I was stopped and searched under the Terrorism Act, on my way through Euston station. Sniffer dog and flamboyantly over-equipped uniformed hat, who at least was reasonably polite about it. As he said, he didn’t actually suspect me of anything. It was only later when I examined the receipt he gave me for the procedure that the implications of this totally sank in. Here’s the relevant section of the small print:
Sec. 44(1) and 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000
There are also powers to stop and search vehicles and their occupants (44(1)) and pedestrians (44(2)) in an area if a senior police officer authorises it, to prevent acts of terrorism.
For these powers, the officer does not have to have reasonable grounds to suspect the individual stopped or searched of carrying instruments or offensive weapons or of involvement in the anticipated violence or terrorism…
Italics mine. Let’s have that again in bold, shall we?
…the officer does not have to have reasonable grounds to suspect the individual stopped or searched of carrying instruments or offensive weapons or of involvement in the anticipated violence or terrorism…
— so, regardless of the presence or absence of any actual threat, this whole thing is about maintaining and reinforcing the climate of fear and intimidating passers by. Nice. Plus of course, if one were to object, that in itself makes one suspicious, so generally speaking, one doesn’t.
Suppose a blogger were to be casting about for emigration to some less sinister part of the world — has anyone any recommendations?
One consideration, I’d think, would be a place where the people are prone to general strikes, shutdown protests and rioting when their governing elite go too far. France and Spain come to mind. The Scandinavian countries and the Low Countries have also always impressed me as fairly sensible. They have their hysterically self-indulgent, authoritarian wingnuts, of course, but they do appear to have ways of keeping them soothed.