Perhaps it would simplify things if the 999 dialling service was amended. From now on it might say: “Press ‘1’ for ambulance, 2 for police, 3 for fire-service and 4 for thought-police.” Although given current priorities, perhaps the thought-police option should be offered first.
The thought is prompted by
the case of Harry Miller, heard at the High Court this week. Mr Miller is a former police officer who was contacted by Humberside Police in January after a complaint that a number of tweets he had published were “transphobic”.
Such door-knocking is a growing and disturbing trend. In recent years there have been an increasing number of cases where members of the public have found the police at their door for saying things online that someone (anyone) has deemed “transphobic”. The fact that “transphobia” (like many other “phobias”) is a deeply unclear concept, is cause for concern. The fact that saying things about sex, gender and genitalia that are true should be considered any type of “crime” should be cause for serious alarm.
Mr Miller was told that he had not committed a crime but that his social media posts were being
recorded as a “hate incident”. In the not very distant past there were crimes and there were not-crimes. When people did things that were not-crimes there was no need for the police to appear on their doorstep. If they robbed a bank, mugged or stabbed someone, however, quite often the police would get involved.
Of course, as residents of London and other cities might have noticed, the police are not especially good at stopping knife crime in particular these days. Whether because of political interference, incompetence or some other factor, our capital has in recent years become known worldwide as a hub of this barbarity.
Is it a coincidence that the eagerness of the police to pursue “hate incidents” seems to rise just as their ability to deal with real crime appears to fall? Perhaps officers simply find it more restful to turn up on the doorstep of naughty tweeters? Even former colleagues guilty of this charge.
Well Mr Miller, at least, was not taking this lying down. At the High Court this week he said that the actions of Humberside Police breached his human right to free expression. Meantime, the police claim that their actions were lawful and in no way interfered with his rights.
Perhaps Humberside Police are simply unaware of the problems with this claim. For instance, they seem to think that it is no particular bother if the police turn up on a member of the public’s doorstep and start questioning them about their opinions. They clearly see no current or historic occasions when such a procedure went wrong. Nor can they apparently guess why some of us might be concerned at the police taking it upon themselves to decide what is and is not allowed to be said in our society.
The additional problem is that the whole world of “hate-crime” legislation is replete with bad thinking. A hate-crime is a hate-crime if a person says it is so. Meaning that I could decide that from now on every single time somebody does not agree with 100 per cent of my opinions that I have been the victim of a hate crime. We could call it “Murray-opobia”. I think I could provide full-time work for a number of police forces if we agreed to do so.
Yet even this is not the deepest problem. The deepest problem with the police stepping into these areas is that for a society to make healthy decisions it must have healthy discussions: to do so freely and without fear. In the area of trans we are currently (as with other “phobias”) being bullied away from having such a discussion. By claiming they are “offended”, a small number of activists are trying to force everyone else into agreeing with extraordinarily radical demands. This includes a demand that irreversible medical interventions should be carried out on children.
Well those demands should not be agreed to. And those who are questioning some of the emerging trans orthodoxy will be seen in the future as having provided – at the very least – a useful corrective. They should be free to do so without fearing not just some extremists on their backs but the police at their door.
www.telegraph.co.uk
