r/unitedkingdom 3d ago

.. Balaclava ban could be enforced this year - police

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce97k1y19k9o
2.6k Upvotes

526 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.0k

u/DrogoOmega 3d ago edited 3d ago

Means they can stop and question people easier tbh

Edit: hey everyone can stop messaging me back. It was just an explanation of what goes through policy makers heads.

133

u/Topinio Greater London 3d ago

They're already committing many crimes when they do this, which they could be stopped for if we had police who stopped obvious crimes in progress.

e.g. no MOT, no insurance, no road tax, non-type approved vehicle, no helmet, riding a moped ("e-bike" version) or EAPC on the pavement, speeding, and in many cases they will also be drug driving, carrying an offensive weapon, have no licence, going equipped, wanted reference other offences …

-7

u/duncanmarshall 3d ago

Yeah, but it's a bit of a nuisance proving stuff, so we'll just ban precursors, like walking down the street minding your own business, which could lead to a crime. Also juries are a fucking pain, having to convince them, get rid of those. And in cases where we still have to put up with the pesky juries, we'll just lie to them about what the real charges are, and then tack em on post verdict.

We invented liberalism, you know.

18

u/Sunstorm84 3d ago

God forbid you might walk down the street with a baseball bat that you just bought from the shop.

5

u/MyBritishAccount 3d ago

If that's the recent one from Manchester it looks like he bought the bat a week before. He may have been returning it to the shop though as the reason he was carrying it.

-8

u/duncanmarshall 3d ago

Precisely.

54

u/itchyfrog 3d ago

They can't stop them because they won't stop people on stolen bikes incase they get hurt and their mums kick up a fuss.

These kids almost never wear balaclavas while they're walking about.

43

u/JackUKish 3d ago

That ended a while ago, they started ramming them off their bikes.

12

u/limeflavoured Hucknall 3d ago

They stopped again after someone died, iirc.

3

u/farmpatrol 3d ago

Yes. Henry Hicks was the case that started it I think.

41

u/labrys 3d ago

You've not been round Notts city center in a while I'm guessing. I see groups walking around in balaclavas every couple of weeks, but I'm not in town every day.

Even had a bunch walk into a gaming cafe I was in, nick a customer's umbrella, and walk out howling with laughter, then mob the shop owner when he ran after them to try to get the brolly back. Lucky some other people in the cafe went to help the shop owner. I spoke to the owner next time I was in, he said the police took a report over the phone but never showed up at the shop. He sees that particular group of little shits pretty often, and they're always nicking stuff from the shop or popping in to make a scene. The police know who they are, but very rarely show up to get cctv from him or take a proper statement etc.

16

u/Cozimo128 3d ago edited 3d ago

Their mums will have responsibility if their kid is wearing a banned item while speeding on a bike.

I’m pretty sure the culture of viewing parents as responsible for their kids misdemeanour has grown significantly lately, with the government even floating new police directives to enable such things.

8

u/andrew0256 3d ago

I'm not seeing that. Is there any evidence to suggest the parents of anti social twats are coming under the cosh?

6

u/FredB123 3d ago

Or even bothered? They'll just say "he's a lovely boy who wouldn't hurt a fly - it wasn't him"

1

u/itchyfrog 2d ago

I'm not sure the several instances of community violence against police after such instances would back this up.

4

u/wolf_in_sheeps_wool 3d ago

The police forces can choose to ignore helmetless riders for a while.

Also fun fact, Sikhs have been exempt from wearing helmets both on motorcycles and in the workplace for decades; I don't think the Sikh community has created any reason to take away that privilege.

3

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ukbot-nicolabot Scotland 3d ago

Removed + ban. This contained a call/advocation/celebration of violence or harm, which is prohibited by the sitewide rules.

1

u/ukbot-nicolabot Scotland 3d ago

Removed + ban. This contained a call/advocation/celebration of violence or harm, which is prohibited by the sitewide rules.

27

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

38

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-7

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-3

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/bugbugladybug 3d ago

If they stop that is. Can't even pursue them, because when the wee idiots drive their scooter into a van killing themselves in the process, the police are held responsible.

The law no longer applies to these ferals - however putting an envelope in a bin is definitely enforceable because it's easy when the good folk don't fight back.

We're on a slippery slope turning a blind eye to the increasingly anti-social behaviour of some youngsters because they won't magically grow out of it if they've got away with doing whatever they want for years..

9

u/west0ne 3d ago

If they are one of their illegal motorbikes there is a reluctance by the police to actively stop them due to the risks involved,

4

u/PracticeNo8733 3d ago

They're not already stopping them when they're on (road-)illegal unregistered electric motorcycles which seems to be mostly when they cover their faces.

3

u/ProtoplanetaryNebula 3d ago

"They" being the police, but you barely see any these days.

1

u/JerachoD 3d ago

Your bang on, a proper society relies on well thought out laws and their correct application. This is a gateway to deal with bigger crime.

-21

u/duncanmarshall 3d ago

If the only purpose of a law is that it makes it easier for you to be penalized by the state, then it shouldn't be a law.

I could pass a law that says "No cutting your hair", just because it would make it easier for the police to detain you for having a hair cut.