Barriers on london bridges

[mjr]

The SM thanked me for waiting and offering up the bag and contents for inspection, saying that he'd had 2 people earlier who had kicked up a fuss at being stopped. Unbelieveable!

Why's it unbelievable that people would object to security theatre invasions of their privacy? We should not let terrorists change our way of life and that includes opposing totalitarian tendencies like arbitrary stop-and-search.

You are opposed to bag searches on the entrances to large public venues?

Yes, unless they've reason to suspect someone's likely to try a bag bomb and even then, it would probably only move the target of bombers to those just outside the security perimeter either waiting to be searched to go in, or waiting for people to come out like in Manchester recently. Even if they suspect a bomb, it would seem better to search people selected from an area, rather than making people queue up as sitting ducks for the attackers. What proportion of bag searches discover bombs? Why's that a good use of limited security staff numbers and worth changing our society to allow?

[trilathon]

coming back to Newhaven on the ferry t'other day ( a few days after MEN arena ) , I was told all my panniers would have to be emptied ( I'd not seen a washing machine for 5 hot days, with only 2 sets of clothing ! ). Anyhow they let me straight through, but machine gun cops pulled aside a car with a middle eastern looking gent and tore it apart there and then on the tarmac by passport control. I never saw him on the tiny boat.

I got shouted at in Holland by some youths whilst at one of the free camping sites, the general gist being I was some kind of refugee and to go home ! Plenty of neo Nazi graffitti about.

Having a roadside brew and lunch up whilst seeking shelter in the Fenlands a couple leaving their property doubled back to make sure I wasn't malingering and burgling their house !

I hear lots of brave talk but see lots of suspicion. The first time in 20 years of touring I've encountered negativity.

[pwa]

Why's it unbelievable that people would object to security theatre invasions of their privacy? We should not let terrorists change our way of life and that includes opposing totalitarian tendencies like arbitrary stop-and-search.

You are opposed to bag searches on the entrances to large public venues?

Yes, unless they've reason to suspect someone's likely to try a bag bomb and even then, it would probably only move the target of bombers to those just outside the security perimeter either waiting to be searched to go in, or waiting for people to come out like in Manchester recently. Even if they suspect a bomb, it would seem better to search people selected from an area, rather than making people queue up as sitting ducks for the attackers. What proportion of bag searches discover bombs? Why's that a good use of limited security staff numbers and worth changing our society to allow?

Maybe the bag searches don't find bombs because they put people off trying to bring a bomb in a bag. Where do you think the Manchester bomber would have preferred to have detonated that bomb? Inside or outside the venue?

[mjr]

You are opposed to bag searches on the entrances to large public venues?

Yes, unless they've reason to suspect someone's likely to try a bag bomb and even then, it would probably only move the target of bombers to those just outside the security perimeter either waiting to be searched to go in, or waiting for people to come out like in Manchester recently. Even if they suspect a bomb, it would seem better to search people selected from an area, rather than making people queue up as sitting ducks for the attackers. What proportion of bag searches discover bombs? Why's that a good use of limited security staff numbers and worth changing our society to allow?

Maybe the bag searches don't find bombs because they put people off trying to bring a bomb in a bag.

And if you believe that, can I interest you in buying some elephant repellent?

Why do you want to give in to terrorism and surrender our way of life based on such flimsy fictions?

Where do you think the Manchester bomber would have preferred to have detonated that bomb? Inside or outside the venue?

Where he did, if he's got any sense. I was at the arena recently and the explosion probably did much more damage in that lobby because it's a smaller, more confined space that's more densely-packed with people who can only escape in one direction (outwards) so there's also quite a good chance of secondary stampede injuries. Would you have set it off in the vast near-open space of the arena where people could leave in all directions?

[Cyril Haearn]

I assume that the sardonic undertone got lost in translation here?


It's a composting toilet -> my wobbly bog brush using hovercraft full of eels

No no undertone, all motor vehicles at least could be limited, not cyclists

How?


It's a composting toilet -> my wobbly bog brush using hovercraft full of eels

Satnav, the system always knows where the vehicle is

[pwa]

Yes, unless they've reason to suspect someone's likely to try a bag bomb and even then, it would probably only move the target of bombers to those just outside the security perimeter either waiting to be searched to go in, or waiting for people to come out like in Manchester recently. Even if they suspect a bomb, it would seem better to search people selected from an area, rather than making people queue up as sitting ducks for the attackers. What proportion of bag searches discover bombs? Why's that a good use of limited security staff numbers and worth changing our society to allow?

Maybe the bag searches don't find bombs because they put people off trying to bring a bomb in a bag.

And if you believe that, can I interest you in buying some elephant repellent?

Why do you want to give in to terrorism and surrender our way of life based on such flimsy fictions?

Where do you think the Manchester bomber would have preferred to have detonated that bomb? Inside or outside the venue?

Where he did, if he's got any sense. I was at the arena recently and the explosion probably did much more damage in that lobby because it's a smaller, more confined space that's more densely-packed with people who can only escape in one direction (outwards) so there's also quite a good chance of secondary stampede injuries. Would you have set it off in the vast near-open space of the arena where people could leave in all directions?

Would you also recommend that we stop searching people's bags at airports? I've no problem with occasional bag searches. It's a minor inconvenience. There were huge metal barriers at the entrance points to the large pedestrian areas in Cardiff for the last week or so, to stop attacks using lorries. Nobody was complaining. (Big football match)

[mjr]

Would you also recommend that we stop searching people's bags at airports?

I would recommend we stop searching people's bags on entry to airports where that currently happens, for similar reasons to those I outlined above. Searching bags before loading them onto planes seems a good idea for all sorts of reasons, including that a relatively small bag bomb could compromise airworthiness and kill many more people than a public-place bomb.

I've no problem with occasional bag searches. It's a minor inconvenience. There were huge metal barriers at the entrance points to the large pedestrian areas in Cardiff for the last week or so, to stop attacks using lorries. Nobody was complaining. (Big football match)

I read complaints about it and I was nowhere near Cardiff, so I know that's not true.

Also, apparently the UK government paid £1.4m towards that security, too - it spent more on one football match than on five years cycling in Oxford!

(national government only paid two-thirds of the announced city amount, with the rest coming from local government)

If you've no problem with occasional bag searches, would you object to occasional cloning of your electronic devices and their contents? Occasional use of your bank accounts? Occasional detainment while they check your travel plans? Occasional body cavity searches? At what point would you consider such minor inconveniences become a fundamental change to our society?

[landsurfer]

I suppose we have to find a balance.
Bag searches have been with us in the UK from the 70's.
Venue searches are not new.
Individual searches when entering shops where a part of life in the 70's, 80's and later in Belfast and the rest of Ulster.

I applaud those that will cry out for our liberty, genuinely.

So put forward your alternatives, your plans to allow the fight against terrorism to continue ... possibly succeed.
Because if there is no alternative to Government monitoring and control then there is just Government monitoring and control.

Thoughtful alternatives need to be discussed before we all end up in INGSOC.

[pwa]

Would you also recommend that we stop searching people's bags at airports?

I would recommend we stop searching people's bags on entry to airports where that currently happens, for similar reasons to those I outlined above. Searching bags before loading them onto planes seems a good idea for all sorts of reasons, including that a relatively small bag bomb could compromise airworthiness and kill many more people than a public-place bomb.

I've no problem with occasional bag searches. It's a minor inconvenience. There were huge metal barriers at the entrance points to the large pedestrian areas in Cardiff for the last week or so, to stop attacks using lorries. Nobody was complaining. (Big football match)

I read complaints about it and I was nowhere near Cardiff, so I know that's not true.

Also, apparently the UK government paid £1.4m towards that security, too - it spent more on one football match than on five years cycling in Oxford!

(national government only paid two-thirds of the announced city amount, with the rest coming from local government)

If you've no problem with occasional bag searches, would you object to occasional cloning of your electronic devices and their contents? Occasional use of your bank accounts? Occasional detainment while they check your travel plans? Occasional body cavity searches? At what point would you consider such minor inconveniences become a fundamental change to our society?

Well, no rubber glove searches yet on the streets of Cardiff, so my tolerance levels have not been tested that far. But when I walked through the metal barriers in Cardiff last week I saw nobody having problems with it at all. The atmosphere on the streets was friendly and relaxed. I've been into the Welsh paliament building (the public can go in and watch committee meetings and general sessions) and had an airport style search, and I was happy with that. The people doing it were friendly and I was relaxed about it. That sort of thing is at most a slight inconvenience. I once had to "help the police with their enquiries" regarding a matter that I had nothing to do with, and I was also relaxed about that. They asked their questions and I answered honestly and fully, with nothing to hide, and all was well. I don't even mind the idea of my electronic communications being monitored, though anyone doing so would need a lot of caffeine to stay awake. If you want to be protected as well as can be done you have to allow the people we pay to do it to actually do their job.

Where would I draw the line? I'd say we don't want our security forces focusing on harmless groups not breaking the law, and we don't want them "fitting up" innocent people. And we don't want interrogation that verges on torture. So we do need them to be subject to proper scrutiny.

Measures to increase security need to have widespread consent. If people felt oppressed by security measures that would constitute a fundamental change in our society. I don't feel that yet, and I don't think most people do.

[The utility cyclist]

Organised bag searches are a waste of time, waste of resources and money and are the absolute definition of security theatre, however the most pathetic and so much more worse is that barrier.
jesus wept whoever thought that was even remotely a good idea should be strung up by the goolies, the most pointless thing ever.
That some/most? people think it's a good thing just highlights how blinded people are by what has actually happened, what that is in the the grand scheme of things and also the underlying reasons as to why these things are happening.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.

[pwa]

Organised bag searches are a waste of time, waste of resources and money and are the absolute definition of security theatre, however the most pathetic and so much more worse is that barrier.
jesus wept whoever thought that was even remotely a good idea should be strung up by the goolies, the most pointless thing ever.
That some/most? people think it's a good thing just highlights how blinded people are by what has actually happened, what that is in the the grand scheme of things and also the underlying reasons as to why these things are happening.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.

When the Westminster attack happened a few months back I assumed, wrongly, that some obstacles would then be put on the pavements of London bridges to prevent motor vehicles being driven along the length of them. Probably something crude and ugly, to be replaced by something better designed at a later date. It has taken a second attack for that to happen.

Nobody will claim this is the complete answer to terrorism. That has not even been suggested. Nor are bag searches. Complete solutions involve things like removing the desire in others to attack us.

[Tangled Metal]

Is it obligatory for a cyclist to have a persecution complex to post on this forum?

It's a barrier put up on a prominent London bridge that's been a target of the same type of terrorism that said barrier would stop. It was put up to stop another attack. I'm ok with that and not blind because of that. It wasn't put up to restrict cyclists but as a security measure. Should they have considered cyclists? Well obviously yes but if that leads to delay then better to get any barrier up then work out a better solution long term.

It's not about persecution of cyclists!

PS usual suspects making the same sort of persecution narrative. I wonder what they'd be like if they actually suffered persecution?!!

[bovlomov]

Thoughtful alternatives need to be discussed before we all end up in INGSOC.

We've already had the discussion about foreign policy, and all that stuff.

After that, it might be better for resources to be directed. For example, we are increasingly having our privacy indiscriminately compromised, supposedly to keep us safe. On the other hand, here is a man who has appeared on TV, evidently very angry, willing to talk about killing for Jihad, that the police and security services know, that the local mosques know (and have excluded), that neighbours have raised concerns about.

Rather than spend billions collecting, storing and scanning our internet communications, why not deal with this man? As far as I can see, he had already done enough to be prosecuted. Yet, if I've not misunderstood, he was able to get a job on the Underground (in customer services!), and able to hire a van. It seems to me that the government is promoting data sharing for everyone apart from Jihadis.

If they search my emails, and they find that I am raving about the infidel in the evil west, and saying that I am prepared to kill my mother for Jihad... ...what will they do about it? Raise a flag to add to the other millions of flags? Then nothing? How will that keep the country safe? Internet security is compromised to no good effect.

Back to topic - these people could strike anywhere. I don't see the point in making all our lives more inconvenient. I don't see the point, in this case, of making cycling more dangerous. By the way - it seems that a man with his record could have got a job driving the lorry with the concrete blocks around town. Imagine how much damage he could do with that.

Someone needs to separate security from showbiz, which is what it has largely become.

Finally: At Paddington Station yesterday I was pleased to see absolutely no evidence of security theatre. I saw no armed police, and the only difference was more regular security announcements.

[bovlomov]

It's not about persecution of cyclists!

It's not about the persecution of cyclists. I doubt a single person involved gave a moment's thought to us. That's the problem.

[lahoski]

...rather than leave the pannier on the bike, which was locked up by the suspension bridge, I thought I'd better take it with me (unattended baggage d'you see!) and lined-up behind another bloke to have my bag searched by the security man.

The SM thanked me for waiting and offering up the bag and contents for inspection, saying that he'd had 2 people earlier who had kicked up a fuss at being stopped. Unbelieveable!

Why's it unbelievable that people would object to security theatre invasions of their privacy? We should not let terrorists change our way of life and that includes opposing totalitarian tendencies like arbitrary stop-and-search.

You are opposed to bag searches on the entrances to large public venues?

There are plenty of publicly accessible crowded places. Bag searches at venues do absolutely nothing - as evidenced by the three most recent terrorist attacks.

It's not choice of venue that limits terrorist activity.