An increasing number of people searched for drugs but not found to be carrying them after being identified by police sniffer dogs are being charged or cautioned for angry outbursts against police.Note, it doesn’t say ‘assaults’, just ‘outbursts’.
Clearly, if you are anything less than cringingly obsequious or complimentary towards the authorities, you can expect retaliation…
The NSW Greens MP David Shoebridge, who requested the government figures, said there was no excuse for poor behaviour towards police, but questioned the value of intrusive body searches on people suspected of carrying drugs, where in the vast majority of cases no drugs were found.Good point, David, good point.
So, what do the police have to say about this? Some variation of ‘can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs’, perhaps? Blaming the dogs for being, well, just animals after all, and therefore not 100% accurate?
The Police Minister, Mike Gallacher, said yesterday he supported the use of sniffer dogs, which had a highly acute sense of smell and could detect on people traces of drugs or explosives even after they had been discarded.Ah. Right. OK, I wasn’t expecting that…
The answer isn’t that ‘the dog made a mistake’, it’s ‘you had drugs/weapons but you got rid of ‘em’ before we stopped you!'.
‘Guilty until proven innocent’ seems to have given way to ‘guilty even when proven innocent, but we can’t do anything about it…yet’.
I don’t know about you, but I think I preferred it when Aussie cops were represented in fiction by Max Rockatansky, rather than by Judge Dredd’s far less reasonable and even-handed twin…
This blog goes from lambasting the establishment failure to punish criminal behaviour to lambasting the establishment for punishing criminal behaviour. Which is it that's wrong again?
ReplyDeleteWhat criminal behaviour? Did you perhaps miss the point that no drugs or exosives were found on these people?
ReplyDeletee dunt reed much cos ees just cops innit but shoot the bak leg of and orse e can
ReplyDeleteAre you widening your net Julia to criticise foreign police forces as well? Should be good.Can't wait until you compare our pathetic softly softly approach with lets's say-Syria,North Korea,Brazil.The people there really have something to moan about,not the English.
ReplyDeleteJaded
Xmas temporarily transforms mean relatives, Jaded. Yours might even accept abundant sarcasm as wit.
ReplyDeleteJaded is correct. Some crims get off lightly here. Take this one:
ReplyDeleteA depraved police inspector who led a double life encouraging internet paedophiles to sexually assault children, was jailed today for only 30 months. Geraint Lloyd Evans, 48, acquired a property portfolio - thanks to remuneration packages from South Wales and extensive royalties.
(Yup, they do take these offences quite seriously in Syria and N Korea, Julia.)
80% failure rate?? Are they training the dogs to smell signs of that evil drug "sausages"?
ReplyDeleteHappy xmas Melvin,I hope you get that new thesaurus.One with smaller words so mere plods like me can understand your meanings.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 15.19.Yes I agree,far to short a sentence.Please don't presume that because he wore the blue cloth I will automatically support him.Scum like him make my job as an honest one that much harder.
Jaded
My library shelves buckle under thesauri. You don't think Santa would....nah.
ReplyDeleteA very Happy Christmas to you, Jaded.
Melvin
A drug dog can smell a trace of drugs but cannot tell the handler whether the 'customer' had drugs a few days before, or had obviously just discarded some.
ReplyDeleteThe 'customer' often does get a bit lairy, but in the UK the worst he might expect is an £80 ticket. The law is a bit tougher elsewhere
Drugs dogs are far from infallible, my wife, to whom asprin is a drug, was stopped by a drugs dog. The officer was informed that the dog could probably smell our dogs on her, "Oh no they are trained not to react to the scent of other dogs" was the reply. A quick pat down and a brief chat later on our way. Later we passed a few other drug dogs who ignored us. Is it possible to ask for a second opinion/sniff?
ReplyDeleteA dog's sense of smell is around 200 times more sensitive than a man's - there's your problem.
ReplyDeleteThey can smell stuff from weeks ago. They can smell dope on your wallet from the notes inside it.
BTW If Babylon wanted to search me - no problem. I suspect there is an accompanying attitude which causes all the piss.
JuliaM, Drugs is the scourge of our country and I for one will back any initiative to reduce its effects. Anglegrindermondey has a valid point, what is it? You may now be aware from the answers on your post that a dog has such a sensitive nose it can pick up a trace from someone who has taken drugs from days ago, so it will mostly target the right people.
ReplyDeleteDid you also know that most bank notes in this country have traces of drugs on them! I wonder why?
"Are you widening your net Julia to criticise foreign police forces as well?"
ReplyDeleteWell, I don't usually need the extra material... ;)
"80% failure rate?? "
Having walked past a chap on the way to a Tube station and practically got high from the smell coming off him myself, I can see how accidental transfer could well be a factor.
It seems the current breed of pot is a much, much more pungent strain than that from the hippie paradise of the Sixties.
"The 'customer' often does get a bit lairy, but in the UK the worst he might expect is an £80 ticket. "
Not sure why anyone should get fined for getting annoyed when being stopped for no good reason...
"Is it possible to ask for a second opinion/sniff?"
:D
"BTW If Babylon wanted to search me - no problem. I suspect there is an accompanying attitude which causes all the piss."
ReplyDeleteVery possibly. But then, aren't they entitled to it?
"Drugs is the scourge of our country and I for one will back any initiative to reduce its effects. Anglegrindermondey has a valid point, what is it? You may now be aware from the answers on your post that a dog has such a sensitive nose it can pick up a trace from someone who has taken drugs from days ago, so it will mostly target the right people."
I'm afraid if the goal is to stop drugs, the game's lost.
And especially if - in the meantime - it means the police waste their time stopping people who took drugs days ago, or worse, sat next to someone who took drugs on the bus! In what sense are they 'the right people'?
Otherwise we'll just have a police state, and who wants that?