4 ms·

I wouldn't say it's the beginning. There's nothing new about it. Apparently the police have recorded over 100000 incidents of 'non-crime hate crimes'. I like A

I wouldn't say it's the beginning. There's nothing new about it. Apparently the police have recorded over 100000 incidents of 'non-crime hate crimes'. I like Andrew Doyle quote on this: > In this new woke era, our law enforcement agencies are not content to police crime, but also non-crime. This is a huge relief, because for a long while now too many citizens have been not breaking the law and getting away with it.

maxehmookau 4y ago
Non-hate hate crimes are the latest cause celebre of the GBNews lot. It's their latest grift and HN would do well to see past it.
- xdennis 4y ago
  I don't agree with being harassed by the police over something that's literally not a crime. But I'm not sure why GBNews would be grifting with it. Conservatives have been in power in the UK for 12 years now and they've done nothing about it.
notavalleyman 4y ago
> the police have recorded over 100000 incidents I just think it's worth rebutting, that the police are not combing twitter for anything borderline. These are complaints that the public are making to the police. There is a relevant law about malicious comms, so the police are obliged to open a case. > this new woke era Give me a break. Members of the public are taxed to provide a police service. If they feel like they're a victim of malicious communications, they're allowed to go to the police. Nothing to do with being "content to police non-crime" or being "woke".
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  >These are complaints that the public are making to the police. There is a relevant law about malicious comms, so the police are obliged to open a case. >Give me a break. Members of the public are taxed to provide a police service. If they feel like they're a victim of malicious communications, they're allowed to go to the police. Nothing to do with being "content to police non-crime" or being "woke". And you act as though that's a good thing? 100k people going through the work of reporting what is likely mostly unfunny boomer memes and thinly veiled trolling is a much stronger indictment of the current state of affairs than 100k instances of bored cops going looking for violations of some broad law from the comfort of their desks.
  - notavalleyman 4y ago
    You don't know that at all. For all you know, 99% are legitimate targeted harassment or part of a larger course of offending behaviour. It's snap uninformed judgements like yours that are the problem, imo
    - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
      I might not know but it seems like a very fair default assumption given the history of anti-nuisance laws in meatspace.
SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
Police were already enforcing non-crime for a long time. They get called when there are black and brown people in spaces that makes the neighbors nervous. I don’t think police being used as an enforcement mechanism for non-crimes should be critiqued as if it’s a new phenomenon. It’s old and it sucks and it should be critiqued on that.

maxehmookau 4y ago

Non-hate hate crimes are the latest cause celebre of the GBNews lot. It's their latest grift and HN would do well to see past it.

xdennis 4y ago
I don't agree with being harassed by the police over something that's literally not a crime. But I'm not sure why GBNews would be grifting with it. Conservatives have been in power in the UK for 12 years now and they've done nothing about it.

notavalleyman 4y ago

> the police have recorded over 100000 incidents I just think it's worth rebutting, that the police are not combing twitter for anything borderline. These are complaints that the public are making to the police. There is a relevant law about malicious comms, so the police are obliged to open a case. > this new woke era Give me a break. Members of the public are taxed to provide a police service. If they feel like they're a victim of malicious communications, they're allowed to go to the police. Nothing to do with being "content to police non-crime" or being "woke".

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
>These are complaints that the public are making to the police. There is a relevant law about malicious comms, so the police are obliged to open a case. >Give me a break. Members of the public are taxed to provide a police service. If they feel like they're a victim of malicious communications, they're allowed to go to the police. Nothing to do with being "content to police non-crime" or being "woke". And you act as though that's a good thing? 100k people going through the work of reporting what is likely mostly unfunny boomer memes and thinly veiled trolling is a much stronger indictment of the current state of affairs than 100k instances of bored cops going looking for violations of some broad law from the comfort of their desks.
- notavalleyman 4y ago
  You don't know that at all. For all you know, 99% are legitimate targeted harassment or part of a larger course of offending behaviour. It's snap uninformed judgements like yours that are the problem, imo
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    I might not know but it seems like a very fair default assumption given the history of anti-nuisance laws in meatspace.

SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago

Police were already enforcing non-crime for a long time. They get called when there are black and brown people in spaces that makes the neighbors nervous. I don’t think police being used as an enforcement mechanism for non-crimes should be critiqued as if it’s a new phenomenon. It’s old and it sucks and it should be critiqued on that.