Main Edition
US
FR
March 9, 2021 - 4:09pm
Miller versus The College of Policing will take place at The Court of Appeal, and although it is being hailed as a case about freedom of speech, it is, in fact, about the demand for unwavering control by trans activists.
In February 2020 The High Court ruled that Humberside Constabulary had acted inappropriately when they visited the workplace of former police officer Harry Miller to “check his thinking”. Miller had reposted a song lyric on Twitter that stated the well-known biological fact that males do not have female genitalia.
Humberside maintain that they were merely complying with the Hate Crime Operational guidance published by The College of Policing. The College of Policing agreed. In a bizarre judgement, the High Court ruled that the guidance is legal — although following it is not.
What this means is that if a complaint is lodged by, for example, a transgender person who claims to have been ‘misgendered’, a record of this complaint will remain on the database for six years and may be revealed to a potential employer at the discretion of the Chief Constable.
During the two years since Miller was visited by police, over 120,000 ‘non-crime hate incidents’ have been recorded. The police claim this is ‘essential’ to prevent ‘escalation’ into criminality.
I have been subject to a complaint under this ‘non-crime hate’ nonsense. One Sunday in January 2020 I was visited at my home by two young female police officers. They had come to inform me that a trans man had reported an ‘offensive’ tweet that had apparently caused him distress. The tweet in question was something along the lines of, ‘biological sex is not why we are oppressed, but it can be used against us.’ It was actually one of my more boring attempts at explaining why biological sex matters.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe advent, some years ago, of allowing certain ‘offences’ to be defined by the victim’s opinion, rather than by any objective evidence, arose post McPherson enquiry. This resulted in the rise of a number of ‘specialist’ teams, often comprised of uniform dodgers, with the active connivance of promotion seeking senior officers who knew which way the Home Office wind was blowing.
These teams then set about pursuing and recording their ‘non offences’ rigorously in order to provide make work that would prevent their reversion to real policework, (and shifts).
The added benefit for them was that there was no requirement therefore to engage in the thoroughly unsavoury, and sometimes dangerous, business of contact with actual criminals, or of actually arresting anyone, or of appearing in court to answer for the lawfulness, (or sanity), of their actions.
This article highlights the logical, if idiotic, conclusion of this lamentable trend.
We have more police than ever before but as you correctly state most of them are working very civilised hours well away from the streets. It’s a complete retreat from Robert Peels principals of policing. He inherited a system in which ordinary citizens carried weapons routinely for self protection and within a generation London was believed to be the safest city in the world.
Absolutely spot on.
that makes sense
Very well said, Mr Johns. I couldn’t have put it better.
The police can not catch
Shop lifters
Muggers
Drug dealers
Car thieve’s
Aggressive begging
Rapists
Murderer’s
But tweet about men being men and women being women and soon there is a knock on the door and
Hello hello hello what’s all this then…..
Pathetic absolutely pathetic
Can’t stop real crime so focus on non crime,crime
So all the crime I see every day must be my imagination
They’ve got no intention of stopping ‘real crime’ – it’s useful because it keeps the normals scared and compliant. The role of the police is to keep the 99% of law-abiding citizens scared and under control. Which is why they’ve been so gleeful about arresting people sitting on park benches and buying nonessential Easter eggs.
It’s just time off from persecuting the motorists.
So HM’s Prisons are full to bursting with people convicted of hate-speech then are they?
No, but the problem is that the accused has to spend time, effort and often money defending what they said.
to be fair the London Police did just catch a murdering rapist, he is one of them though so they didnt have to look very far
Well of course it isn’t a sensible use of police time. But we have known that for some years.
I am a Red Neck, and proud of it. I work hard, self employed tradesman, doing rough work, I drive a pickup truck, I used to shoot a good deal and am expert with firearms, I fish a lot, used to hunt, was a drunk, been in jail, look like a redneck and sometimes wear a MAGA hat, live in a town in one of natures beauty spots, fix my own truck and house and anything and spent a very great amount of time in nature, listened to Country and Western and used to spend all my time in very rough honky-tonk bars…..
AND I AM OPPRESSED. Everywhere ‘Redneck’ is used pejoratively, it is hate speech against me and all I hold dear. Why can I be verbally attacked in the MSM and it not count, am I not a minority with easily identified cultural traits? Where are my feelings protected?
Dear Sanford,
IF you were to start policing the speech that is straight up hate speech calling for the destruction of the white working class male, you’d have to quit doing all those healthy life activities you’ve listed and make it your full time job.
This victim culture is only truly viable for people who are not actually DOING anything with their life. Well, except spending all day on the internet finding new ways to claim victim hood. I can’t even keep up.
I myself am also a tradesperson, running a small company and creating living wage jobs that allow people dignity and something to be proud of. I come from factory workers in a forgotten/abandoned state. My roots are hardcore pro union (but like old school trade unions, not the BS that hijacked that for more entitled people who don’t really work by my standards), and actually radical leftist, back when that meant PRO free speech, and never banning books or ideas, and pushing for all people to be able to work for the betterment of their lives without governments dictating how we think or believe or educate within our homes.
I believe eventually the working class will have to realize we are the targets of a concentrated movement of elite people who control academia and government and who run corporations. We should be focused on working together for the people who pay taxes and support a system so flawed and broken that we are probably the ONLY ones paying taxes these days. But we get no support or concern.
I believe it is taxation without representation. Maybe we should all stop paying until we have a voice.
Recommend ‘Blackout’ by Candace Owens.
Oh, and if you want easy ammunition to fire back at anyone shaming you for being a straight, white man, this is hilarious and horrifying. Taking Mein Kampf and replacing “Jew” with “straight white men” makes it progressive, not evil. Go figure!
https://quillette.com/2018/10/01/the-grievance-studies-scandal-five-academics-respond/
Maybe you need to wear ladies clothes they’d have to listen to you then
Sanford, are you a white, heterosexual, blue collar man? If so then now, in 2021 in the western world, you are the enemy. You’re not black, Asian, Latino, Muslim, a woman, LGBTQ etc. etc. or one of those wealthy ‘white wine swilling liberals from the coast’. Just about everyone else falls into at least one of these categories, which automatically makes them victims (OK not the white wine swillers but they’re in charge and they give themselves a pass, just listen to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex!)
So, if they’re all victims, then they can’t also be guilty, but you’re not a victim (poor doesn’t count on its own any more) so you can be assigned the role of bad guy, like it or not. Tough, but it’s got to be someone and there simply isn’t anybody else left, so it falls on you – sorry!
Sick of this lunacy.
No, its about freedom of speech. The case doesn’t specifically go after the recording of non-crime hate incidents concerning trans issues – its going to the core of whether such records are justified at all. A ruling against such records will go far beyond the trans debate – it will affect debate concerning race, sexuality and sex. It will pushback Critical Race Theorists, all elements of the LGBT lobby (not just the trans element) and radical feminists.
In fact radical trans issues are at odds with feminists and will soon be at odds with lesbian and gay communities.
Bindel – same as Burchill et al – is a feminist. And per definition a leftist. These people are single-issue free speech warriors, all het up about the trans issue but woke on everything else (race, immigration, feminism, etc.)
That’s why i’m not terribly upset about the trannies; they p¡ss off the feminists and that’s not a bad thing at all.
Interesting viewpoint… My enemies enemy etc. On the other hand, once they’ve silenced the feminists (and good luck with that!) they’ll be after everyone else.
I suspect the satisfaction is seeing the feminist movement reaping what it has sown, watching them twist in the wind while they try to deny to another group the use the same arguments and tactics they have used for so long, while themselves clinging to those same arguments and tactics because it is all they have.
Also there is almost nil prospect of them developing any insight as they try to use the self same arguments to beat back the trans mob without realising they are comparatively the patriarchy. You really would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.
As for them being after everyone else, why should trans politics bother men. They have already been the same mill with the feminists and who given any other choice would want to be a man.
Fair points.
Yes to all that.
Being a woman i have a particular dislike for feminists, as they spout their BS assuming they speak on all women’s behalf – certainly not on mine, and i never consented to them calling me a ‘sister’. I have one sister of my own, and she hates feminism just as much as i do.
As for the trannies, it’s also a matter of æsthetics – most of them are blokes in frocks, and i find them a lot easier on the eye than the average feminist. The whole trans thing is way too absurd anyway to get as much traction as feminism did (or maybe i’m just too naive? hope not), so if it was a binary choice between blokes in frocks vs harridans in dungarees, i’ll pick the blokes any day.
@ethniciodo—What do you mean by “they are comparatively the patriarchy.”? Not getting it.
The rad fems are pushing back against invasion of their sole physical spaces & safety, and against distortion of the category of “women”.
Nothing unusual or wrong about that.
Just as you said, “good luck with that!” 🙂
They are mainly just blokes at the end of the day. Even if they lope off their unladybits, they are still no match for the feminists when it comes to shrieking.
yes
I loathe the execrable, loud-mouthed, vacuous, inane and fascist twits aka transgender lobby and all their disgusting crap. Is that a hate crime? Come and get me, then, (address supplied if required by the disgusting shambles aka the police).
A Scots Transman with one leg, An Irish gay prostitute, and an English Traveller Scientologist walked into a bar ………..
😉
I am deeply offended. About what I’m not at all sure, but to turn down the opportunity to be offended would be silly.
…..the barman said “this is Wales, you can all **** off”
That’s my recollection of Wales too :))
I live in Wales and I’m definitely offended.
Wales, where the men are offended and the sheep are nervous…
(sorry, couldn’t let it pass 😉
I think I used to drink at that bar, I remember the Sientologist kept smoking my cigaretts and tried to get me to read some literature he had on getting on the right side of the Thetans by attending a very expensive retreat. Shot pool with the other two, it was a good night.
…to celebrate their gold medal in the Women’s Beach Volleyball at the Tokyo Olympics.
The blind surgeon at the gender-reassignment clinic cut off the wrong limb at first.
the tyranny was evident from the start. When a movement puts perception ahead of reality, there is no reasoning with those within it. When a movement seeks to erase womanhood, there is no logic behind it. When a movement puts tomboys and potentially gay males on a road to medical experimentation, there can be no accommodation.
Perception is very important though. It is the result of our evolution
Perception is not reality. You can identify as a goat if you wish, but it does not make you one nor does it compel me to regard you as one.
“It’s life Jim, but not as we know it”
This idea of ‘hate incidents’ is not well known to the public. Every one has to be investigated and followed up with paperwork, even the very silly ones. If the idea of reporting these fairly trivial things became popular, the system would collapse. Now there’s an idea!
Only the right kind of hate incidents. Twitter about knee capping white men and abolishing whiteness is apparently only grounds for promotion.
Who was the fool who invented “hate crimes”?
Blair, or one of his cronies, I would imagine.
I looked it up. George Bush was President in US in 89 when it was recognised by Congress, Blair in UK in 98. Bloody left wing Republicans with their woke obsession.
But he ended the crimes of treason and sedition, just in time for remoaners to try to overturn the referendum. Whether the referendum should have been a simple majority is another question…
It all started in 2004 and was well-intentioned. The senior police officers were given an instruction about hate – nasty comments which had proliferated over the internet. Now, 16 years later, ‘Hate incidents’ have been politicised so if you want to start a minority group you just complain about every adverse comment – the police have to investigate even if there is no crime involved.
I have heard of roads paved with good intentions. They never lead to a worthwhile destination.
There is no hell. Too taboo to mention?
That is absolutely not true, that the police HAVE to investigate such matters. There has always been a fundamental discretion in British policing. The shift to deploying resources when someone notified the police that they have been ‘offended’ is a function of weak, politically influenced police leadership since the 1980s. Both at ACPO and Chief Constable level across the 43 constabularies. I do not know a single middle or lower rank who wants to waste time on this nonsense. (I was a police officer for 24 years and now 25 years at the criminal bar, mainly defending).
It stems from that idiot Macpherson opening the flood gates.
You mean fool which indeed he was
No idea but the Hate Crime bill is going through Scottish parliament today 🙁
“Miller versus The College of Policing … it is being hailed as a case about freedom of speech, it is…about the demand for unwavering control by trans activists.”
Not so fast. It is perhaps about demand for control – but it is not just about trans activists. Consider, for example, that the same “hate incident” law can be applied to wolf-whistling.
The irony of left wing feminists complaining about non-criminal incidents being reported to the police because someone’s feels were hurt seems to be lost on the author.
Just this morning I read an article in the Guardian claiming that almost every woman in the country has been the victim of sexual assault or harassment. The definition of such incidents can be whistling, unwanted attention or making someone feel uncomfortable. The article implores the authorities to do more about this.
As far as I’m concerned, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander who identifies as a goose.
I was manhandled by a female work colleague last week. I laughed it off but if I had done similar I might be up in front the beak..
I imagine most men in the country have been the victims of sexual assault or harassment if the definition is unwanted attention or making someone feel uncomfortable.
If the police ever come round to ‘check your thinking’ they are in the wrong. The law that enables or compels them to do so is wrong. Not a bit, not maybe, but 100% and always wrong. What kind of thinking it is or may have been is utterly irrelevant.
The British police, coming round to ‘check your thinking’. That’s got shivers going down my spine.
What do trans activist and isla mists have in common? …. Neither will rest until they rule the world
over 120,000 ‘non-crime hate incidents’ have been recorded.
The Stasi would be proud. This is absolutely appalling.
Thank you, Julie. Once again, you’re doing the heavy lifting and women everywhere applaud you.
Phony news and fake crises taking up space in our heads with manufactured discussions by the moronic inferno of nitwits and schoolyard bullies creating melodrama for bureaucrats who have convinced them they too have a ‘voice’ – all in order to keep the real focus on social and climactic pollution by power brokers and corporations hobbling individuals and groups by manipulating them into a belief they’re ‘crippled’ away from truly perceptive consciousness in this wonderful display of distraction and deceit by the conceited
all of which purpose is designed to conflate issues as if real and manufacture ‘cake’ while those in power receiving rich salaries maintain themselves in a deluded search for a fixed solution that does not exist in a transformative society that has succumbed to the glorification of wankers producing nothing but worry, trouble and self-absorbed attention
my cat also has a voice, but I consider the context
and while all that is ongoing no one who isn’t an uninformed, illiterate belligerent is dismissed since it might take an actual exercise of real thought to make such a consideration and wouldn’t sustain the critics and might unemploy those at the centre of such false controversies
woke is just another daisy in the chain of the socially illegitimate tantrums of diaper-full ‘tards demanding ‘someone’ do something for them