Issued COVID FPN by a police officer

[Nibbles_bits]

blueg33 said:

Nibbles_bits said:

8 weeks training. That's it.
8 weeks before your thrust upon the adoring public.
8 weeks to do a job like no other.

So who's the more unprofessional, ignorant Officer now?
Me, who won't give a Covid FPN?
Or these Officers that have arrested someone for an "offence"
(Not to mention 'not giving your details' isn't an offence') and ended up plastered all over the internet??

Lots of jobs are like no other so I am not sure that is a point

There would be more public support of there weren't so many issues around bullying attitudes from the police, poor understanding of the laws they are enforcing and what appears to be an almost institutional attitude of "I have power and I'm going to use it"

There must be ongoing training after the initial 8 weeks?

Out of interest, which jobs are "like no other", yet face so much scrutiny from people with no experience in that field?

Ongoing training after 8 weeks.........I refer you to Dibbles post above.

Much of the training bares very little resemblance to what the public see as "Policing".

Edited by Nibbles_bits on Wednesday 3rd March 09:13

[Greendubber]

Dibble said:

I started as a Special in 1991 and joined as a regular officer in 1996. I didn’t get very much training for the former and a bit more for the latter. Obviously, even since 1996, there’s been quite a lot that’s changed, with huge chunk of new legislation. Off the top of my head, there’s been legislation about harassment, sexual offences, bail, Covid (obviously), as well as changes to disclosure, drug reclassification (and re-reclassification). I’m sure there’s plenty more which escape me now.

Some of that legislation (and its application) is complex. Who should be responsible for making sure officers are up to speed on that, the organisation, or the individual officer? If people try to learn it at home, how do they know they’re getting it right/understand it? We’ve seen plenty of discussion on here about what the CoVid legislation means, so self learning for stuff like this isn’t really an option, IMHO. Look at any Facebook thread about police giving tickets out and there’s a split between “Tickets should be a bazillion and eleven pounds”, “You’re not allowed to drive more than five miles out of your postcode on a Wednesday when the wind speed is above 5 knots from the west unless your maternal grandfather’s second cousin’s surname had three syllables and ended in q” to the full on FOTL frothers. Although most forces are now only recruiting people with a degree, or working towards one, that’s no guarantee of intelligence/common sense. Some cops are great, some are rubbish. Some are extremely clever, some couldn’t count their own balls/tits and get the same number twice.

Unfortunately, most forces use online learning now, which has its limitations and everyone learns differently, so what works for one person won’t work for another. But it means the organisation can say “Well, we put out an NCALT package and they’ve done it, so we’re covered...” even with the pass/fail “knowledge checks”, it doesn’t allow people to ask questions about the bits they don’t understand/aren’t clear on.

Nail on head.

[Pothole]

blueg33 said:

There would be more public support of there weren't so many issues around bullying attitudes from the police, poor understanding of the laws they are enforcing and what appears to be an almost institutional attitude of "I have power and I'm going to use it"

See above. The incidents you are extrapolating into endemics are a tiny, tiny percentage of the number of interactions police officers have with members of the public every day. Coupling that with human nature that makes the majority of us irritated and upset to have our behaviour challenged or questioned in any way and having many of those incidents broadcast on various media platforms where they are jumped on with relish and paraded as "evidence of rot from top to bottom" as some would have it, means your view cannot be anything but jaundiced.

Also, there is LOTS of public support, it's just not shouted about as loudly and it's not exciting enough to go viral.

ETA: None of the above means I dismiss these incidents out of hand. Just that they need looking at with a bit of perspective and that the expectation of 100% perfection 24/7 is ridiculous.

(also EF spelling)

[blueg33]

Pothole said:

blueg33 said:

There would be more public support of there weren't so many issues around bullying attitudes from the police, poor understanding of the laws they are enforcing and what appears to be an almost institutional attitude of "I have power and I'm going to use it"

See above. The incidents you are extrapolating into endemics are a tiny, tiny percentage of the number of interactions police officers have with members of the public every day. Coupling that with human nature that makes the majority of us irritated and upset to have our behaviour challenged or questioned in any way and having many of those incidents broadcast on various media platforms where they are jumped on with relish and paraded as "evidence of rot from top to bottom" as some would have it, means your view cannot be anything but jaundiced.

Also, there is LOTS of public support, it's just not shouted about as loudly and it's not exciting enough to go viral.

ETA: None of the above means I dismiss these incidents out of hand. Just that they need looking at with a bit of perspective and that the expectation of 100% perfection 24/7 is ridiculous.

(also EF spelling)

I agree, but like all news its the bad news that spreads, thats why you have to be extra vigilant to do the job right and well to save the barrel from the rotten apples. Unfortunately, many forces seem to be very defensive and dont weed out the rotten apples until exposed in public

[blueg33]

Nibbles_bits said:

Out of interest, which jobs are "like no other", yet face so much scrutiny from people with no experience in that field?

Ongoing training after 8 weeks.........I refer you to Dibbles post above.

Much of the training bares very little resemblance to what the public see as "Policing".

Edited by Nibbles_bits on Wednesday 3rd March 09:13

Medical profession for a start from the top right down to the admin staff dealing with the public day to day - lots of st lots of scrutiny. But in terms of the police, why do you think that the scrutiny has increased - would it be anything to do with the proven failings over the last 50 odd years?

To me and many people - its fundamental that if you are setting out to enforce the law you MUST act in a totally legal way, hypocrisy doesn't sit well.

I am boringly middle class and would expect to be supportive of the police, however in my last interactions, I have witnessed officers blatantly lying and getting aggressive when called out on it. When I needed help from them because of an incident I reported, there was zero help. Thats just me, start to add these things up and you can see why there is scrutiny and rightly so.

[XCP]

It's a fair question.
The 2 options are: give name and get a ticket or don't give name, get arrested, and then get a ticket.

I know which I would choose.

[Pothole]

blueg33 said:

I agree, but like all news its the bad news that spreads, thats why you have to be extra vigilant to do the job right and well to save the barrel from the rotten apples. Unfortunately, many forces seem to be very defensive and dont weed out the rotten apples until exposed in public

It's bad news that spreads, which is why any situation is perhaps not as it "seems". As I said, however "extra vigilant" human beings are, they're not perfect and we're hypocrites to except that from anyone.

ETA: for instance, you "seem" to be implying that any officer shown in a sort, contextless video clip not acting perfectly is a "rotten apple". Are you?

Also, with respect, if you check any force's website you'll find plenty of evidence of rotten apples being ejected.

Edited by Pothole on Wednesday 3rd March 10:04

[Oceanrower]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

A bit woolly? You, sir, have a knack for the understatement...

It’s not woolly, it’s a complete invention. Police, yet again, making up laws that don’t exist...

ETA. The Government have set out VERY clear legislation. There’s even a sticky for it at the top of the SP&L forum. The Police have chosen to gold plate the legislation and make up the law. I accept that the powers that be haven’t helped with “guidance” but the fault for these incorrect FPNs lies squarely with plod.

Edited by Oceanrower on Wednesday 3rd March 10:09

[Pothole]

Oceanrower said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

A bit woolly? You, sir, have a knack for the understatement...

It’s not woolly, it’s a complete invention. Police, yet again, making up laws that don’t exist...

Devonlive said:

While we are permitted to leave home to exercise with people from our household or support bubble - or one person from another household - we must continue to keep a social-distance from anyone we don't live with and are required to "stay local" as much as we can.WRONG

Although the rules do allow people to visit beaches and rivers if you live 'locally' to them, people should not be travelling very far for a walk along the beach or a dip in the sea. WRONG

Guidance from the police outlines that people are asked to remain local and only take part in activities at a nearby beach or river, such as swimming, canoeing or boating, with members of their household, support bubble or with one person from another household.

So how, exactly, is anyone supposed to know what they can and can't do based solely on that?

[Nibbles_bits]

blueg33 said:

Nibbles_bits said:

Out of interest, which jobs are "like no other", yet face so much scrutiny from people with no experience in that field?

Ongoing training after 8 weeks.........I refer you to Dibbles post above.

Much of the training bares very little resemblance to what the public see as "Policing".

Edited by Nibbles_bits on Wednesday 3rd March 09:13

Medical profession for a start from the top right down to the admin staff dealing with the public day to day - lots of st lots of scrutiny. But in terms of the police, why do you think that the scrutiny has increased - would it be anything to do with the proven failings over the last 50 odd years?

To me and many people - its fundamental that if you are setting out to enforce the law you MUST act in a totally legal way, hypocrisy doesn't sit well.

I am boringly middle class and would expect to be supportive of the police, however in my last interactions, I have witnessed officers blatantly lying and getting aggressive when called out on it. When I needed help from them because of an incident I reported, there was zero help. Thats just me, start to add these things up and you can see why there is scrutiny and rightly so.

If only it wasn't so difficult to remove these rotten apples.

And the hypocrisy is why I won't issue a Covid FPN.

Unfortunately, it's the people that call the Police because their neighbour has had friends/family round, that prevents people who actually need a service getting one.

[Oceanrower]

Pothole said:

Oceanrower said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

A bit woolly? You, sir, have a knack for the understatement...

It’s not woolly, it’s a complete invention. Police, yet again, making up laws that don’t exist...

Devonlive said:

While we are permitted to leave home to exercise with people from our household or support bubble - or one person from another household - we must continue to keep a social-distance from anyone we don't live with and are required to "stay local" as much as we can.WRONG

Although the rules do allow people to visit beaches and rivers if you live 'locally' to them, people should not be travelling very far for a walk along the beach or a dip in the sea. WRONG

Guidance from the police outlines that people are asked to remain local and only take part in activities at a nearby beach or river, such as swimming, canoeing or boating, with members of their household, support bubble or with one person from another household.

So how, exactly, is anyone supposed to know what they can and can't do based solely on that?

Based solely on that? You can’t.

But if your sole interpretation of the law is based on the output of a badly written local rag then I think I can see what the problem is...

(Not you individually, the generic public you.)

[Pothole]

Oceanrower said:

Based solely on that? You can’t.

But if your sole interpretation of the law is based on the output of a badly written local rag then I think I can see what the problem is...

(Not you individually, the generic public you.)

I'm talking about the generic public. My village Facebook page has posters who are still confused about what they can and can't do.

[Evanivitch]

Nibbles_bits said:

Unfortunately, it's the people that call the Police because their neighbour has had friends/family round, that prevents people who actually need a service getting one.

Is it? If they call 101 then surely it's a police matter to prioritise the list of information in front of them? If police are choosing to spend time on 101 calls for Covid and not 999 emergency calls then that's a judgement made by the police.

[Oceanrower]

Pothole said:

Oceanrower said:

Based solely on that? You can’t.

But if your sole interpretation of the law is based on the output of a badly written local rag then I think I can see what the problem is...

(Not you individually, the generic public you.)

I'm talking about the generic public. My village Facebook page has posters who are still confused about what they can and can't do.

And mine. So, as I said, problem identified. Idiot people who get their information solely from Facebook and local rags.

I’d like to think plod had a better source but it would seem not...

[Pegscratch]

Evanivitch said:

Is it? If they call 101 then surely it's a police matter to prioritise the list of information in front of them? If police are choosing to spend time on 101 calls for Covid and not 999 emergency calls then that's a judgement made by the police.

This x10000. Perhaps it is "easier" to turn up, close a COVID job and the stats look good (don't pretend there's no focus on the stats, it's the only thing inept management know how to work) because you've done and dusted in five minutes rather than having to interview 6 people and get a conviction under the Dangerous Dogs act. Perhaps it is more satisfying to go home at the end of the day having "made a difference" by finishing something than it is to spend three or four days (if you're lucky) desperately pushing to make a real difference for the CPS to poo-poo it or worse, the courts to tell them they're naughty and wish them well. Perhaps it's direction from the management that the calls have to be picked up and dealt with within a period of time, which means anything they can't close there and then gets forgotten/left behind for quiet days because officers can't be in twenty places at once.

In any event, some here arguing that employers must provide the training to do the job (which nobody has argued against!) when the argument is that employees/officers/people should spend some of their own time learning to do the job well isn't going to persuade people that the police are the victims here.

[Pothole]

Evanivitch said:

Nibbles_bits said:

Unfortunately, it's the people that call the Police because their neighbour has had friends/family round, that prevents people who actually need a service getting one.

Is it? If they call 101 then surely it's a police matter to prioritise the list of information in front of them? If police are choosing to spend time on 101 calls for Covid and not 999 emergency calls then that's a judgement made by the police.

They're not.

[Greendubber]

Pegscratch said:

Evanivitch said:

Is it? If they call 101 then surely it's a police matter to prioritise the list of information in front of them? If police are choosing to spend time on 101 calls for Covid and not 999 emergency calls then that's a judgement made by the police.

This x10000. Perhaps it is "easier" to turn up, close a COVID job and the stats look good (don't pretend there's no focus on the stats, it's the only thing inept management know how to work) because you've done and dusted in five minutes rather than having to interview 6 people and get a conviction under the Dangerous Dogs act. Perhaps it is more satisfying to go home at the end of the day having "made a difference" by finishing something than it is to spend three or four days (if you're lucky) desperately pushing to make a real difference for the CPS to poo-poo it or worse, the courts to tell them they're naughty and wish them well. Perhaps it's direction from the management that the calls have to be picked up and dealt with within a period of time, which means anything they can't close there and then gets forgotten/left behind for quiet days because officers can't be in twenty places at once.

So far off the mark.

Why don't you simply phone up and enquire about your dog job and ask of there is an update instead of grinding axes?

[Nibbles_bits]

Evanivitch said:

Nibbles_bits said:

Unfortunately, it's the people that call the Police because their neighbour has had friends/family round, that prevents people who actually need a service getting one.

Is it? If they call 101 then surely it's a police matter to prioritise the list of information in front of them? If police are choosing to spend time on 101 calls for Covid and not 999 emergency calls then that's a judgement made by the police.

I was going to add - and it's not just during Covid. But I didn't think it would be necessary.

I could give you countless examples of calls to the Police that a) aren't a Police matter but no other agency has the resources to deal with
b) aren't a Police matter at all
c) aren't a Police matter, but the agency that deals with it is 9-5
d) have been exaggerated to get a quicker response
e) are just to use us a weapon in a hostile relationship
f) are from someone who can't be bothered to do something, and wants the Police to do it.

Not to mention the "customers" who know how to play the system, taking up resources.

999 calls are a prioritised, but sometimes due to the above, there just aren't any Officers to go.
Someone Specialist Units will attend in place of a 'local' unit, but they're very rarely in a position to retain it.

[Pothole]

Nibbles_bits said:

I could give you countless examples of calls to the Police that a) aren't a Police matter but no other agency has the resources to deal with

d) have been exaggerated to get a quicker response


.

Regularly recommended on here.

[Pegscratch]

Greendubber said:

So far off the mark.

Why don't you simply phone up and enquire about your dog job and ask of there is an update instead of grinding axes?

Just one example. Why is it then so easy for fleets of police vehicles to be out dealing with COVID calls and other "trivia" that most officers here seem to think shouldn't really be a priority, rather than longer, more challenging investigations?

You piss on anything anyone else says, but have fk all useful to contribute it seems. Perhaps contribute something then, why is the above the case as far as anyone can see?