[mortov]

North Americans are probably astonished at what is 'permitted' for UK police to become involved in - there are no constitutional protections and no effective oversight and there never has been in the UK. Even today the Police actively obstruct and frustrate attempts to bring effective controls and oversight of their activities which can be in clear and blatant breach of what limited legislation exists.

This (and other related) stories rolls on with only a few days ago the Metropolitan police in London being forced by a court order to admit the identities of two officers - Jim Boyling and Bob Lambert [who the referenced article is about] - who fathered children (then disappeared leaving the mothers and babies to fend for themselves). http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/15/metropolitan-...

[mike-cardwell]

Whilst we're comparing police forces:

"Last year, in total, British police officers actually fired their weapons three times. The number of people fatally shot was zero. In 2012 the figure was just one. Even after adjusting for the smaller size of Britain’s population, British citizens are around 100 times less likely to be shot by a police officer than Americans. Between 2010 and 2014 the police force of one small American city, Albuquerque in New Mexico, shot and killed 23 civilians; seven times more than the number of Brits killed by all of England and Wales’s 43 forces during the same period."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/08/ar...

[GVIrish]

Just because you're unlikely to get shot in the streets by British police, doesn't mean unlawful killings by British police are not an issue.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/dec/03/deaths-police-cust...

Law enforcement in each country have their own issues with accountability and human rights, just in different ways.

[mattmanser]

Have you read that article? It doesn't say what you think it does. It pretty much says only 13 officers in 12 years should have been convicted of foul play.

One a year.

[staunch]

Taking guns away from average citizens is an efficient way to reduce shootings. Taking privacy away from average citizens may prove to be even more effective in reducing all forms of crime. Just think of all the children we'll save!

[ivanca]

So privacy is just as important as guns? straw man.

[res0nat0r]

We have 300 million guns in the USA, of course there are going to be less shootings in the UK vs the USA.

[ascorbic]

I don't think it's just North Americans who are astonished. Most Brits are too. Even the most paranoid and cynical of observers seem to have been shocked by the spy cops revelations.

[walshemj]

But on the other hand a UK police force would not be allowed to run out of control as it has in Ferguson and there are much stricter rules on entrapment and agent provocateurs.

In one case an IRA gun runner got of on a very minor technicality over a single informant ( oh they caught they guy bang to rights with the guns) compared to what the FBI seem to get past the radar in encouraging foolish young Muslim Americans

[gadders]

AFAIK, even water cannons have never yet been used on the UK mainland.

[pokpokpok]

you're correct I'm astonished. Is there some vast cultural difference with respect to government power that this is considered bearable?

[Joeboy]

The relevant paragraph in TFA is as follows:

""" James Olson, a former Chief of Counterintelligence at the C.I.A., who was involved in clandestine operations overseas for many years, described undercover sexual involvements as “something that we should not do in the C.I.A., absolutely not.” He went on, “Our liaison friends in other services think that we Americans are ridiculously puritanical and that we avoid using something that works.” The masters were the East Germans—particularly Markus Wolf, whose Romeo agents seduced government secretaries in the West. As for Bob Robinson, Olson said, “It’s very easy to fall into that trap—the righteousness trap. Some people are so convinced that what they’re doing is for the good of the country that they’re willing to excuse what would ordinarily be gross misconduct on their parts. They lose sight of ethical constraints.” """

I note that he doesn't say the US doesn't do this, merely that the CIA shouldn't do it, which UK authorities have also said about the UK police, while seeking to conceal the fact it happened and defend their right to do it again. I doubt the CIA actually refrains entirely from using this effective infiltration technique. If they didn't, they would lie. If it hadn't been for Mark Kennedy being outed by political activists in 2010 this probably wouldn't be widely known about in the UK either.

[mortov]

Yes, it was called the Boston Tea Party.

[mhurron]

Yep, taxing tea in the colonies was just too damn far.

[hindsightbias]

Actually it was an anti-monopolistic protest against a lower tax on East India Corps tea.

Today, we celebrate monopolies or think they can't exist via deregulation.