3 ms·
Your quote says nothing about the police having unique or extreme powers, it says only that individuals have no right to opt out of society's defense mechanisms
by srtjstjsj 10y ago
Your quote says nothing about the police having unique or extreme powers, it says only that individuals have no right to opt out of society's defense mechanisms.
Further, your quoted line, that conflates aggregate consent with individual consent, while trying to distinguish them, making the utterly self-contradictory claim that "no individual can chose to withdraw his or her consent" , which comes from a 2012 commentary opinion by the Home Office, not the classic Peelian principles. (And it is likely a confusion of wording, not their actual understanding of the law or principles.)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/policing-by-consent/definition-of-policing-by-consent https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/policing-by-conse...
- rayiner 10y agoIndividuals can withdraw their consent from interactions with other individuals. They cannot do so in interactions with the police. That's a unique power. And while the Home Office stated it, it's the basis for policing in every developed country. And there is nothing contradictory about the Home Office quote. The government is the instrument through which the people, acting collectively, coerce individuals to behave. The collective needs to consent, but the individual doesn't need to. That's the point of government.
- srtjstjsj 10y agoYou just repeated the Home Office's mistake: > They cannot [withdraw their consent] in interactions with the police. > The collective needs to consent, but the individual doesn't need to Do you see how you contradicted yourself? The police can act without an individual's consent. That doesn't mean they have the individual's consent.