Met Police's Secret Facebook Page Probe
 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10399244.html


I wonder if the poster officers will get away or what; eventually. :wonder:

So, no one thinks it's an issue worth a thought, then?

Fair enough. Sorry for posting a non-issue thread.

I'll talk to myself, like Matteyboy. :D

i can't quiet figure out why people keep calling pikey a racist word?

I'm glad you at least gave it a thought, Tidgy.

Perhaps that's the reason why it's a non-issue here.

I think people take offence for the sake of it most of the time nowadays.

To understand that, you'd first have to understand how it is that "gypsies and travellers are officially recognized as ethnic minorities" in this country. It beats the hell out of me, given that unlike in the rest of Europe where I think pretty much all gypises are ethnic Roma, the majority of travellers in this country seem to be ex-pats of Irish descent. It would be interesting to see some hard figures or other data on that issue, although I doubt any organization with the ability to compile it would dare risk the negative publicity of doing so.

How can choosing to live a certain way be racial?

'A race is a biological construct, of a more or less distinct population with anatomical traits that distinguish it clearly from other races. '

Deciding to be a thieving coont and living in a caravan doesn't mean its a new race. Alright perhaps that is deliberatly being sterotypical lol

At the end of the day it's a few comments relating to a certain lifestyle choice on an unofficial forum. So no, it's not an issue, and it's certainly not racism.

life style choice, not a race hits the nail on the head

Ok, so recognising ALL travellers 'devoid of any feelings and thoughts', 'despicable' and implying that all of them are fundamentally criminals (article suggests that, so media could be just sensationalising) isn't even institutional prejudice, if not institutional racism? May be not, because such opinion (neither racist nor a prejudiced one) is based upon the real experience of those police officers with the travellers, not a pre-reserved one?

About official and unofficial forum, I hear that a police officer's conduct outside his official hours is also taken into account by his/her employers. It's not like other jobs when in your unofficial time and place you could get p7ssed and climb the lamppost to urinate from above, and then go to work in your suit and briefcase the next day. I may be wrong.

Here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...anceJuly14.pdf

A police officer's off-duty conduct involves not discrediting the police services and not undermining police confidence with what they do out there. Perhaps those police officers weren't off duty while they were posting their hatred for the travellers (as some of you say- just a few comments on the Travellers' life style choices) on that private FB page, but their conduct may be still be something that their police forces deem to be an issue worthy of probing/investigation. Perhaps more so, because they were doing that while on duty. I can't be sure.

Now whether posting one's thought process and opinions is a 'conduct' or should it be taken as a rightful freedom of expression as per their human right at some unofficial online pad, then I wonder if their police forces are acting as the thought police to their own police. :wonder:

Yes, you have to be so careful these days as to what you are endorsing.

I can't watch people like Chubby Brown or Bernard Manning due to their material. But also, I can't play any part in showing my support to the veterans of WW2 - as Guy Gibson named his dog with a name which was seen as very offensive. He was part of the British war effort, so it would be very amiss of me to support it too

Coronation Street the other day had a comment on where the bar person (who just happened to be white able-bodied female of undetermined hair colour, race & religious preference) stated "Are you boys going to drink up". At the time the bar had numerous male persons standing at the bar but none of them could be determined as being 'boys'. Obviously for me to carry on watching the show would lead me open to criticism from groups who are apposed to the deliberate demeaning of male persons within a social group.

On my days off now i find is best just to sit in the shoe cupboard and not talk to or have any opinion on anything.

Perhaps everyone in society should be more like me


Is this what your were getting at Turbo?

Well, if you read the article from the first post, and from the gov pdf link that I posted, that's (what's in question on this thread i.e. the FB page probe) what the police forces in question as well as the gov pdf are getting at, not me.

After reading this post of yours, I do think you do an oppressed job.

The lamp post example is a popular one because it was used on the certain police force's presentations for the Special Constables recruitment drives.

By the way, what are your thoughts on this FB secret page probe, Felix? Is that something you aren't allowed to comment on, due to the rules, or, can you? If not, no probs.

Prejudice, yes. Racist, no. These are two very different things.

According to the article, the Equality and Human Rights Commission are playing the racist card based upon prejudice comments ...

So maybe there is an issue after all, one with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and their unfounded accusations of racism ?

Facebook is something our force specifically encourages you not to use of post on.

Which is funny - as when we get sent to a job where Facebook is being used, they suddenly expect us to be an expert on.

I always thought Facebook was 'post it' site similar to this one.

anyone remember the irony of the gypsy community taking viz to court for running the piece on thieving gypsy bstards, they won the case but the very next week the head of the gypsy community was in court for recieving stolen generators

So, if they don't get found 'racially' prejudiced, I wonder if being prejudiced against the Travellers for any other reason can go against them. :wonder:

End of the day if you are an ordinary Joe like a lot of people in this country you are allowed to be a target but if you have the slightest ethnicity, disability or anything that can be construed as different then you have a force shield around you protecting you.

I think one of the differences is that a police professional may end up giving away too much about themselves e.g. their prides and prejudices on FB; due to its very procedure of even initial registration and the intimidating 'wall' protocol (starting with 'what's on your mind'), whereas he/she needs to be perceived as someone disinterested, as per their profession. Example is in this very thread; as the topic of this thread.

I know one can give away too much re. his/her loves and hates here as well, and get nailed for it in their profession, but at least you don't have to put up your bio data here. If you don't put something remotely personal on FB, even your own FB mates can label you as an FB psychopath troll. :D

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33622106



Doesn't say a lot for our police does it really

Yeah, and quite apart from being an ex cop, he's now a director of...wait for it...a human rights forum!

The double 'irony'.