Social media scrutiny and firearms licensing in Scotland

[Zapp]

This is interesting.  We already have a number of FEOs who visit the forum but this could be a first step towards formal consideration of social media activity in the grant/refusal/revocation of tickets in Scotland.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-43291740

There will (or ought to be) a few squeaky bottoms among some of the people who have been on here over the years if this catches on in the rest of the UK.  There are a few facebook groups which are like chimpanzees' tea parties also which could bite a few folk.

In my view it is a sensible precaution, especially having dealt with a few on here over the years who have clearly been an entire hamper short of a picnic.  

What do the rest of you think?

[Delboysparky]

22 minutes ago, Zapp said:

This is interesting.  We already have a number of FEOs who visit the forum but this could be a first step towards formal consideration of social media activity in the grant/refusal/revocation of tickets in Scotland.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-43291740

There will (or ought to be) a few squeaky bottoms among some of the people who have been on here over the years if this catches on in the rest of the UK.  There are a few facebook groups which are like chimpanzees' tea parties also which could bite a few folk.

In my view it is a sensible precaution, especially having dealt with a few on here over the years who have clearly been an entire hamper short of a picnic.  

What do the rest of you think?

Social Media is already used, you are just not told about it.  

Having social media profiles such as facebook will be fine if your security setting prevent everyone from seeing all your posts.

In reality your PW profile will be difficult to attribute to a person unless you openly declare who you are online along with your username.  Remember that the Police cannot access your online data beyond that which you publish.  

[panoma1]

I don't doubt the authorities are monitoring social media now! As said above, just that they don't publicise it!

[Zapp]

25 minutes ago, Delboysparky said:

Social Media is already used, you are just not told about it.  

Having social media profiles such as facebook will be fine if your security setting prevent everyone from seeing all your posts.

In reality your PW profile will be difficult to attribute to a person unless you openly declare who you are online along with your username.  Remember that the Police cannot access your online data beyond that which you publish.  

I know it is, the point I was trying to make is about it becoming a formalised requirement to look at and take a view on.

Depending on how active someone is it can actually be very easy to find out who people are purely from what they publish.  For example, I know precisely who a good many of our more troublesome historic members are - all done simply by reading what they have written on here and elsewhere carefully and putting it all together.

[billytheghillie]

That is why I stay clear of facebook etc. nothing to hide, but I don't want strangers prying in my business.

[Delboysparky]

32 minutes ago, Zapp said:

I know it is, the point I was trying to make is about it becoming a formalised requirement to look at and take a view on.

Depending on how active someone is it can actually be very easy to find out who people are purely from what they publish.  For example, I know precisely who a good many of our more troublesome historic members are - all done simply by reading what they have written on here and elsewhere carefully and putting it all together.

I agree that social media should be checked and viewed, it provides not only an isight into the character of the person, their links but also how seriously they take their personal security.  Its a very cheap and fast way of identifying links to undesirables. 

Lets move on to identifying people online and how the Police will go about viewing online content.  

So in the case of vetting, the Police can only look at data you have published, they cannot ask ISP's to identify users or websites/forums to do the same.  Open Source Research (looking at your data online) is subject to significant restrictions and procedure.  Online Research will likely be carried out by a non trained user, they will only look superficially and not trawl every post, they will only be able to access the content you make public, so lock your facebook etc down and they wont see anything. 

Identifying a user of a forum may be relatively easy if they reveal info about themselves, which most don't, even then you have to prove hat you are right, which is nearly impossible without using some form of power, which the police wont have. So if your user name is only used for say PW, there is no way in which to identify you without getting authorisation. 

@Zapp Your username isn't particularly unique, so odd question but have you ever visited Pakistan? You username has links to Islamabad but I suspect thats another user. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[panoma1]

Tactically why would the police tip the public off that they will be monitoring social media? Surely they would find out more if the carried on doing it covertly? 

Let the braggarts, idiots, wannabies, nutters and terrorists incriminate themselves!

[Zapp]

I wouldn't agree that most dont reveal information about themselves on forums like this, it's more the case that most don't realise when they are doing it.  Also recognising a poster from forum to forum doesn't require them to use the same username.

 

 

[Delboysparky]

7 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Tactically why would the police tip the public off that they will be monitoring social media? Surely they would find out more if the carried on doing it covertly? 

Let the braggarts, idiots, wannabies, nutters and terrorists incriminate themselves!

The Police are not monitoring social media or acting covertly when the conduct open source research, if they were they would require high level authority and have to stick to highly restrictive policy/legislation.  Anything you put on the internet is open to the world because you consent to it being there.  

 

5 minutes ago, Zapp said:

I wouldn't agree that most dont reveal information about themselves on forums like this, it's more the case that most don't realise when they are doing it.  Also recognising a poster from forum to forum doesn't require them to use the same username.

I think that depends on the individual and how anonymous they wish to be doesn't it? 

I would be interested in how you have managed to identify users.  If a person doesn't 'out' themselves you can trace them via a user name on other forums where they may feel more comfortable in disclosing. 

 

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[Zapp]

It does.

As daft as it may sound I'm not going to give away how I do it on the open forum since it is often the difference between some of the real idiots we have encountered being on here or not.

Happy to discuss by pm if you want.

EDIT to say that no dodgy dealings were involved at any point 

[Delboysparky]

7 minutes ago, Zapp said:

It does.

As daft as it may sound I'm not going to give away how I do it on the open forum since it is often the difference between some of the real idiots we have encountered being on here or not.

Happy to discuss by pm if you want.

EDIT to say that no dodgy dealings were involved at any point 

Totally understand, I am interested in hearing from you via PM. 

Just realised your position on the forum too, so i think I know. 

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[stagboy]

Some time ago, the head of an English police force firearms licencing team told me, over a cup of coffee, that just about the first thing they did when considering an application or renewal was to check the individual's social media stuff. 

[Delboysparky]

3 minutes ago, stagboy said:

Some time ago, the head of an English police force firearms licencing team told me, over a cup of coffee, that just about the first thing they did when considering an application or renewal was to check the individual's social media stuff. 

So do employers these days, its the cheapest way of getting info.

[panoma1]

25 minutes ago, Delboysparky said:

The Police are not monitoring social media or acting covertly when the conduct open source research, if they were they would require high level authority and have to stick to highly restrictive policy/legislation.  Anything you put on the internet is open to the world because you consent to it being there.  

 

 

 

Is not doing something covertly, doing it without openly publicising it? If the police are monitoring social media (which I suspect they are!)  they ain't publicising it.......so they are doing it covertly!

Not to be confused with what the police term "covert activities" such as undercover work, surveillance etc which probably needs high level authority and is equally probably subject to the restrictive policy/legislation to which you refer?

Perhaps you could advise me what a police research officer does then? 

Edited March 6, 2018 by panoma1

[Delboysparky]

15 minutes ago, panoma1 said:

Is not doing something covertly, doing it without openly publicising it? If the police are monitoring social media (which I suspect they are!)  they ain't publicising it.......so they are doing it covertly!

Not to be confused with what the police term "covert activities" such as undercover work, surveillance etc which probably needs high level authority and is equally probably subject to the restrictive policy/legislation to which you refer?

Not publishing an action does not make it covert as there is no statutory duty for the police to disclose such action, moreover the individual has published their material, therefore they consent to others accessing it.  When you buy milk do you tell everyone?  Are you acting covertly because you didn't? 

Police do not monitor the internet per se, (well not in relation to minor crime or firearms licensing anyway) they do conduct open source searches retrospectively, as do many others. 

For the police to act in a covert manner they must comply with legislation and get authority, for the police in this scenario to 'target'  an individual, this would not be authorise as it does not meet the criteria for 'Directed Surveillance' which this would fall within if the police make more than a specific number of attempts to access a persons online data. 

Lets keep in mind here that a FEO works for the police and therefore must comply with the same legislation/policy as a Police officer has to. But I understand your view and appreciate the healthy debate. Thank you. 

Im interested in your views then on what the police should be able to do in what circumstance. 

 

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[TriBsa]

Look out Burnley Dave.

[Gordon R]

Quote

Police do not monitor the internet per se, (well not in relation to minor crime or firearms licensing anyway)

Really??????

[Delboysparky]

34 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Really??????

There is 1 Police Officer for every 517 people in the UK, the average computer ability of a Police Officer is at best basic, with many resorting to 1 fat finger typing.  Lets take in to consideration shift wort over 24 hrs a day, 365 days a week. So in reality how many police officers are 'monitoring' the internet every day? 

There is something like 200 million emails sent annually in the UK alone, 89 percent of adults use the internet daily (about 42 million people), with about 36.6 million people having a facebook account.  

This is excluding all other social media, chat rooms, deep web, dark web, tor etc etc.   The stats speak for their self  http://www.hondachat.com/showthread.php?t=IDLEupJzDoC7VLP8o 

Who is reading all this data?  Its GB's a second? 

 

Lets not detract from the fact the police to view parts of the internet for law enforcement or intelligence purposes. 

But if innocent people think they are being spied on, you need to put your foil hat on more often and stay off the gin.  I think people have to much faith in the nearly bankrupt and short sighted government abilities if this is the case. 

But again @Gordon R, I am interested in why you have a different opinion and I thank you for contributing.  

Edited March 6, 2018 by Delboysparky

[Gordon R]

I have a different opinion because of what I know, as opposed to the junior mathematics exercise above.

[saddler]

9 minutes ago, Delboysparky said:

But again @Gordon R, I am interested in why you have a different opinion and I thank you for contributing.  

I'm with @Gordon R

I've been shown a print-off (from another forum) by then L&B Police, where I was posting a general comment on a force employee; who was at the time pushing for some shotguns to be declared S5.

[Delboysparky]

8 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

I have a different opinion because of what I know, as opposed to the junior mathematics exercise above.

I am trying to stimulate debate, so would you care to expand on your comment?

5 minutes ago, saddler said:

I'm with @Gordon R

I've been shown a print-off (from another forum) by then L&B Police, where I was posting a general comment on a force employee; who was at the time pushing for some shotguns to be declared S5.

I have already said the police use the internet for law enforcement, such as a complaint is made and the police recover the evidence from the internet.  But monitoring and recovering data as part of a complaint are very different wouldn't you say? 

[Guest stevo]

I thought Facebook was for children . ........

oh no that’s it , it was designed for teenagers, however grown ups with to much time on there hands , decided to take over and make everyone else see just how **** there life is , and embarrass there kids and family in the process. ...... is that the one your all on about ? 

Haha ?

Edited March 6, 2018 by stevo

[islandgun]

3 hours ago, Zapp said:

This is interesting.  We already have a number of FEOs who visit the forum but this could be a first step towards formal consideration of social media activity in the grant/refusal/revocation of tickets in Scotland.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-43291740

There will (or ought to be) a few squeaky bottoms among some of the people who have been on here over the years if this catches on in the rest of the UK.  There are a few facebook groups which are like chimpanzees' tea parties also which could bite a few folk.

In my view it is a sensible precaution, especially having dealt with a few on here over the years who have clearly been an entire hamper short of a picnic.  

What do the rest of you think?

yes check by all means, why not.?

[saddler]

8 minutes ago, Delboysparky said:

I have already said the police use the internet for law enforcement, such as a complaint is made and the police recover the evidence from the internet.  But monitoring and recovering data as part of a complaint are very different wouldn't you say? 

In may case, NO complaint had been made against anyone. nor was any form of official information gathering taking place for any potential or pending prosecution.

100% fishing trip; at the tax-payers expense: I was told in no uncertain circumstances that FULL monitoring of ALL social forums and similar chat rooms DOES happen; this being around 7-10 years ago!!
...all from a force with some of the lowest criminal detective/prosecution rates in the UK. 

The bigger question should be, why is the very limited police budget going toward such media scrutiny instead of actual root & branch police work and solving the host of crimes that have been committed & go in-investigated? It's easier to sit in a warm office for 12 hours browsing Farcebuk than crawl on hands and knees in the grass looking for stolen goods or vital case evidence that will put folk away for some serious crimes that would otherwise be brushed under the carpet...and are being so ignored, as can be seen from published statistics.

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

I am trying to stimulate debate, so would you care to expand on your comment?

I am not convinced you are trying to stimulate debate. From a scathing assessment of the abilities of the Police to ridiculing the notion that anyone does look at social media - via your mathematics for juniors - you seem to have a closed mind.

I don't agree with your thoughts and don't see it as my role in life to educate people who are unwilling to listen. I do not care to expand on my comment.