The Met Police is pushing ahead with plans to use divisive LFR at Notting Hill – it's another terrifying slide towards state surveillance. Plus: Zoë Grünewald on Epping decision + latest ReformWatch.
What this article fails to address is the violence and crimes that are committed at this annual event. Local residents dread it year after year and feel trapped in their homes and then there’s the human excrement that they have to deal with in their front gardens.
I agree that facial recognition may not be totally accurate, as in the sense of the required number of points to prove in fingerprints or DNA, but imagine, for example, that there has been a knifing, captured on camera at the Notting Hill Carnival, LFR could help considerably towards identifying possible suspects, but it would not end there. Supporting evidence would be required to prove the offence in a court of law.
What you should consider is that the police are primarily responsible for safeguarding the public, and LFR is a tool which can be used for this, and also in respect of other crimes, such as shoplifting where thieves, overall, are costing millions to the stores, which, to stay in business, have to pass on their losses to the shoppers.
Such as the Notting Hill Carnival, or any large crowds, attract criminals because they present opportunities to commit crime, and sadly, as has happened previously, they can attract terrorists, intent on murder.
Maintaining the protection of the public from crime, I agree, has to be a balance between that and the freedom of the public
Now retired, having served a career in the police service, I can say that the vast majority of my former colleagues had a developed sense of justice and discretion to enable them to treat the public, including the criminals in a fair and proper manner, also aware that infractions of that could lead to disciplinary offences for which, proved could have significant effects on their career, even to the extent of getting sacked.
The police develop expertise in the performance of their duties, which they are required to perform without fear or favour, to a high standard of conduct, which can be arduous and dangerous at times, so why not trust them for doing the job for which they are paid, instead of trying to tie their hands behind their backs? By that, we should all be able to remain that much safer.
What this article fails to address is the violence and crimes that are committed at this annual event. Local residents dread it year after year and feel trapped in their homes and then there’s the human excrement that they have to deal with in their front gardens.
GET REAL
I agree that facial recognition may not be totally accurate, as in the sense of the required number of points to prove in fingerprints or DNA, but imagine, for example, that there has been a knifing, captured on camera at the Notting Hill Carnival, LFR could help considerably towards identifying possible suspects, but it would not end there. Supporting evidence would be required to prove the offence in a court of law.
What you should consider is that the police are primarily responsible for safeguarding the public, and LFR is a tool which can be used for this, and also in respect of other crimes, such as shoplifting where thieves, overall, are costing millions to the stores, which, to stay in business, have to pass on their losses to the shoppers.
Such as the Notting Hill Carnival, or any large crowds, attract criminals because they present opportunities to commit crime, and sadly, as has happened previously, they can attract terrorists, intent on murder.
Maintaining the protection of the public from crime, I agree, has to be a balance between that and the freedom of the public
Now retired, having served a career in the police service, I can say that the vast majority of my former colleagues had a developed sense of justice and discretion to enable them to treat the public, including the criminals in a fair and proper manner, also aware that infractions of that could lead to disciplinary offences for which, proved could have significant effects on their career, even to the extent of getting sacked.
The police develop expertise in the performance of their duties, which they are required to perform without fear or favour, to a high standard of conduct, which can be arduous and dangerous at times, so why not trust them for doing the job for which they are paid, instead of trying to tie their hands behind their backs? By that, we should all be able to remain that much safer.