Three things distinguish UK policing from the US. 1. Guns (obviously) 2. The absence of any immunities from civil actions (v important) 3. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, still the most important regulation of police powers. /1 - ThreadSky

spinninghugo.bsky.social • 19 days ago

Three things distinguish UK policing from the US.

1. Guns (obviously)
2. The absence of any immunities from civil actions (v important)
3. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, still the most important regulation of police powers.

/1

Comments

grantsana.bsky.social•19 days ago

The Legacy Act does not pass point two. Made it all the way through parliament with barely a whisper of opposition from GB (not UK) public, human rights groups and most Legal professionals. The UK sanctions police criminality via indifference to it depending on who is on the receiving end of it

spinninghugo.bsky.social•19 days ago

I am open to correction, but my understanding was that this did not give the police, as such, any specific immunity?

There are of many other immunities that apply to everyone in civil actions. The problem in the US is the existence of general immunities that are given to the police specifically.

johngage1.bsky.social•19 days ago

Surely, history too. In many parts of the Wild West, ur claims to the land had to be defended by force as frequently there was no local law enforcement or legal authorities to back up your land title. This lends itself to people taking the law in their own hands or vigilantism.

stephencobden.bsky.social•19 days ago

One thing I noticed, which I think emphasises the difference: in the UK, the police address the public as "sir"*. In the US, the public address the policeman as "sir".

*albeit sometimes with a not unwarranted amount of sarcasm.

joeyclose.bsky.social•19 days ago

a UK cop once kicked the shit out of my mate for calling him sir which he took to be sarcastic. It wasn't, he just a policeman dad who made him do that.

dinahrose.bsky.social•19 days ago

I always call police "Officer"

stephencobden.bsky.social•19 days ago

I've always liked "constable", unless I am in trouble in which I address them by the rank one above that which they hold.

joeyclose.bsky.social•19 days ago

yea, this guy was very punk but called any grown man 'sir' cos his dad was very...like that. So a cop threw him down some steps and stamped his head on the curb, nearly killed him. There were no crimes reported or arrests, just a noise complaint at 9pm as some people left my house.

charlierad.bsky.social•19 days ago

I’d add:

4. Police militarisation over the last 60 years (inextricably linked to riots and police reacting to such rioting)

spinninghugo.bsky.social•19 days ago

PACE came in after the Brixton riots and other high profile examples of police misconduct, and was the result of a Royal Commission.

An era when a Tory government was still a serious thing.

/ends

robbyred.bsky.social•19 days ago

Thatcher govt was serious as fuck

chrisweston.bsky.social•19 days ago

Policing by consent. Simple, and crucial.

stevewmobb.bsky.social•19 days ago

A militarised police vs police by consent

giffordhead.co.uk•19 days ago

There's also the cultural difference in that Amercian forces never developed something like Peel's Principles. Even if there is a debate as to how important they are today, at least the concepts of policing by consent & keeping the peach exist here.

milesgeffin.bsky.social•19 days ago

…and the election (thus politicisation) of county sheriffs. See eg Joe Arpaio.

flisty.bsky.social•19 days ago

They've tried that here with the police and crime commissioners but I think they could get rid of those roles tomorrow and nobody would even notice

milesgeffin.bsky.social•19 days ago

Agreed.

poppingbubbles.bsky.social•19 days ago

They *do* pay lip service to Peel specifically, although in practice obviously less so.

giffordhead.co.uk•19 days ago

I didn’t realise that. I assumed independence was sufficiently early for them to evolve in a different direction.

poppingbubbles.bsky.social•19 days ago

I had a suspicion that it was pretty widespread in the Anglo sphere but I did check before I posted. It's more a late 20th century thing to acknowledge it specifically than something that runs deep.

mwhoyle96.bsky.social•19 days ago

American policing v much operates as an old style continental gendarmerie. I wonder if, as with many parts of American law, it reflects their early break from Britain being overlaid by European migration in the 19th C.

mwhoyle96.bsky.social•19 days ago

Something like a gendarmerie may be inevitable in such a vast and well armed country, but that doesn’t explain eg places like New York or Baltimore.

giffordhead.co.uk•19 days ago

The other odd cultural difference is the vast number of police forces. I’m not quite sure how we ended up avoiding that in the UK. Perhaps because most forces after the earliest were established by Parliament?

giffordhead.co.uk•19 days ago

* keeping the peace. Keeping the peach is something else altogether...

nathanielgraham.bsky.social•19 days ago

I still say Queen’s peace

almagroschool.bsky.social•19 days ago

another thing is cultural differences wrt to guns, the various police forces in Spain are routinely armed and are subject to all the usual complaints police everywhere are. But they very rarely seem to shoot anyone, I think they consider shooting a citz poor form unless absolutely necessary

giffordhead.co.uk•19 days ago

It would be interesting to compare the number of times GB police drew or discharged firearms compared to PSNI ones. Unfortunately, only the PSNI publishes the stats on drawing. And none of the UK police fire them very often.

almagroschool.bsky.social•19 days ago

the last victim of a questionable police shooting in Spain had four legs https://www.elperiodico.com/es/barcelona/20220430/guardia-urbano-muerte-perra-sota-maltrato-animal-13589981

flisty.bsky.social•19 days ago

Is that a function of more training, or even different training? Not just weapons handling but de-escalation and all the other things. Or just cultural - shooting at people isn't normalised?

almagroschool.bsky.social•19 days ago

I suspect the latter bc it's also true of small municipal forces that I don't imagine have huge training budgets

giffordhead.co.uk•19 days ago

I’d guess the lack of civilian firearms is also important here. I dare say it is much easier not to shoot if you think it is unlikely that the civilians you are interacting with will not be armed.

spinninghugo.bsky.social•19 days ago

Guns change the whole interaction. What the public will tolerate from the police also changes if there are lots of dangerous armed people.

almagroschool.bsky.social•19 days ago

yes, fundamental. Back in 2017 the surviving Rambla terrorists were all shot wo hesitation

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply