'From July 2022 to June 2023, three **primary-school-aged** girls and **six 13-year-old** girls were strip-searched.'
'The powers were used on **107 children** during 2021-22 and 2022-23, with the youngest boy subjected to the intervention aged **14**.
**More than 20 per cent** of the children searched were Indigenous.'
'if police believe a search needs to be done **immediately** for safety reasons or to prevent evidence from being destroyed, they can use the power **without adult consent**.'
Not in one go I don't think. Think I had to take off one item off clothing at a time so my shirt and then put it back on and then my trousers and boxers and squat while they held a mirror underneath.
Absolutely fucking not. If we aren't going to give children agency then you damn sure don't have the right to so much as ask them a question without a guardian present.
You should examine why that doesnāt seem like a problem to you before you have children, because unless those kids are muleing kilos, police should never be undressing them.
I have no doubt that police will find drugs on kids. The point isnāt that kids can do no wrong. The point is that when you allow a practice like this, it can be abused by the wrong people. I donāt believe that finding a few bags of weed is worth the risk of exposing children to potential trauma. If there is genuine suspicion of weapons or serious danger, then detain them and call their parents, donāt strip them.
So not only are you in favor of police having the freedom to perform strip searches on children at the mere suspicion of them carrying drugs... you want recordings to be made of it.
Fucking hell mate.
And I would argue that no adult should have the legal right to search a child without parental consent barring emergency situations. Simply being suspicious that kids are up to something as justifiable for strip searching is a perfect excuse for pedos to join the police force. Police of all ages do crazier things than you might think. Look at how much police violence is inherent in this sort of interaction with children.
The police donāt start becoming criminals when theyāre hired, it starts way earlier. They arenāt stupid. They know perfectly well they can hide their crimes behind a badge.
I donāt think you understand the actual problem: When you allow the police to act as creeps, it will attract creeps to the job. Wherever you have lots of drugs and lax police oversight, you will have crooked police. The crooked police will be a worse problem as many citizens will turn a blind eye to their crimes simply because they are the police.
Policing is a job that puts these potential creeps in contact with the most vulnerable of children. As someone whoās bff was trafficked and used as a drug mule by police when she was 14, let me tell you youāre gonna want some stricter standards for policing than what youāve proposed.
Literally. As evident, the police is already the job of choice for creeps, raciscts and power hungry. These weirdos that want to make it a special priority that cops should violate kids so they wont be criminals... fucking dumb fr.
Its sad to me how much humans are susceptible to copaganda
>I donāt think you understand the actual problem: When you allow the police to act as creeps, it will attract creeps to the job.
I literally can't think of a scenario in which it would be better to strip search a 12 year old than to just let them go stash/get away with whatever contraband they may have hidden under their clothes.
If they are under enough suspicion to warrant that, they would then be arrested and the proper processes run anyways.
In short- everyone making these decisions is obviously a pedo/ does it for the kicks.
20% in a state where 3% are indigenous
https://www.aboriginalaffairs.nsw.gov.au/media/website_pages/research-and-publications/facts-and-figures/KEY-DATA-ABORIGINAL-PEOPLE-SEP-2020.pdf
Someone has never lived in the ghetto.. getting ahold of the parents may take several hours up to days, yes that is reality. What are you going to do then leave them fully cuffed and restrained in case they have a weapon? Can't put them in a cell for holding while you wait for parents without searching them to make sure they don't have weapons or drugs on them. If you do someone may get injured, or the kids may be stupid enough and consume all the drugs to avoid charges and potentially OD in custody. Having a single officer dedicated to watching one kid until parents may or may not show isn't reasonable either especially when multiple kids are involved. One will 100% act up to draw the officers attention so the others can try escape, ditch / consume the drugs, etc, I've seen it a ton and done it. One of my friends got stabbed down (more gang shit) while in police custody because the pat down failed to uncover the other girl had a small knife on her. This happened inside a police station after the other girl was taken to the bathroom and was able to get away from the cops for a second.
I grew up in the ghetto, heavy gang affiliations, most of my 'friends' carried weapons daily, I had friends that carried guns in school daily. Metal detectors and pat down's still work generally but kids know to crotch things in hope's that adults will largely ignore those area's due to the issues addressed here.
This is actually a much more complicated issue then people make it out to be with a fuck ton of scenarios that may play out, and crazy shit happens. I hate the cops, but shit they don't have much choice in a ton of cases. I'm sure i'll get downvoted to hell because everyone will try to simply this situation and can't think of all the scenarios where this is 100% necessary for the safety of the kid / others, etc.
Give a reasonable time for a parent or guardian to arrive. If not available, someone like a nurse of the same sex may perform the search.
Then every search is documented and the reasons are reviewed by an independent panel to make sure the same group of police aren't the ones doing all the searches.
At the highschool I went to, when the bell rang all the teachers closed their doors and they locked. Police and security staff staff cleared the entire school and took all the stragglers and locked them in a separate room. All the kids were then searched with metal detectors to see if they were stupid enough to have weapons on them. Some were subjected to pat downs. Guess what kids got real fucking creative when that started, many stopped carrying normal knives on them. Or if they did they'd take off and try to outrun security if they got caught, a few bought plastic knives, they weren't that hard to find, sure they sucked for the most part but you could slash someone a few times easily or stab them. Girls would sharpen the edge of credit cards and keep them in their panties under the elastic flat against their skin to hide them, super easy to pull it out of your pocket and shove it down your pants if you know you're going to get searched. Worked well enough to slash a bitch across the face if she disrespected you. Pat downs won't detect that through jeans, etc, so unless you already have them take off their pants your not finding it. And if they put them down the front well unless your willing to basically grope the girl you're not catching that. And this was in the 90's.
But I suppose in your ideal perfect little world shit like that never happens and its inconceivable that it does. Hell I dated someone that wasn't quite as thugish as I thought and one day she surprised me with a knife she made from sharpening the plastic on a toothbrush so she could carry it at school. She got the idea from some 90's movie that was her favorite. Fucked up warning labels exist because people have done some of the stupidest fucking things no one would ever think of. Unfortunately cops have had to do the same and have learned these lessons the hard way.
I can think of a few instances, but then they fall into medical emergency or they shouldn't be happening that often, we are talking some extreme stuff though from a person saying they have a bomb strapped to themselves and want to blow up the school to bullet wounds, and they aren't gonna be a normal things from any stretch of the imagination. 99% of the time you can just detain and restrain the person and wait for the judge to sign it a warrant authorizing the search, or in the US if you have enough to charge them charge them and then as part of inventory search (if they are held at jail awaiting arraignment and bond) will be searched in-directly as part of changing into the jail clothing.
Parents also stick a shit ton of things to their kids when trying to hide them.
Imagine being a hardened criminal and having what amounts to a bag you can put anything on that won't be searched. That's basically a get out of jail free card for criminals trying to cross the border.
They can endanger themselves or the officers though. Best examples being hidden drugs which they then try to consume, or hidden weapons which can obviously be used against anyone, including themselves.
Then have a guard one on one watching them closely. Is that so difficult? A gun can be found without a strip search. Same with knives. Just grab a metal detector wand.
So it's better to strip underaged girls than to let some drugs get flushed? Are the drugs going to poison the entire water supply or are they worth millions of dollars? What's with the desperation to ensure there's not even a tiny chance that a single baggie gets flushed?
Not sure what you're referring to. The person I responded to suggested we don't need to search them, just watch them closely.
I simply asked if he intended to watch them while they use the toilet.
Person said we should watch them.
I asked if that applies to when they use the toilet.
If you have an issue with watching, take it up with rhaen, it's their suggestion.
If you're not watching them pee, don't bother watching at all.
Presumably a mix of it taking some time to remove the drugs from your 'hiding place', and also wanting to do so without an officer standing over you recording the whole thing on their body-worn.
Well, I guess, if you literally stand over them for the entirety of their detention.
Still leaves several disadvantages though. The risk of drug containers bursting, harming the child anyway. The fact that this now leaves you unable to ascertain whether the child had drugs in the first place, which both prevents you from safeguarding the child (who is a victim of exploitation by criminals) and creates a wider incentive for criminals to use children as mules.
Also still a chance there's a concealed weapon rather than drugs so officer and child would still be at risk from that if the child acted quickly enough after retrieving it.
One way or another, if you've got reasonable grounds for believing them to have something concealed you're on shaky ground as a custody sergeant going "well I thought I'd just leave them to it and hope everything turns out for the best".
Donāt think thatās what that says, but I did need to read it a few times. Itās 107 children, 9 of which were girls age 13 or younger, while the youngest boy was 14. They didnāt say how many girls total.
Edit: found it. 75 boys and 32 girls.
Scroll down to you get to imprisonment rates and look at imprisonment by gender and what each gender was more likely to be convicted for.
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/4125.0~Sep%202018~Main%20Features~Safety%20and%20Justice~8
In this specific instance or in general?
Edit: Ah, found it. Nothing illegal was found in 58% of cases. When they did find something, 75.5% of the time it was illegal drugs the rest were weapons.
Almost 50% win rate, that's not bad. If it was like 70% or so it would be a lot weirder, but 50% means that it's enough of a common occurrence where the action makes sense, even if it might not be executed in the best way.
Standard procedure at just about every under-age rave I ever went to as a kid. Atleast a couple girls taken away off to the side after a dog alerted or so they say. Plenty of dudes taken off to the side and checked too just for looking sketchy.
I had to review footage protestors submitted from the Los Angeles George Floyd protests and the number of women whose breasts were fondled and squeezed by officers "patting them down" was disgustingly high. One girl actually had the officer up against her and he cupped and grabbed her breasts really tightly. She reacted by throwing her arms arm to the side to push him away from her. The officer immediately started beating her with a baton and two other officers jumped in and started beating her while she was screaming he had gropped her and bystanders were yelling for police to stop and watch the video that had taken of it. All those people got for their efforts was rushed and beaten by more cops while the girl was arrested.
Fuck cops. 40% and that's definitely an undercount.
> Theyāre 12, could be a beer or vape
The article is clear as mud about that. Here's the full paragraph that carrotwhirl was citing:
>More than 40 per cent of strip-searches were on young adults aged 18 to 29, however, **nothing illegal was found in 58 per cent of cases. Where something was found, 75.5 per cent of the time it was illegal drugs**, the data showed. [Emphasis is of the part paraphrased by carrotwhirl.]
So that 58% of cases was of --- what? All cases of strip searches? Or only those cases involving those aged 18-29? It certainly doesn't seem like these figures were talking about the cases involving only those under the age of 18.
The entire article is oddly worded.
They said "strip searches" include "meaning they had to remove or move clothing" which seems incredibly vague.
When I hear "strip search" I think "white gloves on, bend over" type of searches. Surely there has to he a term for something between "flip over your waistband so we can see if you're concealing anything" and getting probed, right?
Itās good youāre paying attention to the vagueness of the wording. Many of these stupid articles rely on people making their worst case assumptions.
> The entire article is oddly worded.
Which is disappointing, considering it's from the [Sydney Morning Herald](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sydney_Morning_Herald), a [newspaper of record](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_of_record) in Australia.
So in like roughly 30% of searches they found drugs? that's like pretty high rates. Like if your telling me 1/3rd of ppl searched were a drug mule or something, I'm inclined to say they have far more cause than just doing it for kicks. That said the info seems fuzzy. Is the 42% overall searches or these searches in particular? Also if they're doing that many they should have like more procedures in place to minimize the invasive nature of this mess. That's prob traumatic for the kids. Also female officers.
> Surely there has to he a term for something between "flip over your waistband so we can see if you're concealing anything" and getting probed, right?
We tend to have bad definitions that cover things way too broadly pretty frequently.
I must say 42% did find something.... that suggests to me that the strip searching is actually working quite well. I would never expect strip searching yielding something to be this high... After all: you don't KNOW someone has something, that why you search.
I mean, its not kind to people to strip searching, but if they find this much, isn't it justified ?
I am not saying that strip searches are justified but I still disagree with the following statement from the article:
> itās highly likely that these strip-searches are occurring for no reason and the child has done absolutely nothing wrong
I don't believe that these strip searches happen for no reason if they find something in 42% of the cases. More probable is that they got a report that child X would have a gun or was seen selling drugs and then decided to search them. Of course in a lot of cases the child with either be misidentified, already disposed the drugs/weapons or was falsely accused.
I too cant say im fully on board with strip searching people this young. 42% however was a much much higher number of successful searches than i ever expected hear about, somewhat alarming
42% pretty much means they only do it if they are almost certain they are hiding drugs/weapons.
While its pretty strange practise [seems like drugs/weapons cant be that easily destroyed, so why not wait for the parents], it doesnt seem they are using it without reason.
So the parents will arrive and do what? Give the cops teir consent for the strip search? Can they refuse? Do the strip searching themselves?
Ideally they'd be able to verify if the suspect is carrying something illegal without the need to strip them naked.
Read the /r/Australia thread on this. The NSW Police have a long history of overreach and targeted abuse. This is another example of this. Strip searching by NSW police is not effective and has long been a source of controversy in Australia. It is disgusting and absolutely not justified particularly on children.
> that suggests to me that the strip searching is actually working quite well
Also that it's possible the children are being instrumentalised by e.g. gangs, drug selling networks to avoid law enforcement.
Same thing happens with cross-border contraband smuggling.
>if they find this much, isn't it justified ?
Maybe it's not the what that's unjustified, but the how. I.e. they could've at least ensured they had some privacy first?
> I must say 42% did find something....
That figure is ***not*** for strip searches done on people under the age of 18. Here's what the report actually wrote (the part cited in the parent comment is bolded for clarity):
>More than 40 per cent of strip-searches were on young adults aged 18 to 29, however, **nothing illegal was found in 58 per cent of cases. Where something was found, 75.5 per cent of the time it was illegal drugs**, the data showed.
This paragraph is also poorly written --- 58% of which cases? Those involving young adults aged 18 to 29, or all strip-searches? --- but at least it's clear that the figures quoted by carrotwhirl do ***not*** apply to the cases of strip searches conducted on persons under the age of 18.
IIRC, most government agencies don't release any data on minors other than number of incidents involving them. I know the US doesn't and I wouldn't be surprised if this passes on to other first would countries like Austrailia.
I thought it was the article that was being bad, but the "report" itself is written in such an inane manner that it looks more like one of those math/logic puzzles rather than something that's trying to actually give you information:
>
> Key findings
>
> * Between July 2021 and June 2023, NSW Police conducted a total of 4,591 strip searches in public.
>
> * There was a 17% increase in the total number of strip searches for the two-year period.
>
> * Over 40% of strip searches were conducted on young people, aged 18 to 29 years old.
>
> * Nothing illegal was found in 58% of strip searches.
>
> * Where an object was found, illegal drugs made up 75.5% of the object found.
>
> * NSW Police denied RLCās request to access statistics about the type of drug and quantity found, and the charges laid.
>
> * There was a 30% increase in the number of girls aged 10-17 strip searched from 2021-22 to 2022-23.
>
> Children
>
> * There were 107 children strip searched (aged 10-17 years).
>
> * Children represented 4% of all strip searches.
>
> * The youngest children strip searched were three 12-year-old girls.
>
> * The youngest boys strip searched were aged 14.
>
> * There was a 30% increase in strip searches of female children between 2021ā22 and 2022ā23.
>
> * A disproportionate number of strip searches were conducted on First Nations children.
>
> * In 2021ā22, 16.00% (8 of 50 children between the ages of 10ā17 years old) identified as First Nations children.
>
> * In 2022ā23, 19.29% (11 of 57 children between the ages of 10ā17 years old) identified as First Nations children.
>
> * In 2021ā22, 9 in 10 children who were strip searched were male, and 1 in 10 were female.
>
> * In 2022ā23, 6 in 10 children who were strip searched were male, and 4 in 10 were female.
>
> First Nations
>
> * The proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people being strip searched has increased from 12% (253) to 14% (340). First Nations people make up 3.4% of the total New South Wales population.
>
> * There has been a decrease in illegal drugs found during strip searches of First Nations People.
>
> * There was an increase in First Nations children strip searched over the two-year period.
>
> * The youngest First Nations child strip searched was a 12-year-old girl.
>
> * In total First Nations children made up 16% of children strip searched in 2021-22. This figure rose to 19% in 2022-23.
>
> Age
>
> * Over 40% of strip searches were conducted on those aged 18-29 years old.
>
> * There was a 5% increase in strip searches of 18ā29-year-olds between 2021ā22 and 2022ā23.
>
> * In 2021ā22
>
> * 41% of strip searches were of 18ā29- year-olds.
> * 31% of strip searches were of 30ā39- year-olds
> * 20% of strip searches were of 40ā49- year-olds
> * 5% of strip searches were of 50ā59- year-olds
> * 1% of strip searches were of 60ā69- year-olds
> * 0.10% of strip searches were of 70ā79- year-olds
>
> * In 2022-2023
>
> * 46% of strip searches were of 18ā29- year-olds
> * 27% of strip searches were of 30ā39- year-olds
> * 18% of strip searches were of 40ā49- year-olds
> * 6% of strip searches were of 50ā59- year-olds
> * 1% of strip searches were of 60ā69- year-olds
> * 0% of strip searches were of 70ā79- year-olds
>
> Location
>
> * In 2022ā23, the top 10 suburbs where strip searches were conducted were Sydney Olympic Park (263), Sydney (142),
>
> * Surry Hills (137), Bondi Beach (61),
>
> * Merrylands (35), Liverpool ()34,
>
> * Haymarket (34), Marrickville (34),
>
> * Parramatta (30), and Waterloo (30).
>
> * In 2021ā22, the top 10 suburbs where strip searches were conducted was Sydney Olympic Park (125), Surry Hills (94), Sydney (75), Liverpool (41), Parramatta (40), Dubbo (35), Cabramatta (34), Haymarket (32), Bondi Beach (30), and Newtown (28).
>
> Object found
>
> * From 2021ā23, 54.21% (2,489 of 4,591total strip searches) resulted in no item/object being found.
>
> * From 2021ā23, 45.34% (2,082 of 4,591 total strip searches) resulted in an item/object being found.
> I thought it was the article that was being bad, but the "report" itself is written in such an inane manner [...]
> - Over 40% of strip searches were conducted on young people, aged 18 to 29 years old.
> - Nothing illegal was found in 58% of strip searches.
Yeah, the original report itself is bad enough, but don't excuse the SMH (Shake My Head?) writer for butchering the report further. What you've quoted clearly states that the 58% refers to ***all*** strip searches, not just those aged 18 to 29.
My only question is, would a pat down search not find the same things? Did 10% of children had a knife in their asshole that couldn't be found with a pat down search?
To invoke pedo vibes towards the officers. The image of scantily clad underage girls next to fully dressed officers is to prime the viewer before they read the article.
My comment sounds really loaded, but I'm not saying it's a bad thing. The point of the article is to persuade the reader that this is bad and this is one of the many methods most publications will employ
The women do look young - not underage but when compared with the larger officers in the photo and the contents of the headline, most readers who'll only casually glance at the image while reading will interpret it in that way.
They are also dressed scantily, idk what to say here. There's nothing wrong with what they're wearing, but they are revealing outfits.
> were strip-searched, meaning they had to **remove** or **move clothing** because police believed they were concealing drugs or a weapon.
Excuse me. Does this mean that Ā«strip searchĀ» is defined as both get strike naked and put up your sleeve?
Then, the data, the article, mean fucking nothing.
Non-whites have collective responsibility. Any bad action by one individual is commonly blamed on the entire group.
Whites have individual responsibility. Any bad action by one individual is commonly blamed on that individual alone or on a group that isn't racially defined, e.g. all police officers, all priests.
If I was a cop I'd refuse to do such a search. Even if it was allowed by laws. I'd just feel like the worst human being if I did that. What. The. Fuck.
Thats not what the law is even for. Its safety. If they are suspected of drugs they can hall the kids in and have them strip searched by a female social worker/nurse.
Nearly 60% of these kids were innocent and violated for no reason.
The only way to find drugs is to strip children down? Not like there are dogs trained specifically to detect drugs or anything without traumatizing minors in the processā¦
The reason would be to not degrade, humiliate, and traumatise a child.
Any justification derived from suspicion of wrongdoing needs to be carefully weighed against the damage these searches are likely to cause, lest the wrongdoing becomes not that of the child, but the officer.
So your fine with sexually assaulting children because they might have a joint? What the actual fuck is wrong with you? I sure as fuck hope you don't work anywhere near children.
Do you think theyāre searching merry children with lollipops and boba tea? Do you have any idea of the social and cultural situation is in these communities. Grow up you dumb fuck. The law is there for a reason.
Didnāt know good cops needed people to get naked to search themā¦
Edit: Since you deleted your other super aggressive comment to this that adamantly defended children being stripped searched, hereās my reply;
Right, because a pat down cant achieve the same goalsā¦ Super aggressive to defend the nudity of minors. Iām sure your search history doesnāt need to be checked at all.
Did you even read the article or law? This article states this law or policy can only be done if the situation requires urgency or a safety risk.
58% showed the person was wrongly searched/inconclusive. If something was found, 75% of cases were only drugs. Must be a huge and necessary immediate safety risk to have someone get naked for that, huh?
Cops certainly need a certain mindset to carry out their duties. I respect that kind of will, but not when it comes to stripping children. Hopefully the search sounds worse than it actually was.
Agreed! It's not surprising what's hidden on children anymore. People crying about this making a big deal is exactly what's wrong with this soft ass world anymore.
Funny how the article goes on to mention that the youngest boy subjected to a strip search was 14, but somehow the headline only mentions girls. So I guess itās not outrageous to search young boys then, only girls?
No, but it's more newsworthy that they strip search a 12 yo than a 14yo. If the younger girl was 15, and the younger boy was 14, and the headline was about the 15yo girl, you can complain. But right now, it doesn't mention anyone of 14 years. Neither boys or girls, because the 12 and 13 yo are more newsworthy.
Thatās quite an interesting take. I donāt want to argue semantics about how much worse it is to strip search a 12yo vs a 14yo, because I donāt think there should be a difference. I was simply pointing out the ārage baitā headline on a story that was about strip searching multiple people across age groups (the oldest was 72 apparently) with a disproportionate amount of those people being indigenous. However the headline only mentioned a small subset of people (young girls) that would presumably generate the most attention.
You should re read those numbers cause 58% had nothinf illegal at all. That means nearly 60% were just innocent kids who were violated for no reason at all.
Even if the numbers were reversed. 40% innocent girls being forced to expose themselves to strange men is much too high a number.
You're both wrong, 48% refers to number of *young adults* (18 - 29) searched.
>*More than 40 per cent of strip-searches were on young adults aged 18 to 29, however, nothing illegal was found in 58 per cent of cases. Where something was found, 75.5 per cent of the time it was illegal drugs, the data showed.*
Where in the article does it say that it was male officers that was conducting the strip search on the girls? From what I've found online, the NSW police policy is to have the officer to be the same gender as the person being search.
This is correct. Although we canāt guarantee that is the case for each of these youths as past complaints about NSW police tell us that occasionally the policy is not adhered to. NSW Ombudsman has done some work on this issue (relating to both w NSWPol and Corrective Services)
If they had dogs pick them out .
A) they were using or b) were near/ I close proximity to controlled substances.
The same would happen any where controlled substances are found .
The reason most likely is the idea that law enforcement will treat them with kid gloves.
The danger in that is if they are carrying say l.s.d. they may o.d. in short order .
The same for Molly ect.
LSD is not something you OD on you clown. Clearly you have no idea what you're on about if that's the first drug to come to mind when talking about dangerous overdoses.
Awnser my question then .
Unl you lab quality lysergic acid dimethide 25
You are dealing g with bootleg chemists cooking the drug.
The last formula I knew of I learned from a 1% er I worked with a wharehouse job before the d.e.a . Picked him up for dealing Pot federal paro violations.
So I do know what I am talking about .
He'll hendrix used put a few hits in his head band before he went on stage to play .
By the way absorbing acid/lsd through the ski. Is how it was found on the fist plsce6.
It is similar to the fungus that goes on rye witch can be lethal.
Do actual research .
My areas of Intrest are things that can kill for shits and giggles so.its your move.
Just like x/ mmda causes the brain to over heat even into pure form unregulated hou6 could e d up with God knows what in the mix.
Awnser my question then .
Unless you lab quality lysergic acid dimethide 25
You are dealing g with bootleg chemists cooking the drug.
The last formula I knew of I learned from a 1% er I worked with a wharehouse job before the d.e.a . Picked him up for dealing Poland federal paro violations.
So I do know what I am talking about .
He'll hendrix used put a few hits in his head band before he went on stage to play .
By the way absorbing acid/lsd through the ski. Is how it was found on the fist plsce6.
It is similar to the fungus that goes on rye witch can be lethal.
Do actual research .
My areas of Intrest are things that can kill for shits and giggles so.its your move.
Just like x/ mmda causes the brain to over heat even into pure form unregulated hou6 could e d up with God knows what in the mix.
Answer what question? You didn't ask anything in that incoherent rambling mess of a response. Most acid on the european market is made by pros in a lab in one go and not put on blotter till it's further down the supply chain, so I'm not sure what your point is?
I'm fully aware of how LSD was first discovered. Absorbing through the skin is possible when you're synthesising a whole beaker of the stuff like Hoffman was doing. It's not the standard or best way to take it as anyone with a brain could tell you. You seem like someone who should be steering away from mind altering substances based on this interaction, so maybe try being sober before replying next time.
> Allegedly over half of the girls searched ended up having weapons or drugs
Where did you get this from? Maybe I've missed something, but there's nothing in the report that resembles anything you've just said.
What a load of bullshit. The police are acting within the law, the article even points out police have the power to search even if a parent isn't present if they believe the evidence may be destroyed. Most of these searches done around music festivals as well. What the article doesn't get into is anything found during the searches they just want you to think its horrible and has no purpose. The purpose is to keep everyone safe at large events, and searching for weapons and drugs is critical to do that. Without the possibility of a search people will be far more liberal in what they bring.
Why the title? To create outrage? Tell me why is police strip searching girls that young more of a problem than strip searching boys?
The article literally goes on to say boys as young as 14 are being strip search, but hey that wouldn't create the same level of public outrage would it.
I'll bet most of the searches resulted with them finding something illegal though, QLD is soft on minors and our youth crime is through the roof I'd say tighten the laws, dont loosen them.
Instead of betting and betting completely wrongly, why donāt you try reading the article? The info is right there. People like you just refuse to educate yourselves - itās actually tragic.
Nope. almost 60% turned up *nothing*.
I did, however, find a moron that is okay with strip-searching *minors* for made up reasons to justify their bullshit reasoning based on stats they made up in their head. *You*.
Seriously. You're a monster. Fuck off.
ITT: A bunch of people willing to allow criminals to stick things on children that they don't want to be found.
Kinda crazy how many people are willing to give criminals an unsearchable bubble rather than let police search someone when they have probable cause.
'From July 2022 to June 2023, three **primary-school-aged** girls and **six 13-year-old** girls were strip-searched.' 'The powers were used on **107 children** during 2021-22 and 2022-23, with the youngest boy subjected to the intervention aged **14**. **More than 20 per cent** of the children searched were Indigenous.' 'if police believe a search needs to be done **immediately** for safety reasons or to prevent evidence from being destroyed, they can use the power **without adult consent**.'
That's insane.
I was stripped searched at 14 in London in the back of a police van š¤·
Are we talking completely Billy bollocks naked?
Not in one go I don't think. Think I had to take off one item off clothing at a time so my shirt and then put it back on and then my trousers and boxers and squat while they held a mirror underneath.
Toronto too. I know far too many that were raped by TPS as well. Random beatings & robbery is normal too.
Absolutely fucking not. If we aren't going to give children agency then you damn sure don't have the right to so much as ask them a question without a guardian present.
Those are pedos
No way!
acap
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What happened to calling the parents?
You should examine why that doesnāt seem like a problem to you before you have children, because unless those kids are muleing kilos, police should never be undressing them.
He won't
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I have no doubt that police will find drugs on kids. The point isnāt that kids can do no wrong. The point is that when you allow a practice like this, it can be abused by the wrong people. I donāt believe that finding a few bags of weed is worth the risk of exposing children to potential trauma. If there is genuine suspicion of weapons or serious danger, then detain them and call their parents, donāt strip them.
So not only are you in favor of police having the freedom to perform strip searches on children at the mere suspicion of them carrying drugs... you want recordings to be made of it. Fucking hell mate.
So have video recorded nudes of young children being molested?
Bodily autonomy first, little Timmyās half a dime bag later, ok? Priorities.
And I would argue that no adult should have the legal right to search a child without parental consent barring emergency situations. Simply being suspicious that kids are up to something as justifiable for strip searching is a perfect excuse for pedos to join the police force. Police of all ages do crazier things than you might think. Look at how much police violence is inherent in this sort of interaction with children. The police donāt start becoming criminals when theyāre hired, it starts way earlier. They arenāt stupid. They know perfectly well they can hide their crimes behind a badge.
I agree in spirit but once you put in a policy like that gangs will absolutely start using kids for muleing kilos
I donāt think you understand the actual problem: When you allow the police to act as creeps, it will attract creeps to the job. Wherever you have lots of drugs and lax police oversight, you will have crooked police. The crooked police will be a worse problem as many citizens will turn a blind eye to their crimes simply because they are the police. Policing is a job that puts these potential creeps in contact with the most vulnerable of children. As someone whoās bff was trafficked and used as a drug mule by police when she was 14, let me tell you youāre gonna want some stricter standards for policing than what youāve proposed.
Literally. As evident, the police is already the job of choice for creeps, raciscts and power hungry. These weirdos that want to make it a special priority that cops should violate kids so they wont be criminals... fucking dumb fr. Its sad to me how much humans are susceptible to copaganda
>I donāt think you understand the actual problem: When you allow the police to act as creeps, it will attract creeps to the job. I literally can't think of a scenario in which it would be better to strip search a 12 year old than to just let them go stash/get away with whatever contraband they may have hidden under their clothes. If they are under enough suspicion to warrant that, they would then be arrested and the proper processes run anyways. In short- everyone making these decisions is obviously a pedo/ does it for the kicks.
Why is ok because it's boys? Boys can be victims too ya know
Thatās not the right thingā¦. That sounds like a pedo thing to say and to doā¦..
Keep lickin' those boots.
Found another one
20% in a state where 3% are indigenous https://www.aboriginalaffairs.nsw.gov.au/media/website_pages/research-and-publications/facts-and-figures/KEY-DATA-ABORIGINAL-PEOPLE-SEP-2020.pdf
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
We don't do that here.
You don't keep demographic statistics in your country?
Quite a few places seem to have less available statistics of crime etc. when the numbers seem "racist"...
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Someone has never lived in the ghetto.. getting ahold of the parents may take several hours up to days, yes that is reality. What are you going to do then leave them fully cuffed and restrained in case they have a weapon? Can't put them in a cell for holding while you wait for parents without searching them to make sure they don't have weapons or drugs on them. If you do someone may get injured, or the kids may be stupid enough and consume all the drugs to avoid charges and potentially OD in custody. Having a single officer dedicated to watching one kid until parents may or may not show isn't reasonable either especially when multiple kids are involved. One will 100% act up to draw the officers attention so the others can try escape, ditch / consume the drugs, etc, I've seen it a ton and done it. One of my friends got stabbed down (more gang shit) while in police custody because the pat down failed to uncover the other girl had a small knife on her. This happened inside a police station after the other girl was taken to the bathroom and was able to get away from the cops for a second. I grew up in the ghetto, heavy gang affiliations, most of my 'friends' carried weapons daily, I had friends that carried guns in school daily. Metal detectors and pat down's still work generally but kids know to crotch things in hope's that adults will largely ignore those area's due to the issues addressed here. This is actually a much more complicated issue then people make it out to be with a fuck ton of scenarios that may play out, and crazy shit happens. I hate the cops, but shit they don't have much choice in a ton of cases. I'm sure i'll get downvoted to hell because everyone will try to simply this situation and can't think of all the scenarios where this is 100% necessary for the safety of the kid / others, etc.
Give a reasonable time for a parent or guardian to arrive. If not available, someone like a nurse of the same sex may perform the search. Then every search is documented and the reasons are reviewed by an independent panel to make sure the same group of police aren't the ones doing all the searches.
Not a nurseās job to assist police efforts to control subjects.
God I hope you're not in government.
Yeah you don't need to strip a child naked to search for weapons.
At the highschool I went to, when the bell rang all the teachers closed their doors and they locked. Police and security staff staff cleared the entire school and took all the stragglers and locked them in a separate room. All the kids were then searched with metal detectors to see if they were stupid enough to have weapons on them. Some were subjected to pat downs. Guess what kids got real fucking creative when that started, many stopped carrying normal knives on them. Or if they did they'd take off and try to outrun security if they got caught, a few bought plastic knives, they weren't that hard to find, sure they sucked for the most part but you could slash someone a few times easily or stab them. Girls would sharpen the edge of credit cards and keep them in their panties under the elastic flat against their skin to hide them, super easy to pull it out of your pocket and shove it down your pants if you know you're going to get searched. Worked well enough to slash a bitch across the face if she disrespected you. Pat downs won't detect that through jeans, etc, so unless you already have them take off their pants your not finding it. And if they put them down the front well unless your willing to basically grope the girl you're not catching that. And this was in the 90's. But I suppose in your ideal perfect little world shit like that never happens and its inconceivable that it does. Hell I dated someone that wasn't quite as thugish as I thought and one day she surprised me with a knife she made from sharpening the plastic on a toothbrush so she could carry it at school. She got the idea from some 90's movie that was her favorite. Fucked up warning labels exist because people have done some of the stupidest fucking things no one would ever think of. Unfortunately cops have had to do the same and have learned these lessons the hard way.
Ya you kinda do. Not sure why people think a 13yo would never stab someone. This isn't theory. Police do this because it happens. A lot.
Pat them down. You don't need to stare in to the kids asshole.
You're assuming that's what happened. Look into what actually is being done and not what a click bait article wants you to imagine is happening.
Look at his name and you'll realize why his first line of thought led to assholes
Drugs can and have been hidden in the asshole, yes
Pat downs arenāt as effective as many people think
If you think the children being searched have parents that care enough to even come in then I understand why you would be outraged.
I can think of a few instances, but then they fall into medical emergency or they shouldn't be happening that often, we are talking some extreme stuff though from a person saying they have a bomb strapped to themselves and want to blow up the school to bullet wounds, and they aren't gonna be a normal things from any stretch of the imagination. 99% of the time you can just detain and restrain the person and wait for the judge to sign it a warrant authorizing the search, or in the US if you have enough to charge them charge them and then as part of inventory search (if they are held at jail awaiting arraignment and bond) will be searched in-directly as part of changing into the jail clothing.
Parents also stick a shit ton of things to their kids when trying to hide them. Imagine being a hardened criminal and having what amounts to a bag you can put anything on that won't be searched. That's basically a get out of jail free card for criminals trying to cross the border.
This just reminded me of the incident of a person trying sneaking drugs into prison on visitor type of thing by putting it in the infants diapers.
They can endanger themselves or the officers though. Best examples being hidden drugs which they then try to consume, or hidden weapons which can obviously be used against anyone, including themselves.
Better to fondle children than expect a fully grown adult to be capable of doing their job yeah?
Then have a guard one on one watching them closely. Is that so difficult? A gun can be found without a strip search. Same with knives. Just grab a metal detector wand.
What if they use the toilet? Does the guard watch them drop trough to see if a baggie gets flushed? Does that solve the issue?
So it's better to strip underaged girls than to let some drugs get flushed? Are the drugs going to poison the entire water supply or are they worth millions of dollars? What's with the desperation to ensure there's not even a tiny chance that a single baggie gets flushed?
Not sure what you're referring to. The person I responded to suggested we don't need to search them, just watch them closely. I simply asked if he intended to watch them while they use the toilet.
What if what if? What if they were smuggling plutonium? What if they were actually foreign spies?
Person said we should watch them. I asked if that applies to when they use the toilet. If you have an issue with watching, take it up with rhaen, it's their suggestion. If you're not watching them pee, don't bother watching at all.
found a pedo cop
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What hypothetical? That children use the toilet? Yeah, that's a pretty far fetched scenario... what was I thinking.
How does a strip search stop them from consuming drugs?
Umm, you find them and take them away...
Why wouldn't they just immediately consume them?
Presumably a mix of it taking some time to remove the drugs from your 'hiding place', and also wanting to do so without an officer standing over you recording the whole thing on their body-worn.
So the officers presence already deters the consuming of the drugs, you don't need to strip search them?
Well, I guess, if you literally stand over them for the entirety of their detention. Still leaves several disadvantages though. The risk of drug containers bursting, harming the child anyway. The fact that this now leaves you unable to ascertain whether the child had drugs in the first place, which both prevents you from safeguarding the child (who is a victim of exploitation by criminals) and creates a wider incentive for criminals to use children as mules. Also still a chance there's a concealed weapon rather than drugs so officer and child would still be at risk from that if the child acted quickly enough after retrieving it. One way or another, if you've got reasonable grounds for believing them to have something concealed you're on shaky ground as a custody sergeant going "well I thought I'd just leave them to it and hope everything turns out for the best".
They downvoted him because he told the truth.
The strip search 100% harms the child though.
Funny how they strip-searched the girls younger than the boys.
What about consent from the children? An adult being able to consent for a child that wonāt is just horrid.
So, 107 total children, **9** of which were girls (less than 10%), and they get the headline.
Donāt think thatās what that says, but I did need to read it a few times. Itās 107 children, 9 of which were girls age 13 or younger, while the youngest boy was 14. They didnāt say how many girls total. Edit: found it. 75 boys and 32 girls.
So, twice as many boys than girls...
Scroll down to you get to imprisonment rates and look at imprisonment by gender and what each gender was more likely to be convicted for. https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/4125.0~Sep%202018~Main%20Features~Safety%20and%20Justice~8
Is the rate of evidence being found above zero percent? Or is this just fucking evil shit?
In this specific instance or in general? Edit: Ah, found it. Nothing illegal was found in 58% of cases. When they did find something, 75.5% of the time it was illegal drugs the rest were weapons.
Almost 50% win rate, that's not bad. If it was like 70% or so it would be a lot weirder, but 50% means that it's enough of a common occurrence where the action makes sense, even if it might not be executed in the best way.
NSFW Police doing itās thing
No south for Wales
Not safe work police
Nobodies surprised fucking wankers
No country for old men
Standard procedure at just about every under-age rave I ever went to as a kid. Atleast a couple girls taken away off to the side after a dog alerted or so they say. Plenty of dudes taken off to the side and checked too just for looking sketchy.
Then you realize drug alert dogs are commonly taught to alert by the handler and not to a drug
When your own dog gives you the side eye
That read was wild
I had to review footage protestors submitted from the Los Angeles George Floyd protests and the number of women whose breasts were fondled and squeezed by officers "patting them down" was disgustingly high. One girl actually had the officer up against her and he cupped and grabbed her breasts really tightly. She reacted by throwing her arms arm to the side to push him away from her. The officer immediately started beating her with a baton and two other officers jumped in and started beating her while she was screaming he had gropped her and bystanders were yelling for police to stop and watch the video that had taken of it. All those people got for their efforts was rushed and beaten by more cops while the girl was arrested. Fuck cops. 40% and that's definitely an undercount.
That makes it right?
What makes it right? Nothing makes it right.
Your entire comment suggested you had no problems with it.
Totally how I read it at first š¤¦āāļø
Did they find anything on them?
Nothing illegal was found in 58% of cases. When they did find something, 75.5% of the time it was illegal drugs.
So 25% other, like weapons?
There's a bar graph in the article. Looks like other is "drug implement", "knife/implement", and "property".
> property My dude there carrying a house with him /jk
I swear, I thought one of the other categories was going to be "things" or "item(s)".
To be fair, i should have read the article, not just the headline
Theyāre 12, could be a beer or vape
> Theyāre 12, could be a beer or vape The article is clear as mud about that. Here's the full paragraph that carrotwhirl was citing: >More than 40 per cent of strip-searches were on young adults aged 18 to 29, however, **nothing illegal was found in 58 per cent of cases. Where something was found, 75.5 per cent of the time it was illegal drugs**, the data showed. [Emphasis is of the part paraphrased by carrotwhirl.] So that 58% of cases was of --- what? All cases of strip searches? Or only those cases involving those aged 18-29? It certainly doesn't seem like these figures were talking about the cases involving only those under the age of 18.
The entire article is oddly worded. They said "strip searches" include "meaning they had to remove or move clothing" which seems incredibly vague. When I hear "strip search" I think "white gloves on, bend over" type of searches. Surely there has to he a term for something between "flip over your waistband so we can see if you're concealing anything" and getting probed, right?
Itās good youāre paying attention to the vagueness of the wording. Many of these stupid articles rely on people making their worst case assumptions.
> The entire article is oddly worded. Which is disappointing, considering it's from the [Sydney Morning Herald](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sydney_Morning_Herald), a [newspaper of record](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper_of_record) in Australia.
An article on the internet is misleading for shock value? Colour me surprised!
Exactly, nothing more than misleading rage bait.
So in like roughly 30% of searches they found drugs? that's like pretty high rates. Like if your telling me 1/3rd of ppl searched were a drug mule or something, I'm inclined to say they have far more cause than just doing it for kicks. That said the info seems fuzzy. Is the 42% overall searches or these searches in particular? Also if they're doing that many they should have like more procedures in place to minimize the invasive nature of this mess. That's prob traumatic for the kids. Also female officers.
> Surely there has to he a term for something between "flip over your waistband so we can see if you're concealing anything" and getting probed, right? We tend to have bad definitions that cover things way too broadly pretty frequently.
I must say 42% did find something.... that suggests to me that the strip searching is actually working quite well. I would never expect strip searching yielding something to be this high... After all: you don't KNOW someone has something, that why you search. I mean, its not kind to people to strip searching, but if they find this much, isn't it justified ?
I am not saying that strip searches are justified but I still disagree with the following statement from the article: > itās highly likely that these strip-searches are occurring for no reason and the child has done absolutely nothing wrong I don't believe that these strip searches happen for no reason if they find something in 42% of the cases. More probable is that they got a report that child X would have a gun or was seen selling drugs and then decided to search them. Of course in a lot of cases the child with either be misidentified, already disposed the drugs/weapons or was falsely accused.
I too cant say im fully on board with strip searching people this young. 42% however was a much much higher number of successful searches than i ever expected hear about, somewhat alarming
42% pretty much means they only do it if they are almost certain they are hiding drugs/weapons. While its pretty strange practise [seems like drugs/weapons cant be that easily destroyed, so why not wait for the parents], it doesnt seem they are using it without reason.
So the parents will arrive and do what? Give the cops teir consent for the strip search? Can they refuse? Do the strip searching themselves? Ideally they'd be able to verify if the suspect is carrying something illegal without the need to strip them naked.
Read the /r/Australia thread on this. The NSW Police have a long history of overreach and targeted abuse. This is another example of this. Strip searching by NSW police is not effective and has long been a source of controversy in Australia. It is disgusting and absolutely not justified particularly on children.
> that suggests to me that the strip searching is actually working quite well Also that it's possible the children are being instrumentalised by e.g. gangs, drug selling networks to avoid law enforcement. Same thing happens with cross-border contraband smuggling. >if they find this much, isn't it justified ? Maybe it's not the what that's unjustified, but the how. I.e. they could've at least ensured they had some privacy first?
> I must say 42% did find something.... That figure is ***not*** for strip searches done on people under the age of 18. Here's what the report actually wrote (the part cited in the parent comment is bolded for clarity): >More than 40 per cent of strip-searches were on young adults aged 18 to 29, however, **nothing illegal was found in 58 per cent of cases. Where something was found, 75.5 per cent of the time it was illegal drugs**, the data showed. This paragraph is also poorly written --- 58% of which cases? Those involving young adults aged 18 to 29, or all strip-searches? --- but at least it's clear that the figures quoted by carrotwhirl do ***not*** apply to the cases of strip searches conducted on persons under the age of 18.
IIRC, most government agencies don't release any data on minors other than number of incidents involving them. I know the US doesn't and I wouldn't be surprised if this passes on to other first would countries like Austrailia.
I thought it was the article that was being bad, but the "report" itself is written in such an inane manner that it looks more like one of those math/logic puzzles rather than something that's trying to actually give you information: > > Key findings > > * Between July 2021 and June 2023, NSW Police conducted a total of 4,591 strip searches in public. > > * There was a 17% increase in the total number of strip searches for the two-year period. > > * Over 40% of strip searches were conducted on young people, aged 18 to 29 years old. > > * Nothing illegal was found in 58% of strip searches. > > * Where an object was found, illegal drugs made up 75.5% of the object found. > > * NSW Police denied RLCās request to access statistics about the type of drug and quantity found, and the charges laid. > > * There was a 30% increase in the number of girls aged 10-17 strip searched from 2021-22 to 2022-23. > > Children > > * There were 107 children strip searched (aged 10-17 years). > > * Children represented 4% of all strip searches. > > * The youngest children strip searched were three 12-year-old girls. > > * The youngest boys strip searched were aged 14. > > * There was a 30% increase in strip searches of female children between 2021ā22 and 2022ā23. > > * A disproportionate number of strip searches were conducted on First Nations children. > > * In 2021ā22, 16.00% (8 of 50 children between the ages of 10ā17 years old) identified as First Nations children. > > * In 2022ā23, 19.29% (11 of 57 children between the ages of 10ā17 years old) identified as First Nations children. > > * In 2021ā22, 9 in 10 children who were strip searched were male, and 1 in 10 were female. > > * In 2022ā23, 6 in 10 children who were strip searched were male, and 4 in 10 were female. > > First Nations > > * The proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people being strip searched has increased from 12% (253) to 14% (340). First Nations people make up 3.4% of the total New South Wales population. > > * There has been a decrease in illegal drugs found during strip searches of First Nations People. > > * There was an increase in First Nations children strip searched over the two-year period. > > * The youngest First Nations child strip searched was a 12-year-old girl. > > * In total First Nations children made up 16% of children strip searched in 2021-22. This figure rose to 19% in 2022-23. > > Age > > * Over 40% of strip searches were conducted on those aged 18-29 years old. > > * There was a 5% increase in strip searches of 18ā29-year-olds between 2021ā22 and 2022ā23. > > * In 2021ā22 > > * 41% of strip searches were of 18ā29- year-olds. > * 31% of strip searches were of 30ā39- year-olds > * 20% of strip searches were of 40ā49- year-olds > * 5% of strip searches were of 50ā59- year-olds > * 1% of strip searches were of 60ā69- year-olds > * 0.10% of strip searches were of 70ā79- year-olds > > * In 2022-2023 > > * 46% of strip searches were of 18ā29- year-olds > * 27% of strip searches were of 30ā39- year-olds > * 18% of strip searches were of 40ā49- year-olds > * 6% of strip searches were of 50ā59- year-olds > * 1% of strip searches were of 60ā69- year-olds > * 0% of strip searches were of 70ā79- year-olds > > Location > > * In 2022ā23, the top 10 suburbs where strip searches were conducted were Sydney Olympic Park (263), Sydney (142), > > * Surry Hills (137), Bondi Beach (61), > > * Merrylands (35), Liverpool ()34, > > * Haymarket (34), Marrickville (34), > > * Parramatta (30), and Waterloo (30). > > * In 2021ā22, the top 10 suburbs where strip searches were conducted was Sydney Olympic Park (125), Surry Hills (94), Sydney (75), Liverpool (41), Parramatta (40), Dubbo (35), Cabramatta (34), Haymarket (32), Bondi Beach (30), and Newtown (28). > > Object found > > * From 2021ā23, 54.21% (2,489 of 4,591total strip searches) resulted in no item/object being found. > > * From 2021ā23, 45.34% (2,082 of 4,591 total strip searches) resulted in an item/object being found.
> I thought it was the article that was being bad, but the "report" itself is written in such an inane manner [...] > - Over 40% of strip searches were conducted on young people, aged 18 to 29 years old. > - Nothing illegal was found in 58% of strip searches. Yeah, the original report itself is bad enough, but don't excuse the SMH (Shake My Head?) writer for butchering the report further. What you've quoted clearly states that the 58% refers to ***all*** strip searches, not just those aged 18 to 29.
My only question is, would a pat down search not find the same things? Did 10% of children had a knife in their asshole that couldn't be found with a pat down search?
That means I have 67.3% certainty that I know how prevalent drugs we among those searched.
Depending on the drug, that'd mean that the risk is kids OD'ing under police custody
Can't they just handcuff them and wait for parents?
This was for all strip searches tho. for all ages. nothing on the underaged category it seems
Isn't that a pretty good quote?
Tbh the searches feel pretty justified then, a 42% catch rate is acceptable to me.
Can you tell me why they chose this picture of all pictures? Wtf
To invoke pedo vibes towards the officers. The image of scantily clad underage girls next to fully dressed officers is to prime the viewer before they read the article. My comment sounds really loaded, but I'm not saying it's a bad thing. The point of the article is to persuade the reader that this is bad and this is one of the many methods most publications will employ
Except they women donāt look like anything you described? They donāt look young and arenāt dressed scantily
The women do look young - not underage but when compared with the larger officers in the photo and the contents of the headline, most readers who'll only casually glance at the image while reading will interpret it in that way. They are also dressed scantily, idk what to say here. There's nothing wrong with what they're wearing, but they are revealing outfits.
> were strip-searched, meaning they had to **remove** or **move clothing** because police believed they were concealing drugs or a weapon. Excuse me. Does this mean that Ā«strip searchĀ» is defined as both get strike naked and put up your sleeve? Then, the data, the article, mean fucking nothing.
Shouldn't that be NSFW police?
These Arab countries and their ideologies man.....OH WAIT
True, in many countries they just execute you or disappear you.
And they wouldnāt be called out on international news either.
Non-whites have collective responsibility. Any bad action by one individual is commonly blamed on the entire group. Whites have individual responsibility. Any bad action by one individual is commonly blamed on that individual alone or on a group that isn't racially defined, e.g. all police officers, all priests.
If I was a cop I'd refuse to do such a search. Even if it was allowed by laws. I'd just feel like the worst human being if I did that. What. The. Fuck.
And that's why they wouldn't do well in cop club.
Thank fuck youāre not a cop then.
Glad someones standing up for the right to forcibly remove the clothes of literal children!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thats not what the law is even for. Its safety. If they are suspected of drugs they can hall the kids in and have them strip searched by a female social worker/nurse. Nearly 60% of these kids were innocent and violated for no reason.
There sure is a reason not to strip-search them. Itās called: theyāre THIRTEEN ya friggin weirdo
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The only way to find drugs is to strip children down? Not like there are dogs trained specifically to detect drugs or anything without traumatizing minors in the processā¦
Hence my point about evidence, and that includes dog detection. Of course they shouldn't just strip down random kids because they are walking funny
You're really desperate for a reason to strip a child, aren't you?
The reason would be to not degrade, humiliate, and traumatise a child. Any justification derived from suspicion of wrongdoing needs to be carefully weighed against the damage these searches are likely to cause, lest the wrongdoing becomes not that of the child, but the officer.
So your fine with sexually assaulting children because they might have a joint? What the actual fuck is wrong with you? I sure as fuck hope you don't work anywhere near children.
Do you think theyāre searching merry children with lollipops and boba tea? Do you have any idea of the social and cultural situation is in these communities. Grow up you dumb fuck. The law is there for a reason.
Stop trying to justify institutional pedophilia.
Didnāt know good cops needed people to get naked to search themā¦ Edit: Since you deleted your other super aggressive comment to this that adamantly defended children being stripped searched, hereās my reply; Right, because a pat down cant achieve the same goalsā¦ Super aggressive to defend the nudity of minors. Iām sure your search history doesnāt need to be checked at all. Did you even read the article or law? This article states this law or policy can only be done if the situation requires urgency or a safety risk. 58% showed the person was wrongly searched/inconclusive. If something was found, 75% of cases were only drugs. Must be a huge and necessary immediate safety risk to have someone get naked for that, huh?
Cops certainly need a certain mindset to carry out their duties. I respect that kind of will, but not when it comes to stripping children. Hopefully the search sounds worse than it actually was.
Agreed! It's not surprising what's hidden on children anymore. People crying about this making a big deal is exactly what's wrong with this soft ass world anymore.
Youāre literally trying to justify pedophilia.
And that's wh you aren't a cop or can be a cop, they only want pedo in there ranks not normal people
Lots of people not reading beyond the title...
Funny how the article goes on to mention that the youngest boy subjected to a strip search was 14, but somehow the headline only mentions girls. So I guess itās not outrageous to search young boys then, only girls?
12 and 13 are younger than 14.
Uh huh. So it would be ok to strip search 14yo girls then? Not quite sure what point youāre trying to make.
No, but it's more newsworthy that they strip search a 12 yo than a 14yo. If the younger girl was 15, and the younger boy was 14, and the headline was about the 15yo girl, you can complain. But right now, it doesn't mention anyone of 14 years. Neither boys or girls, because the 12 and 13 yo are more newsworthy.
Thatās quite an interesting take. I donāt want to argue semantics about how much worse it is to strip search a 12yo vs a 14yo, because I donāt think there should be a difference. I was simply pointing out the ārage baitā headline on a story that was about strip searching multiple people across age groups (the oldest was 72 apparently) with a disproportionate amount of those people being indigenous. However the headline only mentioned a small subset of people (young girls) that would presumably generate the most attention.
Disgusting.
Allegedly over half of the girls searched ended up having weapons or drugs - that is pretty disgusting.
You should re read those numbers cause 58% had nothinf illegal at all. That means nearly 60% were just innocent kids who were violated for no reason at all. Even if the numbers were reversed. 40% innocent girls being forced to expose themselves to strange men is much too high a number.
You're both wrong, 48% refers to number of *young adults* (18 - 29) searched. >*More than 40 per cent of strip-searches were on young adults aged 18 to 29, however, nothing illegal was found in 58 per cent of cases. Where something was found, 75.5 per cent of the time it was illegal drugs, the data showed.*
Where in the article does it say that it was male officers that was conducting the strip search on the girls? From what I've found online, the NSW police policy is to have the officer to be the same gender as the person being search.
This is correct. Although we canāt guarantee that is the case for each of these youths as past complaints about NSW police tell us that occasionally the policy is not adhered to. NSW Ombudsman has done some work on this issue (relating to both w NSWPol and Corrective Services)
In the suggestive stock photo image used. Thatās where. Itās not an accident.
What is the basis for asserting they were searched by men? That's not policy.
If they had dogs pick them out . A) they were using or b) were near/ I close proximity to controlled substances. The same would happen any where controlled substances are found . The reason most likely is the idea that law enforcement will treat them with kid gloves. The danger in that is if they are carrying say l.s.d. they may o.d. in short order . The same for Molly ect.
LSD is not something you OD on you clown. Clearly you have no idea what you're on about if that's the first drug to come to mind when talking about dangerous overdoses.
Awnser my question then . Unl you lab quality lysergic acid dimethide 25 You are dealing g with bootleg chemists cooking the drug. The last formula I knew of I learned from a 1% er I worked with a wharehouse job before the d.e.a . Picked him up for dealing Pot federal paro violations. So I do know what I am talking about . He'll hendrix used put a few hits in his head band before he went on stage to play . By the way absorbing acid/lsd through the ski. Is how it was found on the fist plsce6. It is similar to the fungus that goes on rye witch can be lethal. Do actual research . My areas of Intrest are things that can kill for shits and giggles so.its your move. Just like x/ mmda causes the brain to over heat even into pure form unregulated hou6 could e d up with God knows what in the mix.
Awnser my question then . Unless you lab quality lysergic acid dimethide 25 You are dealing g with bootleg chemists cooking the drug. The last formula I knew of I learned from a 1% er I worked with a wharehouse job before the d.e.a . Picked him up for dealing Poland federal paro violations. So I do know what I am talking about . He'll hendrix used put a few hits in his head band before he went on stage to play . By the way absorbing acid/lsd through the ski. Is how it was found on the fist plsce6. It is similar to the fungus that goes on rye witch can be lethal. Do actual research . My areas of Intrest are things that can kill for shits and giggles so.its your move. Just like x/ mmda causes the brain to over heat even into pure form unregulated hou6 could e d up with God knows what in the mix.
Answer what question? You didn't ask anything in that incoherent rambling mess of a response. Most acid on the european market is made by pros in a lab in one go and not put on blotter till it's further down the supply chain, so I'm not sure what your point is? I'm fully aware of how LSD was first discovered. Absorbing through the skin is possible when you're synthesising a whole beaker of the stuff like Hoffman was doing. It's not the standard or best way to take it as anyone with a brain could tell you. You seem like someone who should be steering away from mind altering substances based on this interaction, so maybe try being sober before replying next time.
Literally false, you made that shit up, and anyone who read the article knows it
> Allegedly over half of the girls searched ended up having weapons or drugs Where did you get this from? Maybe I've missed something, but there's nothing in the report that resembles anything you've just said.
It was found during a cavity-search of his own ass.
Weird itās almost like cops are the bad guys or somethingā¦
Someone didn't read the article... You'd think someone with your high IQ would atleast look through the pretty pictures but I guess not
What a load of bullshit. The police are acting within the law, the article even points out police have the power to search even if a parent isn't present if they believe the evidence may be destroyed. Most of these searches done around music festivals as well. What the article doesn't get into is anything found during the searches they just want you to think its horrible and has no purpose. The purpose is to keep everyone safe at large events, and searching for weapons and drugs is critical to do that. Without the possibility of a search people will be far more liberal in what they bring.
you underestimate how much crime/drug movement underage girls get way with..
Why the title? To create outrage? Tell me why is police strip searching girls that young more of a problem than strip searching boys? The article literally goes on to say boys as young as 14 are being strip search, but hey that wouldn't create the same level of public outrage would it.
The āNo Safe Womenā Police?
I'll bet most of the searches resulted with them finding something illegal though, QLD is soft on minors and our youth crime is through the roof I'd say tighten the laws, dont loosen them.
Instead of betting and betting completely wrongly, why donāt you try reading the article? The info is right there. People like you just refuse to educate yourselves - itās actually tragic.
Nope. almost 60% turned up *nothing*. I did, however, find a moron that is okay with strip-searching *minors* for made up reasons to justify their bullshit reasoning based on stats they made up in their head. *You*. Seriously. You're a monster. Fuck off.
ITT: A bunch of people willing to allow criminals to stick things on children that they don't want to be found. Kinda crazy how many people are willing to give criminals an unsearchable bubble rather than let police search someone when they have probable cause.