Question for Her Majesty's Servants on Bullshido

[slamdunc]

I challenge you to find a single member of the public who doesn't think the police spend to much time trying to catch motorists and not enough time catching burglars, muggers and rapists.

Based on your post, (IMHO) it sounds like they need a 'shake-up' in leadership and to adjust their priorities. Considering the UK is where organized law enforcement really started (structurally, anyway), that is a sad state of affairs.

You should be hard-pressed to find a working constable that doesn't want to fight real crime. It would probably be easier to find an administrator that directs him to focus on traffic offenses.

[judoka_uk]

Wow! Just found one! Me!

Well, obviously, because you're an ex-policeman and so feel compelled to defend your profession, as is only natural.

Seriously, we all know damn well that it's easier to catch a motorist than a mugger hence more people get done for motoring offences. If cops are looking for a "conviction tally" then it's a lot easier to go for soft targets.

I'm not sure what targets the UK police currently work to, I left the Police 15 years ago so what they are doing know I'm not sure.

See above...

BtW I don't blame individual policemen, although I'm sure there are some lazy cowards who prefer going after 'soft' targets than proper criminals.

I blame the culture and politics that directs police to not do what the public wants them to do.

Judoka go to any public police consultation and the three top issues will be speeding, parking and dog fouling. Go to your local station and ask about insight patrols.

Let's not play games. We both know the type of person who goes to a public police consultation is not in anyway representative of the general public.

[Nefron]

Also, the video of those South African miners getting shot has caused a big public outrage. You can see the miners charging the police with sticks and what not.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...triking-miners

[bob63]

Slamdunc. No policy and guidelines are necessary but should be well written taking into account decision making under stress and the variables that confuse the situation. Policy is often used by the press and judiciary to beat up people after the event.

[scipio]

[





Let's not play games. We both know the type of person who goes to a public police consultation is not in anyway representative of the general public.[/QUOTE]

OK - so what is a representative of the general public?? How do the Police make contact with them??

[bob63]

Judoka. And it's that public apathy that allow vociferous minorities to shape local policing.

[slamdunc]

Slamdunc. No policy and guidelines are necessary but should be well written taking into account decision making under stress and the variables that confuse the situation. Policy is often used by the press and judiciary to beat up people after the event.

Agreed; it is, however, easier said than done. Most policies are written to cover the ass of administration (I know, I used to write them), and in the name of safety and structure. The administrator will be the very one to throw one of his men under the bus for a violation of a policy that he knows does not apply to the real (dynamic) world.

[thrutch]

....you lot don't issue sidearms to the Bobbies, do you? How in the name of Cromwell hasyour country NOT descended into anarchy yet?

Do guns stop anarchy?

I'm very happy that our police don't carry guns. The likelihood of them ever needing a gun is pretty slim imo. There's hardly any armed people walking the streets so why would they need to be armed?

[judoka_uk]

OK - so what is a representative of the general public?? How do the Police make contact with them??

Well cast your mind back to the last one you were at. How many people there were under 65? How many were non-white?

We both know the answers to those questions.

Of course the police can never directly reflect the all the priorities of the communities they exist to serve. However, there are ways they could be made more responsive.

I would break up police authorities down to the smallest possible administrative unit. Then I would have an election every 2 years for a police commissioner who would set priorities for the force. These obviously wouldn't override general law enforcement activities, but the police would know that those were the areas that were of highest priority to the community they are there to serve.

Breaking the admin units down to the lowest level would ensure that there was fairness in the system and that people in an area with fewer votes wasn't drowned out by an area with more votes and different needs, i.e an inner city ward wanting targeting of drug dealers outweighing a countryside ward wanting targeting of agricultural crime.

The commissioner should also be given the power to sack the chief constable if he consistently fails to deliver for the public. Similarly the public should have a right of recall, if 50% of the turnout for the previous election signs a petition seeking to oust the current commissioner than a vote will be held to decide whether they get to keep their post or not.

The key is to force officials to be accountable to the electorate and at the closest level possible. It's easy to cheat and swindle the public when you're 300 miles away in Westminster, a lot harder to do it when they'll accost you in your local pub and ask you what you're playing at.

To see that in action look up any clip of an expenses cheat MP getting grilled on Question Time and see the fear in their eyes.

[bob63]

Judoka your wish goes live 22/11/2012 with the election of police crime commissioners on the 15th.
Be interesting to see the turn out of electorate.
Most areas have candidates sponsored by the major political parties and no funding available for independent's publicity campaigns.
be careful what you wish for.