What stops changing laws to make the majority happy?

[rich12]

So for some reason every other day I seem to get videos pop up on my Youtube about things like little scrotes on mopeds doing whatever they want to and are practically untouchable due to laws and people being too afraid.

Why/who stops power being giving to the police to be able to stop them using whatever means necessary?
I'm thinking ramming them off the road, giving chase in the hope that they crash and die etc...

Surely no one will protest in favour for these types of people?

[Mike335i]

Life is so much more complex than that. The majority being happy isn't always good for everyone, sometimes it isn't good for anyone.

Imagine it. No more taxes, free money handed out, no more laws we don't like etc. All the popular things, but the consequences would be dire.

To allow police to effectively pursue young people to an almost certain death / serious injury is never going to be the right thing.

[rich12]

Mike335i said:

To allow police to effectively pursue young people to an almost certain death / serious injury is never going to be the right thing.

So letting them do what they want and maybe even killing people is better than getting rid of these sort of people?
How is it not the right thing?

[Zetec-S]

rich12 said:

So for some reason every other day I seem to get videos pop up on my Youtube about things like little scrotes on mopeds doing whatever they want to and are practically untouchable due to laws and people being too afraid.

Why/who stops power being giving to the police to be able to stop them using whatever means necessary?
I'm thinking ramming them off the road, giving chase in the hope that they crash and die etc...

Surely no one will protest in favour for these types of people?

I fully understand where you're coming from, but at the same time should the police really be judge, jury and executioner? Slippery slope...

[anonymous-user]

rich12 said:

So letting them do what they want and maybe even killing people is better than getting rid of these sort of people?
How is it not the right thing?

Just because you aren't worried by the idea of the police simply killing people to make the country a 'better place', let me assure you that your views will not be shared by the majority.

[Greendubber]

Zetec-S said:

rich12 said:

So for some reason every other day I seem to get videos pop up on my Youtube about things like little scrotes on mopeds doing whatever they want to and are practically untouchable due to laws and people being too afraid.

Why/who stops power being giving to the police to be able to stop them using whatever means necessary?
I'm thinking ramming them off the road, giving chase in the hope that they crash and die etc...

Surely no one will protest in favour for these types of people?

I fully understand where you're coming from, but at the same time should the police really be judge, jury and executioner? Slippery slope...

Quite.

Plus you won't find many officers that want to go to prison for causing death by dangerous driving due to the fact they don't have any protection in law when trying to stop these scrotes.

[Pothole]

This subject has already been done to death (hur hur hur) at least 3 times in various places on here.

[Psycho Warren]

Mike335i said:

To allow police to effectively pursue young people to an almost certain death / serious injury is never going to be the right thing.

Works fine in the USA and many european countries where it is the norm to not back down.

Refusing to chase criminal scum bags sends a message that they can do what they want. Ending chases that get "dangerous" sends a message to scum that to get away just act more dangerously.

Also make it like in the USA where after a chase the scum bag gets criminal damage charges for all the damage caused and assault charges etc where cops get hurt.

MAybe then the scum will think twice about running from the cops - which will make the streets safer. Maybe some of them might also stop committing crime.

[rich12]

Greendubber said:

Quite.

Plus you won't find many officers that want to go to prison for causing death by dangerous driving due to the fact they don't have any protection in law when trying to stop these scrotes.

Surely that's all part of what i'm talking about? Having the laws in place to do this would clearly mean that the police have the power to do so without any fear of being charged.

[Greendubber]

rich12 said:

Greendubber said:

Quite.

Plus you won't find many officers that want to go to prison for causing death by dangerous driving due to the fact they don't have any protection in law when trying to stop these scrotes.

Surely that's all part of what i'm talking about? Having the laws in place to do this would clearly mean that the police have the power to do so without any fear of being charged.

Police officers don't want to kill people. I'm not overly fussed about the idiot on the bike but I am about the person he runs over/crashes into.

It's all about risk management.

[anonymous-user]

Psycho Warren said:

Works fine in the USA and many european countries where it is the norm to not back down.

Refusing to chase criminal scum bags sends a message that they can do what they want. Ending chases that get "dangerous" sends a message to scum that to get away just act more dangerously.

Also make it like in the USA where after a chase the scum bag gets criminal damage charges for all the damage caused and assault charges etc where cops get hurt.

MAybe then the scum will think twice about running from the cops - which will make the streets safer. Maybe some of them might also stop committing crime.

You cannot be serious.

There is mountains of evidence to prove that the harsh penalties dished out by US courts, and the 'shoot to kill' mentality of the Police/homeowners do absolutely nothing whatsoever to deter people from committing crimes.

[ReverendCounter]

Lord Marylebone said:

There is mountains of evidence to prove that the harsh penalties dished out by US courts, and the 'shoot to kill' mentality of the Police/homeowners do absolutely nothing whatsoever to deter people from committing crimes.

I think there's a bit of a difference between the way that the scum the OP was originally referring have been allowed to operate in the UK,with the resulting outcomes, and the US issues you outline.

But isn't it safe to say that, for many, many years UK society has tried to dissuade criminals from committing crime, and as you say it just doesn't work, regardless of the approach - hence the multitude of overflowing UK prisons.

So why not stop trying to dissuade criminals and just deal with their crimes as they commit them? I'm not suggesting all criminals should be executed on the spot but if they get ran over, as in the case of scooter scum then great - they're either temporarily or permanently unable to blight society which is their vocation.

[Graveworm]

Lord Marylebone said:

You cannot be serious.

There is mountains of evidence to prove that the harsh penalties dished out by US courts, and the 'shoot to kill' mentality of the Police/homeowners do absolutely nothing whatsoever to deter people from committing crimes.

Three strikes and you're out does do quite a lot to prevent any further reoffending though. ..
It does depend how far society is willing to take it. Drug trafficking is pretty much non existent in Malaysia to the extent that any seizure is front page news. Just for clarity I am not in favour of a mandatory death penalty here for possessing more than 40g of cocaine,

[Oceanrower]

Graveworm said:

Just for clarity I am not in favour of a mandatory death penalty here for possessing more than 40g of cocaine,

I am!

[caelite]

Graveworm said:

Lord Marylebone said:

You cannot be serious.

There is mountains of evidence to prove that the harsh penalties dished out by US courts, and the 'shoot to kill' mentality of the Police/homeowners do absolutely nothing whatsoever to deter people from committing crimes.

Three strikes and you're out does do quite a lot to prevent any further reoffending though. ..

Mhm, and castle doctrine style laws do correlate to a reduction in petty burglary...

It's only the stand your ground style law which has been shown to have dubious effect (slight reduction in petty crime, but increase in overall homicide). And the US police training being of varying quality as it is heavily dependent on individual state and local police forces.

[Mr Tidy]

Lord Marylebone said:

You cannot be serious.

There is mountains of evidence to prove that the harsh penalties dished out by US courts, and the 'shoot to kill' mentality of the Police/homeowners do absolutely nothing whatsoever to deter people from committing crimes.

I'm totally serious, your Lordship!

A shoot to kill policy does at least prevent re-offending if done properly!

What evidence do you have to suggest that slapping people on the wrist, sending them on a holiday, tagging them or putting them in a prison with a golf course is more effective? And why should I be expected to pay for that?

If that policy doesn't work as a deterrent at least it may work as a solution.

And BTW "there is mountains of evidence" is a grammatical faux-pas - there IS either a mountain of evidence or there ARE mountains of evidence.

If you actually are a Peer of the Realm it's no wonder the UK is such a mess!

[Greendubber]

ReverendCounter said:

Lord Marylebone said:

There is mountains of evidence to prove that the harsh penalties dished out by US courts, and the 'shoot to kill' mentality of the Police/homeowners do absolutely nothing whatsoever to deter people from committing crimes.

I think there's a bit of a difference between the way that the scum the OP was originally referring have been allowed to operate in the UK,with the resulting outcomes, and the US issues you outline.

But isn't it safe to say that, for many, many years UK society has tried to dissuade criminals from committing crime, and as you say it just doesn't work, regardless of the approach - hence the multitude of overflowing UK prisons.

So why not stop trying to dissuade criminals and just deal with their crimes as they commit them? I'm not suggesting all criminals should be executed on the spot but if they get ran over, as in the case of scooter scum then great - they're either temporarily or permanently unable to blight society which is their vocation.

It's not the scrotes that are the concern, it's the members of the public that are going to get mopped up by said scrotes as he's riding down the pavement.

Stingers and other tactics are in play now and believe it or not the police are having a bit of success. Simply smashing bikes off the road is a stupid idea.

[Steve H]

Greendubber said:

Police officers don't want to kill people. I'm not overly fussed about the idiot on the bike but I am about the person he runs over/crashes into.

It's all about risk management.

Isn't there a bigger picture issue here?

For sure making an individual judgement in a situation might make it a good call not to pursue but when it gets to the point where the scrotes know this is policy they can behave with impunity and are much more likely to keep doing it.

This can't be good for public safety and may tend to reinforce the view amongst these low-lifes that the law and the police don't need to be respected/obeyed.


The same issue comes up with loads of things, there's an obviously sensible decision to be made that would give an overall benefit to the population and someone posts up on social media about how they are being unfairly punished (sad face picture of small child etc) and common sense for the majority gets abandoned in favour of pandering to the exceptions.

[durbster]

Psycho Warren said:

Works fine in the USA...

Does it? Blimey.

Making officers largely unaccountable for their actions is a recipe for disaster. There's no way I would want that here.

[Mike335i]

Maybe the answer is to stop basing opinions on YouTube videos and social media posts?

Just because YouTube has lots of videos of moped crime or whatever does not mean that crime is actually worse. Stop paying attention to it and life might look a little better. Crime has always been a problem, it just happens to involve mopeds now. If they clamp down on moped riding, they will find another way to commit the same crime.

Back to the original point, they have the power to pass laws to make us all happier. But the powers that be have a little more insight into what is needed, rather than what is wanted, thank goodness.