Petrol theft is not a crime
Discussion
MarshPhantom said:
Negative Creep said:
9mm said:
Scuffers said:
MarshPhantom said:
You do in a lot of countries.
Theft is theft, but if garages have a problem shouldn't it be down to them to sort it out? Shops that have problems employ security guards, why should garages rely on the Police.
why do we have police then?Theft is theft, but if garages have a problem shouldn't it be down to them to sort it out? Shops that have problems employ security guards, why should garages rely on the Police.
I'd put acting as enforcers for big businesses some way down the list of priorities. So, I'd far rather see Police prioritising domestic burglaries over arresting shopllifters or people making off without paying for petrol.
Retailers moaning winds me up in the same way land owners sometimes moan about parking on their land. Often the solution is a one time investment. E.g pay at pump or a gate.
JensenA said:
MarshPhantom said:
You do in a lot of countries.
Theft is theft, but if garages have a problem shouldn't it be down to them to sort it out? Shops that have problems employ security guards, why should garages rely on the Police.
So if your house is burgled, you'll be quite philosophical about it, and not report it to the police, as it's your fault for not fitting a burglar alarm. Theft is theft, but if garages have a problem shouldn't it be down to them to sort it out? Shops that have problems employ security guards, why should garages rely on the Police.
The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
MarshPhantom said:
Just to add, my house was burgled a few years ago, broke in while we slept in bed. Car taken and a ton of other stuff too.
The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
You obviously didn't take proper precautions against theft. Or is it one rule for them, and a different one for you?The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
eldar said:
MarshPhantom said:
Just to add, my house was burgled a few years ago, broke in while we slept in bed. Car taken and a ton of other stuff too.
The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
You obviously didn't take proper precautions against theft. Or is it one rule for them, and a different one for you?The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
The point is the police have enough to do already dealing with serious crimes.
stuttgartmetal said:
Next it will be unmanned petrol stations.
Progress.
Already here, mate.Progress.
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/464692/Shell-in...
This is just a guess but I'd guess that the average petrol thief probably has their fingers in a few other pies as well, and is probably very often known to local plod anyway.
You'd think they're exactly the sort of person plod should be targeting as there are probably a host of other offences there (insurance, license etc.) as well as some interesting car content.
Or maybe I'm wrong and they're stand-up members of the community who just nick fuel occasionally.
You'd think they're exactly the sort of person plod should be targeting as there are probably a host of other offences there (insurance, license etc.) as well as some interesting car content.
Or maybe I'm wrong and they're stand-up members of the community who just nick fuel occasionally.
MarshPhantom said:
eldar said:
MarshPhantom said:
Just to add, my house was burgled a few years ago, broke in while we slept in bed. Car taken and a ton of other stuff too.
The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
You obviously didn't take proper precautions against theft. Or is it one rule for them, and a different one for you?The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
The point is the police have enough to do already dealing with serious crimes.
The police targeting here represents a careful choice which they think they’re more likely to get away with in their politically motivated quest. The post detailing police inaction over a car theft is pushing it though. Police doing a bunk on bilking is still too transparent, they could do a lot better. If senior police had dynamite as brains sufficient to blow their ear wax out we could be in trouble.
In non-news yet to be released, braid have announced that constables will not respond when people are found bleeding to death in the street unless there is clear evidence of criminal intent, e.g. it can be shown they didn’t slip or trip on the paving, in which case they should pursue a civil case against the Council from ICU if they live long enough. If the person near death had anything to do with big business then clearly it was their own fault for not employing personal security.
Police have never investigated all crime. There has also always been prioritising or triage.
For making off without payment the requirement is that it is done dishonestly and with the intent to avoid payment. The offence is difficult to prove where the offender speaks with a solicitor before the police. Indeed, most drive offs are not offences. If the caller can't provide evidence of dishonesty when phoning, what good is a visit going to do? It is poor use of resources.
For making off without payment the requirement is that it is done dishonestly and with the intent to avoid payment. The offence is difficult to prove where the offender speaks with a solicitor before the police. Indeed, most drive offs are not offences. If the caller can't provide evidence of dishonesty when phoning, what good is a visit going to do? It is poor use of resources.
Derek Smith said:
Police have never investigated all crime. There has also always been prioritising or triage.
Indeed. Nor have senior police ever sacked themselves or reduced their salaries and benefits before playing politician and disrupting front line services as visibly as possible to make a political point.They should of course stick to policing, though they appear marginally more competent as politicians.
MarshPhantom said:
JensenA said:
MarshPhantom said:
You do in a lot of countries.
Theft is theft, but if garages have a problem shouldn't it be down to them to sort it out? Shops that have problems employ security guards, why should garages rely on the Police.
So if your house is burgled, you'll be quite philosophical about it, and not report it to the police, as it's your fault for not fitting a burglar alarm. Theft is theft, but if garages have a problem shouldn't it be down to them to sort it out? Shops that have problems employ security guards, why should garages rely on the Police.
The police didn't attend for 3 days, 4 days for forensics who told me it was a waste of time them being there as it was so long after the event.
And you think they should be spending more stopping theft of petrol?
Burglary has become a low risk crime because criminals know it's not going to be investigated. Driving away without paying for petrol will also become a low risk crime once people know it won't be investigated. The use of Police resources is a whole new topic of discussion.
Langweilig said:
stuttgartmetal said:
Next it will be unmanned petrol stations.
Progress.
Already here, mate.Progress.
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/464692/Shell-in...
This thread is the perfect example of why such a rag as the Daily Mail is so successful. Report something a fact and it gets people frothing at the mouth. Police haven't said they won't investigate theft, they are just stopping being debt collectors for petrol stations. Significant numbers of 'thefts' are in fact cashiers forgetting to charge for petrol when someone buys something from the shop. They then report it to Police and expect them to do the chasing. The Daily Mail subscribers may wish you to believe cutting 30% from an organisations budget (and counting) doesn't have any effect, but it does. If you want Police to investigate each and every crime, I suggest you write to your MP and demand that the Police stop having to be responsible for all the non-crime work that takes up 80% of their time.
Protect the front line you say. Well guess what. The billions cut from the Police budget led to the sacking of tens of thousands of back room staff. The forensic experts, the file builders, the typists, the control room staff and all those others responsible for making the criminal justice system work. Many of those roles were essential. Once upon a time you could send a tape in and it would be typed, proof read and printed for you. Your files would be completed and prepared for you. Now it takes a frontline Officer hours to do that very same thing. The only reason the wheel is still on, despite shifts being a third the strength of what they were, despite equipment not being replaced is because of the dedication and hard work of those that remain. Your pathetic, ignorant and laughable responses are just that, utterly pathetic.
A typical keyboard warrior, who demonstrates a massive sense of entitlement, without any knowledge of what he's talking about. When you step forward and put yourself at risk to protect the public, then you might be in a better position to comment. . Until then, keep on sitting in your cosy sitting room, telling us all how much better you could do it.
Jasandjules said:
It is the responsibility of the state to protect us -
Perhaps you could write to Mr Cameron and ask why he has abdicate all state responsibility for the security of our country and why he considers Policing to be of no interest to him.turbobloke said:
The main point is that police could save a lot on desk jockey salaries and pensions and only then look at front line services. They won't do that because senior police are playing at being politicians, share the same levels of self-interest, and like other public sector over-achievers they have public well-being at heart
The police targeting here represents a careful choice which they think they’re more likely to get away with in their politically motivated quest. The post detailing police inaction over a car theft is pushing it though. Police doing a bunk on bilking is still too transparent, they could do a lot better. If senior police had dynamite as brains sufficient to blow their ear wax out we could be in trouble.
In non-news yet to be released, braid have announced that constables will not respond when people are found bleeding to death in the street unless there is clear evidence of criminal intent, e.g. it can be shown they didn’t slip or trip on the paving, in which case they should pursue a civil case against the Council from ICU if they live long enough. If the person near death had anything to do with big business then clearly it was their own fault for not employing personal security.
You are absolutely a caricature of yourself. Your also cluless.The police targeting here represents a careful choice which they think they’re more likely to get away with in their politically motivated quest. The post detailing police inaction over a car theft is pushing it though. Police doing a bunk on bilking is still too transparent, they could do a lot better. If senior police had dynamite as brains sufficient to blow their ear wax out we could be in trouble.
In non-news yet to be released, braid have announced that constables will not respond when people are found bleeding to death in the street unless there is clear evidence of criminal intent, e.g. it can be shown they didn’t slip or trip on the paving, in which case they should pursue a civil case against the Council from ICU if they live long enough. If the person near death had anything to do with big business then clearly it was their own fault for not employing personal security.
Protect the front line you say. Well guess what. The billions cut from the Police budget led to the sacking of tens of thousands of back room staff. The forensic experts, the file builders, the typists, the control room staff and all those others responsible for making the criminal justice system work. Many of those roles were essential. Once upon a time you could send a tape in and it would be typed, proof read and printed for you. Your files would be completed and prepared for you. Now it takes a frontline Officer hours to do that very same thing. The only reason the wheel is still on, despite shifts being a third the strength of what they were, despite equipment not being replaced is because of the dedication and hard work of those that remain. Your pathetic, ignorant and laughable responses are just that, utterly pathetic.
A typical keyboard warrior, who demonstrates a massive sense of entitlement, without any knowledge of what he's talking about. When you step forward and put yourself at risk to protect the public, then you might be in a better position to comment. . Until then, keep on sitting in your cosy sitting room, telling us all how much better you could do it.
Senior police continue with scaremongering and politicised cuts to front line services following government reductions in police funding, yet crime levels have been falling fast within a context of fewer resources. They need to have another think, and get some lessons on stats.
where else.
Police stats are no laughing matter though. After the Office of the National Statistician noted that Police STATS19 forms were inaccurately completed, which amazingly assisted with meeting casualty reduction targets, we've now got another taster of political activity rather than policing activity.
Police getting it wrong part one STATS19:
The Select Committee on Transport of the House of Commons has quizzed Richard Aldritt as Head of Assessment at the UK Statistics Authority about discrepancies between RTA figures collected in different ways
Police getting it wrong part two STATS19:
According to police statistics the rates of people killed or seriously injured on the roads fell consistently between 1996 and 2004 however hospital admission rates for traffic injuries were almost unchanged
Police getting it wrong part three crime stats:
The national statistics watchdog has said it could no longer approve figures recorded by the police because they were unreliable
Senior BiB should forget about politicking and get back to policing. If these incompetent political police should cut their own pay and/or sack themselves before telling front line officers not to go to bilking crimes.
Article on falling levels of recorded crime said:
The provisional figures, the latest official statistics available, show large falls in crime in the two years to June 2012.
Some of the largest drops were recorded in Nottinghamshire (21.7 per cent), Northumbria (17.6 per cent), West Midlands (13.3 per cent) and Hertfordshire (13.6 per cent). Crime rose in only one area, Devon and Cornwall, where it increased by just 2.2 per cent.
Devon and Cornwall Some of the largest drops were recorded in Nottinghamshire (21.7 per cent), Northumbria (17.6 per cent), West Midlands (13.3 per cent) and Hertfordshire (13.6 per cent). Crime rose in only one area, Devon and Cornwall, where it increased by just 2.2 per cent.
where else.Police stats are no laughing matter though. After the Office of the National Statistician noted that Police STATS19 forms were inaccurately completed, which amazingly assisted with meeting casualty reduction targets, we've now got another taster of political activity rather than policing activity.
Police getting it wrong part one STATS19:
The Select Committee on Transport of the House of Commons has quizzed Richard Aldritt as Head of Assessment at the UK Statistics Authority about discrepancies between RTA figures collected in different ways
Police getting it wrong part two STATS19:
According to police statistics the rates of people killed or seriously injured on the roads fell consistently between 1996 and 2004 however hospital admission rates for traffic injuries were almost unchanged
Police getting it wrong part three crime stats:
The national statistics watchdog has said it could no longer approve figures recorded by the police because they were unreliable
Senior BiB should forget about politicking and get back to policing. If these incompetent political police should cut their own pay and/or sack themselves before telling front line officers not to go to bilking crimes.
Edited by turbobloke on Sunday 31st May 14:06
Elroy Blue said:
This thread is the perfect example of why such a rag as the Daily Mail is so successful. Report something a fact and it gets people frothing at the mouth.
If police could learn to record and report road traffic accidents and crime stats accurately you might just get away with that smear. Don't shoot the messenger, fix the problem.Issues mentioned in that context in this thread have BMJ and ONS as sources. Better than police.
You might want to include the latest crime figures, you know, the one where it shows large increases in crime.
You could use the latest Crime survey of England and Wales to show you 'fall' in recorded crime. Just like the Government does. But when you use figures that doesn't include, violent crime, sexual crime, CSE and retail theft (yes, that's shoplifting..it's not included), then it's easy isn't it.
You could use the latest Crime survey of England and Wales to show you 'fall' in recorded crime. Just like the Government does. But when you use figures that doesn't include, violent crime, sexual crime, CSE and retail theft (yes, that's shoplifting..it's not included), then it's easy isn't it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff