Live data from Hacker News

London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

reclaimthenet.org

121–130 of 159 posts

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#121
post #68
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever walked through the streets of London after essentially any rally? They all end in violence.

Are you serious? This is so ignorant it's unbelievable. There are gazillions of marches that have ended without incident.

The sad thing is that GP is not even being paid to spread this tripe. I just can't understand their motivation to post such patently false info based on what...Tiktok research from Russia?

At least Farage/Yaxley and their hangers-on are clearly on the make.

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> slowly turning into a dystopia *has already turned into a dystopian hell hole FTFY At least China has more good weather

Where in the UK are you living, what's dystopian about it?

Arresting a person minding their own business, walking on the street for refusing to uncover their face because busybodies decided to put thousands of the people on the virtual line up on that day.

Arresting a person yelling "not my king!"

Proscibing a group protesting genocide while openly supporting the genocide. Later the ban was overturned by the court, but the government appealed and the police keeps throwing people in jail for wearing "I oppose genocide"

Arresting and prosecuting the grandma for holding a placard quoting text visible on the wall of the criminal court (old Baileys).

Arresting a man wearing "I support PLASTICINE action" (that's not a typo).

Throwing in jail people sitting on the zoom call and discussing nonviolent, peaceful protest against the environment collapse and the governments role in accelerating it.

Forbiding people from explaining to juries WHY they decided to break the law (as with the law, not all law is fair: slavery was legal, outing Jews to Nazis was mandatory, child marriages were legal)

Asking a neuroscientist to verify harms of the commonly abused substances, firing him for proving alcohol and tobacco are MUCH more deadly and harmful than some of the banned substances. At the same time the government claims there are no medicinal benefits of cannabis , Britain is the home to the biggest cannabis plantation, run by government-connected people. Yield is sold to be processed into Sativex, medical cannabis.

I could go on for hours.

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been no violence at any of the previous marches iirc. I think people assume there must have been because Starmer and co are foaming for violence...but there weren't. Also, they have banned 11 people from getting visas because they were "agitators" and are deploying 4k police officers. Just as a reminder though, the UK has people standing for political office who were convicted of terrorist offences, we have…

> There has been no violence at any of the previous marches iirc. His last protest was in september, it was pretty violent. 26 police officers were injured. Tommy robison has the advantage here in that its not illegal to express public support for him and his march, unlike palestine action where its very much illegal to do so (hence why there are >2000 arrests) > they have banned 11 people from getting visas because…

> His last protest was in september, it was pretty violent. 26 police officers were injured.

Given the number of people involved, that is a pretty low level of violence.

> unlike palestine action where its very much illegal to do so (hence why there are >2000 arrests)

Specifically the arrests were for supporting a group banned as a terrorist group. I am opposed to that law, but its important to be clear why they were arrested.

> if this is a march for uniting the british realm why would he need foreigners to speak

More fundamentally, visas are issued at the discretion of the government. I can think of people with far better cases for entering the country who have been refused visas - for example, academics attending conferences. I wonder how many of the people protesting about these 11 people getting visas were upset about those?

> unless we pay £300k a year to send 4000 people to an african country. yes, just 4k people, not a year, total.

That is just £75 a year per person. it is a LOT cheaper than keeping them in the UK. I think they get something like £50/week if not in catered accommodation.

> Look, if people turn up illegally, then its fair to process them fairly and return. There is nothing wrong with that

What is wrong with the current process is that it is slow and inefficient. There is also a problem with what to do with those who do not have documents as its hard to return them without evidence of where they should be returned to.

It is also grossly unfair as it actually lets in a lot of people who have no real claim while a lot of people who are genuine refugees cannot get here: look at the ratio of people belonging to religious minorities vs majority from Iraq or Syria. In 2025 there were over 2k asylum claims from Sri Lankans, a safe country (the civil war is long over). There are a lot of other countries I am sceptical about but do not have the same direct knowledge of. Why not send people who are clearly from a safe country back immediately?

> The biggest issue facing the UK is that we have not had a working government since 2007

I think that is optimistic. I would put the date a lot earlier!

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where in the UK are you living, what's dystopian about it?

Arresting 1000s of pensioners for holding a disallowed placard https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/11/met-police-mak...

And arresting them still, despite the high court ruling the ban was unlawful.

People are arrested for holding placards that do not even mention the banned group.

It's important to mention that the seemingly unlawful ban was imposed after the group broke into the airbase and spray-painted planes.

Prime minister Keir Starmer was called a hypocrite for calling for the ban, because he was defending an activist in court after they committed pretty much identical act 20 years ago in the airbase Fairford while acting as a human rights lawyer.

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This news from the UK is concerning and the UK is slowly turning into a dystopia but still your reasoning is flawed. The cameras are there to discourage crime and for use in court as evidence. Solving a crime still requires time and energy. Policing is a resources game. So of course petty crimes are still going to be committed because it’s resource intensive to have someone monitor all the cameras. That is until it i…

> slowly turning into a dystopia *has already turned into a dystopian hell hole FTFY At least China has more good weather

[I have lived in the UK. I do not live in the UK. I am not British]

well, I guess you can always try moving there. It's my suspicion that more people move from China to the UK than the other way around. Why is that? Maybe they haven't heard the news about it being a terrible place.

I get it though. As other posters have said, various British police forces seem to get ahead of themselves and then have to climb back off their hill when confronted with skeptical press [remind me, do you get much skeptical press in China?] and although I do not greatly care for the marchers who carry pictures of ultralights (because yeah! Kill civilians!!) I don't think the people who are nearby and telling us that bombing civilians is wrong (hint: bombing civilians is wrong) should be penalized for doing so. The courts and the electorate will have their say, and (slowly) grind any disagreeing gov't into a policy change. As it should be.

That said, while I would like to respectfully disagree with your statement, I can't because, well, because it's stupid. It's a stupid thing to say. You should reflect more before you type.

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#127
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wondering about that line: A 36-year-old woman who had been unlawfully at large for more than 20 years and was wanted for failing to appeal at court for an assault in 2004. so she was 16 when she "disappeared" (how, where, sleeping in the streets?) and the camera can link a 16 y.o. face to a 36 y.o. one after probably rough years?

What's the argument here? Thats crimes should be forgiven after 16 years, or that facial recognition is demonstrably robust?

not understanding written words is one thing, but your lack of basic maths is appalling

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#128
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reform (Farage) got a different £5m under the table donation. Robinson is gutter racism. Farage is trying to be its respectable face.

Reform turned down a $100m donation from musk to avoid Tommy Robinson I assume the £5m did not come with similar strings attached. The Green Party is now a lot more racist. Have you not read of the comments coming out of people withing the party, particularly its newly elected local councillors? IMO Labour are more subtle, but are as racist as Reform. They use race to attack politicians in other parties - they portra…

All of them can be racist, but are you sure it is useful (or independently, accurate) to say they're the same?

While Reform technically didn't exist at the time Farage had his "Breaking Point" poster and all it echoed from the mid 1900s, Farage was very much responsible for it and he literally owned Reform until very recently.

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The policewoman they maimed with a sledgehammer wasn’t an individual? https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c75kp15xz4yo

Palestine Action is also a proscribed terrorist group and the incident you linked is being treated as a terrorist attack now. There have been many other attacks like this both on places and individuals, as I said though the attacks on some individuals is not reported because left-wing terrorism tends to be memetic.

Re: London Police Deploy Facial Recognition at Protest for First Time

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been no violence at any of the previous marches iirc. I think people assume there must have been because Starmer and co are foaming for violence...but there weren't. Also, they have banned 11 people from getting visas because they were "agitators" and are deploying 4k police officers. Just as a reminder though, the UK has people standing for political office who were convicted of terrorist offences, we have…

> There has been no violence at any of the previous marches iirc. His last protest was in september, it was pretty violent. 26 police officers were injured. Tommy robison has the advantage here in that its not illegal to express public support for him and his march, unlike palestine action where its very much illegal to do so (hence why there are >2000 arrests) > they have banned 11 people from getting visas because…

...but it obviously wasn't. 150k people attended, and a lot of the issues with police are because the police come to this stuff tooled up. The same thing happened with the student loan protests 15 years ago. When almost all of the incidents involve police, that is usually an indication.

People outside the UK have been banned from attending because they are "agitators". The reason why Palestine Action is illegal is because they organized terrorist attacks, this protest is not illegal and one of the pro-Palestine groups attending is the largest donor to Labour.

Why would foreigners not be allowed to speak? Britain is a diverse melting pot where all peoples can discuss ideas freely. Petty nationalism and xenophobia isn't welcome here.

I didn't mention anything about every immigrant. I am saying that undocumented people have entered the country and carried our terrorist attacks. It isn't impossible to fix this, Labour changed the laws to push people back aggressively in 2004 (iirc, it was before the GE). What has changed is the electoral makeup of the UK, there is a massive constituency for as many illegal immigrants as possible. That is fomenting unrest because it involves massive social and cultural change in order to make up for the fact that Labour's support collapsed amongst their core vote. This isn't a complex or unusual situation: these things are happening because people are heavily incentivised. Changing the law is "wrong"...of course, you wonder why we have't had a working government at the same time? Lol. If any of this stuff was actually fixed, it would be very bad for political parties.

Post reply on HN