Police Dads Army

[Mk3Spitfire]

ED209 said:

Why anyone who has retired would want to come back is beyond my comprehension. The job is ruined.

It's not ruined. It's struggling, and there is worse ahead, but challenges aren't necessarily a bad thing. Change is good and we just need to adapt. It's tough, and morale is low, but it's still a fantastic job and it's not ruined. Not yet.

[Greendubber]

williamp said:

What a lovely, warm, friendly thread this is....

No chance of discussion, rather then petty point scoring??

It was fine until the terrible twosome derailed it onto police brutality and how 'wronged' they have been. A thread about ex officers volunteering ruined by google trawled press reports about dead people. Brilliant.

Broken record springs to mind.

[Elroy Blue]

After the PM's fantasy comments this morning, the Conservative Party HQ have decided to reinforce the lie. You genuinely couldn't make it up.

This released as a 'tweet'

@CCHQPress: PM: Since 2010, crime is down by 31% and the number of neighbourhood police up by 3,800 - a 500% increase #PMQs

This is absolute fantasy. It's staggering he feels he can get away with lies like this.

[Octoposse]

XCP said:

Just heard George Galloway ( of all people) on Jeremy Vine suggesting that in the present circumstances there are a lot of retired Police and military who could join the Specials and therefore make us all safe.
I have only two words to offer Mr Galloway, the second of which is 'off'.

Can't believe that I'm agreeing (partially) with George Galloway, but that seems sensible. Special Constabulary down our way is way under establishment and can't cover everything the force would like them to.

Fast tracking people in who have the skills would be sensible . . . and if (when?) we are hit with a Paris style attack I'm sure there'll be plenty of volunteers.

[Greendubber]

Octoposse said:

Can't believe that I'm agreeing (partially) with George Galloway, but that seems sensible. Special Constabulary down our way is way under establishment and can't cover everything the force would like them to.

Fast tracking people in who have the skills would be sensible . . . and if (when?) we are hit with a Paris style attack I'm sure there'll be plenty of volunteers.

Never going to happen, a stab vest is a few hundred quid, let alone everything else needed. Plus each vest (in my force) is pretty much bespoke to get the correct fit. a

Any attack would be done and dusted way before any 'reporting for duty' coming out of retirement ex bobbies got anywhere near it.

[Greendubber]

Elroy Blue said:

After the PM's fantasy comments this morning, the Conservative Party HQ have decided to reinforce the lie. You genuinely couldn't make it up.

This released as a 'tweet'

@CCHQPress: PM: Since 2010, crime is down by 31% and the number of neighbourhood police up by 3,800 - a 500% increase #PMQs

This is absolute fantasy. It's staggering he feels he can get away with lies like this.

Well now its down to the chiefs and the fed to set the record straight.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Greendubber said:

Well now its down to the chiefs and the fed to set the record straight.

Which they seem unable or unwilling to do. I guess we don't have the spin doctors that the govt do.

[Derek Smith]

Elroy Blue said:

After the PM's fantasy comments this morning, the Conservative Party HQ have decided to reinforce the lie. You genuinely couldn't make it up.

This released as a 'tweet'

@CCHQPress: PM: Since 2010, crime is down by 31% and the number of neighbourhood police up by 3,800 - a 500% increase #PMQs

This is absolute fantasy. It's staggering he feels he can get away with lies like this.

I feel I should take issue with you on all your points. Take the second:

The figure for 'neighbourhood police' is, I believe, spot on. If your role is 'minor' case prep and the job is 'local' (where else could it be? Belgium?) then that is neighbourhood policing. Further, anyone on patrol is also classified the same. In fact you can be classified in three different positions on the same day.

Further, if you arrest a local offender and you spend the day in the cell block preparing case files, you are also neighbourhood policing. Hence a 25% reduction in police officers but more on the street.

As you know, the police were obliged to get rid of the civilian support staff so a warrant holding officer has to perform the bureaucratic nonsense that this government has reduced considerably by doing nothing about it. So if a PC is sitting at a desk with his radio on, (s)he too must, under HO demands, be classed as 'neighbourhood policing'.

The total hours spent on the street has probably dropped by the percentage quoted by Cameron as the increase in NP.

As for #1, crime dropping, this is probably true as well because now the police are forced to ignore minor crime and concentrate on the increase in serious offences against the person and the latest demand from the HO. So petty, that's petty to everyone but the victim, crime has dropped as no one deals with it. No one answers the phones. Major crime has to be dealt with, which takes considerable manpower, rather than the one person who deals with a theft from the person. I'm told that a considerable number of forces now do not crime 'shoplifting' or theft petrol.

And for #4, why are you surprised that a politician can get away with a lie? They get away with fiddling their expenses so why not a few made up figures? It is what politicians do and when there is only bad news, make up a ridiculous statistic and someone will believe it.

Now fantasy, #3: that requires you to imagine something weird or wonderful. It is separate and distinct from a lie, which has the intent to deceive, normally for one's own ends.

[Octoposse]

Elroy Blue said:

After the PM's fantasy comments this morning, the Conservative Party HQ have decided to reinforce the lie. You genuinely couldn't make it up.

This released as a 'tweet'

@CCHQPress: PM: Since 2010, crime is down by 31% and the number of neighbourhood police up by 3,800 - a 500% increase #PMQs

This is absolute fantasy. It's staggering he feels he can get away with lies like this.

Conceivable that it is (strictly speaking) true, although misleading. Crime is down, and forces moving to an NPT model and re-designating officers could be in the 3,800?

Although, if 3,800 is five times the original, then the total now is only four and a half thousand, which seems very low if you include the Met??

[Octoposse]

Greendubber said:

Octoposse said:

Can't believe that I'm agreeing (partially) with George Galloway, but that seems sensible. Special Constabulary down our way is way under establishment and can't cover everything the force would like them to.

Fast tracking people in who have the skills would be sensible . . . and if (when?) we are hit with a Paris style attack I'm sure there'll be plenty of volunteers.

Never going to happen, a stab vest is a few hundred quid, let alone everything else needed. Plus each vest (in my force) is pretty much bespoke to get the correct fit. a

Any attack would be done and dusted way before any 'reporting for duty' coming out of retirement ex bobbies got anywhere near it.

To clarify, I did mean 'ready for duty' some three months after an attack, girding the loins for the next one . . .

[Bigends]

Get as many volunteers in as you like - theyll only be counting bodies after the event if there is another Paris style attack over here

[anonymous-user]

No retired officer is going to come back as a Special. It's a suggestion which is devoid of reality.

Mk3Spitfire said:

Grow up. Where has he even come close to condoning it? Looks to me like he's pointing out that maybe the whole thing wasn't as clear cut as was first reported. No cop on here is going to condone torture, and even through your trolling eyes you can see that.

Quite. It's another one of his 'tricks' to pretend that any challenge over aspects of a matter = supporting it. How cunning

The IPCC helpfully and not mellow-dramatically called a low-level common assault "torture". A judge wouldn't, since it isn't. Because if it were, it would be the offence being tried. If the IPCC thought it was they should have pushed the CPS for that charge. If not, they should stick to the facts and not write emotive and unjustified rubbish.

To translate it into Pistonheads mode, if you are prosecuted for speeding, you wouldn't expect to be told the matter was 'a form of dangerous driving', too, would you? Because if it were, that's what you should be charged with.

The point I've made is the simplistic expectation that whoever else were present would intervene based on a court-case outcome is a stupid one. It's evidentially not clear cut since one of the two people who were using force at the same time was cleared. Clearly if the custody Sergeant were stamping repeatedly on someone's head then it'd be obvious, but not something of a minor nature, especially without having the accounts of the Sergeant / DO.

[Elroy Blue]

Octoposse said:

Conceivable that it is (strictly speaking) true, although misleading. Crime is down, and forces moving to an NPT model and re-designating officers could be in the 3,800?

Although, if 3,800 is five times the original, then the total now is only four and a half thousand, which seems very low if you include the Met??

Crime WAS going down. That is if you use the figures that didn't include violent crime, sexual crime, fraud, cyber crime and shoplifting. Yes, the crime figures didn't include shoplifting.

Perhaps they could include the 80% of our time that isn't crime. The 80% that May , Cameron and their kind conveniently ignore.

The Officer numbers are fantasy. May constantly (and I mean constantly) trumpets how the PROPORTION of Officers on the frontline has gone up. She achieves this spectacular success by slashing numbers. Once upon a time for every two hundred Officers , 150 would be frontline. A 75 % ratio. Now there's only 100 Officers, but 80 are on the frontline. A ratio of 80%. A rise, but there's actually half the original amount. Politicians mathematics.

If they think slashing Police numbers is justifiable and supported, why haven't they got the moral courage to admit what they're doing and stand up to be counted. Absolute weasels.

[Greendubber]

Bigends said:

Get as many volunteers in as you like - theyll only be counting bodies after the event if there is another Paris style attack over here

Glad I'm DVI trained.....not.

Any terrorists will run out of bullets before the Police gain control.

[Greendubber]

Octoposse said:

To clarify, I did mean 'ready for duty' some three months after an attack, girding the loins for the next one . . .

Nice idea, sadly it'll never happen though.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Greendubber said:

Glad I'm DVI trained.....not.

Any terrorists will run out of bullets before the Police gain control.

Nearly volunteered for a DVI course a couple of years ago. Glad I didn't now. I can see them putting more courses on now though.

[Greendubber]

Mk3Spitfire said:

Nearly volunteered for a DVI course a couple of years ago. Glad I didn't now. I can see them putting more courses on now though.

I have to do it for my role and I suspect we'll be using it sooner or later......still always look on the bright side, might get some coin out of it

[Rovinghawk]

XCP said:

'Excessive force' is not necessarily torture.

It was in this case, according to the IPCC.

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/2012-05-11...

I'll ignore the weasel words & insults from the apologists (not aimed at you, XCP).

[Greendubber]

Rovinghawk said:

It was in this case, according to the IPCC.

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/2012-05-11...

I'll ignore the weasel words & insults from the apologists (not aimed at you, XCP).

If the cap fits.

[anonymous-user]

Rovinghawk said:

It was in this case, according to the IPCC.

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/story/2012-05-11...

I'll ignore the weasel words & insults from the apologists (not aimed at you, XCP).

But not according to the CPS or courts, where it actually matters.

Even beyond the criminal context, the definition nearly always uses the word 'severe'. I don't think a non-custodial common assault quite meets that. If it does, then what is an ABH? Super torture? A GBH super-mega torture, A GBH with intent super-mega-even-more torture? Complete mellow-drama. Stick to the facts. Stick to what can be proven.

I like how you use the IPCC when it suits you. You are quite quick to dismiss their conclusion Cressida Dick didn't order anyone's death, and also their wider conclusions about Stockwell because they aren't what you want to hear.

Why the inconsistency? Is that the way to use a source, just when it says what you want to hear?

With your new-found faith in the IPCC, why didn't they recommend any action against the other officers present since it was so obvious they should have intervened? It'd only need to be on the balance of probabilities they should have done something. That's greater than 50% - so your 'obvious' isn't quite inline with the IPCC's.