and unreported offences. As such, another priority currently being consulted on is how to ensure that the justice system effectively supports victims and communities, and works to reduce re-offending with respect to all types of crime.

Hope that's helpful,

Talk London Team

Eric G

No, I don’t find your missive helpful; I find it largely irrelevant and superfluous. I would have expected your Mayor to be more than just “kept up to date on crime”; it should be one of his active concerns. The types of ‘hate’ crime are self-evident and are clearly listed in my earlier post.

Prioritising crime means treating one crime more importantly than others. For a given resource, every crime that’s awarded priority status, reduces the effective resources allocated to other ‘priority’ crimes, thus making priorities meaningless. A small number of priorities make sense, your Mayor’s, “wide range” is nonsense.

In a sensible approach to crime, two things are primarily relevant, gravity and volume. Grave crimes, e.g. terrorism & homicide should logically be given priority. Large volume crime may logically be given priority. Usually a compromise between the two is appropriate. ‘Hate’ crime is definitely very low volume and judging by the court sanctions generally low gravity. Where its gravity is high, it should be given priority, where its gravity is low, it shouldn’t. It’s a simple concept usually referred to as proportionality and applied to all crime other than ‘hate’ crime. Disproportionate state attention to the treatment of crime is usually associated with totalitarian states, such as Islamist and Communist ones.

I’m surprised that you mention the MOPAC “dashboards”. Any statistic, extracted from the statistical context in which it lies, should be treated with suspicion. When I looked at the simplistic “dashboards” my immediate reaction was that someone didn’t want Londoners poking their noses into the real statistical picture, (the one very well presented by the MPS statistics, a simple spreadsheet).

Talk London has initiated three specific crime threads, Women & Girls and Hate, Extremism & Terror and Underreporting of crime. However, my biggest concern is the definition of ‘hate’ crime, or rather its lack of a definition. As far as I’m aware, it’s the only crime (aggravating factor) which can be self-defined by the victim, witnesses or, presumably the alleged perpetrator themselves. This means that witnesses to a crime may all have different views as to whether or not a crime was committed or how serious it was. Presumably, neither Police Officers, Magistrates nor Judges would know this either and different victims, witnesses, Police Officers and Judges could all come to different conclusions on the same incident. This is presumably the reason the police fail to prosecute so many alleged offences and so many prosecutions fail. It may also be one of the reasons it’s allegedly under reported. How can any individual be sure that they are compliant with such a law? This is particularly important in a city with multiple cultures, religions languages and ways of life, (some of which are very intolerant), and presents the Kafkaesque threat of committing what is later determined to be a crime without any pre knowledge, intent or malice whatsoever.

Isn’t this a more important subject for discussion than the trite and simplistic question raised by Talk

Talk London

Hi Eric,

We started up several threads that follow on from the current survey on policing and crime, to help shape the Mayor's plans. These are: Policing in your neighbourhood, Tackling violence against women and girls, Criminal Justice System, The Mayor and Policing, Keeping children and young people safe and Policing hate, extremism and terror.  

Talk London Team 

tanyad

That was exactly my point, its OTHER organisations like MI5 intelligence and the Police anti-terrorism unit that focus on extremist and terrorist cells so this just shows the Mayor up as not having a clue as to how this is already been managed.

Hate crime is bad but I can honestly say its not something I or anyone else I know has ever experienced and yet the crimes that I do know many people to have experienced are being ignored! If you solely focus on a small group, I think it also builds resentment across the rest of the population because I feel like "Hang on, Mr Mayor, why do you care more about a small minority rather than all of us? Are you expressing bias towards people you identify with? Are you more interested in scoring political points by choosing something trendy to care about?" If your average person feels that their concerns are being ignored in favour of another group, that to my mind just gives them more reasons to direct their hate at that group. Sorry, but his focus should be on crimes that affect that majority, not the minority. I think when it comes to minority crime, I would like to think that Londoners as a progressive group would not allow that to happen. I have witnessed a few occasions where I or others have stepped in to defend someone being aggravated due to their colour or sexual orientation.

Adekiely13

Of course engaging with the community is key to tackling crime. However, highlighting schemes like this are divisive and contrary to the aim. Why can't police, as a matter of course, engage with religious community leaders in the same way that they do with shopowners and local residents? The more we highlight and shout about these things, the more they become apparent and obvious. Are we different? Yes, we are. Can we live together peacefully? Yes, we can. I am white, middle aged and British born and bred. But I am a Londoner and my demographic only makes up a small part of where I live. However, I am spoiled by the richness and diversity that people of different ethnic backgrounds have brought to our communities. The government and media in recent times has caused so much fear and tension between us and its taking us down an irreversible path. We are all people and we all have similar concerns. On the whole people just want to live peacefully and go about their business, schemes like this need to be rethought.

CharlesIC

Hear hear! Agree 100%

philjer

All hate crimes, whether racist/faith based/sexual preference based should be dealt with severely.
But also more needs to be done for those who claim hate crimes to stifle legitimate criticism or legitimate boycotts against foreign groups and countries who are committing abuses against others overseas.

Eric G

Why should all 'hate' crimes be dealt with severely? Sever 'hate' crimes should, but trivial 'hate' crimes shouldn't. Policing and prosecution should, and must, be proportional. This whole disproportionate approach to 'hate' crime prosecution will inevitably create a backlash against the very people it is professed to be protecting as people start to see it as a biased pogrom against the non protected group/s.

It's particularly dangerous that what was once a minority, has in many areas of London, become the majority, but 'victim' perceptions don't seem to reflect this, particularly those of the Mayor.

This Mayor needs to explain why, of all the crimes committed in London, only 'hate' crimes should be disproportionately singled out for special treatment.

julesandlola

agree 100%

julesandlola

the main faith involved in terror needs to preach peace and compliance at all times. It is up to them to stop their ignorant youth from feeling it is ever right to take up arms

godislove

This was a heavily loaded 'survey' - most people will not wish to answer questions unless they are able to remain anonymous so they will be deemed to be happy with the way things are, the fact is that most people want a good police force who arrest criminals and a good justice system that convicts criminals and a fair system to bring those to account when either or both of these things do not happen - simples - forget trying to divide us all the time with what sex, religeon, colour or foorball team we support, londoners are londoners

tanyad

Spot on! The favouritism expressed to any group is just going to be divisive

Pages

Showing 1-50 of 102 comments