4 ms·
The right level of recording of non crime is zero wdym reduced?
by avereveard 4mo ago
The right level of recording of non crime is zero wdym reduced?
- trumpdong 4mo agoIf they're turning over all information the police have it makes sense this gets turned over... Or do you want the police to not have any record they spoke to you, so they'll come tomorrow and say the same thing again, and again, and again?
- avereveard 4mo agoMetadata does not require data and conflating them doesn't help your point
- graemep 4mo agoSo what metadata would be appropriate? Just an incident regarding this person was reported? For a hate incident regarding this person was reported? That could easily make things worse as the risk is that people looking at the check would assume the worst.
- cindyllm 4mo ago[dead]
- trumpdong 4mo agowho the hell is this cindyllm user that keeps replying to my posts with really dumb stuff?
- graemep 4mo agoI did not say its the right level. All my comments in this thread have been stating facts, not opinions (not that that stopped downvotes). By reduced I mean a stricter code of practice that requires a good reason for doing it.: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-crime-hate-incidents-code-of-practice/non-crime-hate-incidents-code-of-practice-on-the-recording-and-retention-of-personal-data-accessible#necessary-considerations--proportionality-common-sense-approach-and-least-intrusive-method https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-crime-hate-in... Example H above is in my view a good example of something should be recorded. A single incident is not a crime, but repeating that conduct could constitute a criminal harassment.