Police too busy!
Discussion
hora said:
This is how media works:
Negative stories sell.
Find like stories and run them so they seems to be a theme.
Part report stories and misquote or change context.
Why do Police blame the media for press failings.
See a misquote of you. Changes it dynamically.
So the media run a story, a police officer says it's not true but can't say why and I'm supposed to just believe that?Negative stories sell.
Find like stories and run them so they seems to be a theme.
Part report stories and misquote or change context.
Why do Police blame the media for press failings.
See a misquote of you. Changes it dynamically.
bmw535i said:
I just don't understand why the police always blame the media for their own failings
Despite your opinion, in this particular examples there aren't any failings.The police were prioritising something else.
As they should do.
There aren't enough police to do 100% of the work the public wrongly think they deserve 100% of the time.
If you wanted enough FTEs in the force to respond to EVERY 999 call instantly then by definition you would have to have thousands upon thousands sitting around doing nothing for most of the time.
(It's called peak loading - look it up.)
Such a strategy would be so outrageously expensive and for and incredibly small benefit that even George Osborne might be able to do the sums.
It's a completely moronic suggestion.
bmw535i said:
So the alternative is to not have enough fit officers who can't/won't respond to serious incidents and then blame the media when they highlight it. Hmmmm
Essentially yes!Here is my honest take on it.
If people really did the math on the understaffing of the police there would be outrage, the government would be forced to step in and pay a boat load of unnecessary money to pacify people like yourself who when faced with direct evidence of a lack of numbers find it unacceptable (a fairly reasonable reaction frankly).
The thing is that people DON'T KNOW!
They happily carry on in ignorance.
(Which ironically to a certain extent shows that the current numbers might be about right...!)
If the media started a campaign to highlight the lack of numbers and tried to force the politicians hands to up funding, that might be a huge mistake since (if the police numbers are right) then we don't really need any more.
(A good example yesterday was the "35 deaths from lack of ambulances" headline. I was surprised it was so few.)
The question is simply what is the right number of police - given the currently stretched government budget.
I think there are enough of them, since I haven't suffered unduly without them around. And haven't seen too many stories such as the one you posted to make me worry.
You think differently and want the government to take on more debt to pay for the police or to shut down some schools to pay for it or find the money somehow.
And that's fine... but it probably should be a decision for professionals, not the media and not us!
bmw535i said:
I agree with most of that, but I don't think it's simply a numbers game. If the current police force was fitter, more deployable and actually appeared to take an interest in serving, my opinion (and a lot of others) may be different
Fair enough but it's quite a stretch to believe that simply from the article in your OP.I mean - they may just have been busy!
I guess you must have some other experiences that have lead to your conclusion and I have to admit that my first-hand knowledge is limited.
However, from the stories and attitude shown by the ones who make the effort to post here, they seem a lot more dedicated and caring than the average civil servant!
bmw535i said:
I agree with most of that, but I don't think it's simply a numbers game. If the current police force was fitter, more deployable and actually appeared to take an interest in serving, my opinion (and a lot of others) may be different
97% of police are fit for the job... http://www.college.police.uk/News/archive/2014jun/...
Might want to get your own house in order before throwing stones.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/too...
wiliferus said:
97% of police are fit for the job...
http://www.college.police.uk/News/archive/2014jun/...
Might want to get your own house in order before throwing stones.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/too...
There are plenty of articles to refute your first link.http://www.college.police.uk/News/archive/2014jun/...
Might want to get your own house in order before throwing stones.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/too...
The second one about unfit troops is probably true. However, if a soldier cannot meet the fitness standards, they are discharged.
bmw535i said:
There are plenty of articles to refute your first link.
The second one about unfit troops is probably true. However, if a soldier cannot meet the fitness standards, they are discharged.
Do provide us with the links then... My link is from the College of Policing, a formal, recognised body. I suspect yours will be from The Daily Mail...The second one about unfit troops is probably true. However, if a soldier cannot meet the fitness standards, they are discharged.
And so are Police Officers! If you can't make the standard you are subject Unsatisfactory Performance Regs and fired.
bmw535i said:
I agree with most of that, but I don't think it's simply a numbers game. If the current police force was fitter, more deployable and actually appeared to take an interest in serving, my opinion (and a lot of others) may be different
That's exactly what it is. Always has been. That hasn't changed since my times.If you have six officers on duty and all six are dealing with incidents/prisoners then when a seventh job comes in you have 0 police officers available to deploy to that job.
Not rocket science is it.
Edited by paintman on Tuesday 24th May 11:53
OP - You blithely request sources, yet when provided with a reputable (ok college of policing, but they crunch the numbers) you want more sources and seem to only trust third rate journalists. Have you requested their sources?
60% unfit? FFS have a look around you.
That number, hilarioulsy mis-quoted and taken as gospel by several prize nuggets on here was that 60% of overweight officers who sought help from a screening test were unfit.
Well f
k me. People who go to a health screening as they have concerned found to have a health problem.
Before you try and come up with another twist to you bashing, the numbers who went to the screening was small, those identified offered help - where it was possible, a large proportion were found to be at the end of their service and frankly, in jobs that needed their skill set and they were never going to be patrol officers again.
You know, like you wouldn't deploy a medic as a sniper....
60% unfit? FFS have a look around you.
That number, hilarioulsy mis-quoted and taken as gospel by several prize nuggets on here was that 60% of overweight officers who sought help from a screening test were unfit.
Well f
k me. People who go to a health screening as they have concerned found to have a health problem. Before you try and come up with another twist to you bashing, the numbers who went to the screening was small, those identified offered help - where it was possible, a large proportion were found to be at the end of their service and frankly, in jobs that needed their skill set and they were never going to be patrol officers again.
You know, like you wouldn't deploy a medic as a sniper....
wiliferus said:
Do provide us with the links then... My link is from the College of Policing, a formal, recognised body. I suspect yours will be from The Daily Mail...
And so are Police Officers! If you can't make the standard you are subject Unsatisfactory Performance Regs and fired.
Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe was quoted as saying that he believed the fitness test standard was too low and that it should be harder. It seems that it has actually got easier in the last few years in order to accomodate the less fit officers.And so are Police Officers! If you can't make the standard you are subject Unsatisfactory Performance Regs and fired.
If a police officer is fired for being unfit, are they replaced?
davemac250 said:
OP - You blithely request sources, yet when provided with a reputable (ok college of policing, but they crunch the numbers) you want more sources and seem to only trust third rate journalists. Have you requested their sources?
60% unfit? FFS have a look around you.
That number, hilarioulsy mis-quoted and taken as gospel by several prize nuggets on here was that 60% of overweight officers who sought help from a screening test were unfit.
Well fk me. People who go to a health screening as they have concerned found to have a health problem.
Before you try and come up with another twist to you bashing, the numbers who went to the screening was small, those identified offered help - where it was possible, a large proportion were found to be at the end of their service and frankly, in jobs that needed their skill set and they were never going to be patrol officers again.
You know, like you wouldn't deploy a medic as a sniper....
What would be the reason that in 2015, 5700 police officers in England and Wales were absentees?60% unfit? FFS have a look around you.
That number, hilarioulsy mis-quoted and taken as gospel by several prize nuggets on here was that 60% of overweight officers who sought help from a screening test were unfit.
Well f
k me. People who go to a health screening as they have concerned found to have a health problem. Before you try and come up with another twist to you bashing, the numbers who went to the screening was small, those identified offered help - where it was possible, a large proportion were found to be at the end of their service and frankly, in jobs that needed their skill set and they were never going to be patrol officers again.
You know, like you wouldn't deploy a medic as a sniper....
bmw535i said:
What would be the reason that in 2015, 5700 police officers in England and Wales were absentees?
Normal sort of thing that happens to any workforce.From the gov.uk website:
"Long-term absentees – police workers who are either on a career break, compassionate leave, maternity/paternity leave, special leave, study leave, suspension, or sick leave and have been absent for at least 28 calendar days."
bmw535i said:
Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe was quoted as saying that he believed the fitness test standard was too low and that it should be harder. It seems that it has actually got easier in the last few years in order to accomodate the less fit officers.
If a police officer is fired for being unfit, are they replaced?
The current basic fitness test is quite easy.If a police officer is fired for being unfit, are they replaced?
However, there are different tests for different roles - AFOs, ARV, dogs, for example, need to attain a higher standard.
The standard of the test may well be increased in the future but, in my opinion, it isn't really about fitness.
It's a way of getting rid of cops as they get older and stopping them accruing full pensions.
.... just like the fire service - dismissed on capability grounds because they can't pass the fitness test in their 50's .....
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff