Police to tackle real crimes!
Discussion
At last.....
Forget deserving issues and focus on basics, police told http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46053069
Will it happen will it work - round here there are more burglaries and cashpoints being ripped out of walls that ‘gender hate crime’ so this is good news....
Forget deserving issues and focus on basics, police told http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46053069
Will it happen will it work - round here there are more burglaries and cashpoints being ripped out of walls that ‘gender hate crime’ so this is good news....
Finally somebody has bothered to do a reality check.
Instead of investigating possible crimes committed by dead people and crimes relating to people's hurt feelings, somebody has opened their eyes in government and decided that crimes that cause real pain and suffering to victims should now be addressed.
Instead of investigating possible crimes committed by dead people and crimes relating to people's hurt feelings, somebody has opened their eyes in government and decided that crimes that cause real pain and suffering to victims should now be addressed.
The vast majority of policing time is spent on non-crime issues and this won’t change. That’s domestic abuse, mental health related issues, missing children, concern for people, anti-social behaviour etc.
How much demand is there against dead people? Not much I’d imagine. Most ‘non-crime hate matters’ are recorded by police staff at a call centre and receive no additional investigation.
Drops on the ocean in terms of time spent, but I bet she knows nothing can be done about the areas that actually use up significent time.
If she’s signalling to the Home Office that there needs to be meaningful reform to define what the police do, then fine, but to suggest the police will currently have much discretion as to what they can pick and choose they record would be misleading.
There’s no getting away from the fact police officer numbers are what we had in the 1980s, except now we have the internet and mobile phones.
How much demand is there against dead people? Not much I’d imagine. Most ‘non-crime hate matters’ are recorded by police staff at a call centre and receive no additional investigation.
Drops on the ocean in terms of time spent, but I bet she knows nothing can be done about the areas that actually use up significent time.
If she’s signalling to the Home Office that there needs to be meaningful reform to define what the police do, then fine, but to suggest the police will currently have much discretion as to what they can pick and choose they record would be misleading.
There’s no getting away from the fact police officer numbers are what we had in the 1980s, except now we have the internet and mobile phones.
La Liga said:
Drops on the ocean in terms of time spent, but I bet she knows nothing can be done about the areas that actually use up significent time.
If she’s signalling to the Home Office that there needs to be meaningful reform to define what the police do, then fine, but to suggest the police will currently have much discretion as to what they can pick and choose they record would be misleading.
This. It's empty rhetoric. Until there are changes from above, everything will continue as before. Wriggle room is zero.If she’s signalling to the Home Office that there needs to be meaningful reform to define what the police do, then fine, but to suggest the police will currently have much discretion as to what they can pick and choose they record would be misleading.
Derek Smith said:
La Liga said:
Drops on the ocean in terms of time spent, but I bet she knows nothing can be done about the areas that actually use up significent time.
If she’s signalling to the Home Office that there needs to be meaningful reform to define what the police do, then fine, but to suggest the police will currently have much discretion as to what they can pick and choose they record would be misleading.
This. It's empty rhetoric. Until there are changes from above, everything will continue as before. Wriggle room is zero.If she’s signalling to the Home Office that there needs to be meaningful reform to define what the police do, then fine, but to suggest the police will currently have much discretion as to what they can pick and choose they record would be misleading.
Exactly that, the more this is in the news / public eye, the more pressure there will be from higher up to announce / change priorities and resource allocations.
You can see with other items brought in the public eye recently how strong media (including social) is when it comes to pushing changes forward.
You can see with other items brought in the public eye recently how strong media (including social) is when it comes to pushing changes forward.
La Liga said:
The vast majority of policing time is spent on non-crime issues and this won’t change. That’s domestic abuse, mental health related issues, missing children, concern for people, anti-social behaviour etc.
Aren't two of the things on that list mainly crime (DV and ASB)?I do agree with the general sentiment of your post though. I often hear that Police will be freed up from non-core functions but all that seems to happen is that after each review an added layer of crap is inserted to justify not doing whatever it was in the first place, this then gets reviewed and we have to do the work twice when someone high up deals with a complaint and backs down.....
Atomic12C said:
Finally somebody has bothered to do a reality check.
Instead of investigating possible crimes committed by dead people and crimes relating to people's hurt feelings, somebody has opened their eyes in government and decided that crimes that cause real pain and suffering to victims should now be addressed.
I hope it gathers momentum and gets support - its what should really be happening. The 'dead people' is an odd one I presume its not spending millions and resourcing long investigations into dead MP's child molesting for all for nowt. Instead of investigating possible crimes committed by dead people and crimes relating to people's hurt feelings, somebody has opened their eyes in government and decided that crimes that cause real pain and suffering to victims should now be addressed.
There's a difference between prioritisation and 'remit'. The reality we have is the police remit is far too wide.
They're mainly non-crime but do have crimes within the 'umbrella' e.g. domestic assaults.
wgl2014 said:
La Liga said:
The vast majority of policing time is spent on non-crime issues and this won’t change. That’s domestic abuse, mental health related issues, missing children, concern for people, anti-social behaviour etc.
Aren't two of the things on that list mainly crime (DV and ASB)?La Liga said:
There’s no getting away from the fact police officer numbers are what we had in the 1980s, except now we have the internet and mobile phones.
Cat
Edited by Cat on Thursday 1st November 18:49
Yes and I wonder what percentage of those understand and will want to live by the laws of the land...I`m sure 99% are good people, but 1% is still 80,000!
I do not know much about the Police force and it structure, but if it is anything like any other government institution, it will be top heavy and far too inefficient (far more costly than it needs to be) with far too much arse covering red tape...but as usual the people at the coal face (Police Constables/sgts, nurses/Doctors etc) will be doing their absolute best (with exceptions of course) with what they are given...and they will be the ones feeling the most pressure.
Trouble is that without the right accountability at the top...senior snivel servants especially nothing will change. The politicians can control budgets, but they cannot control how money is wasted...although it would be true to say that they do a pretty good job of wasting it themselves too!
I do not know much about the Police force and it structure, but if it is anything like any other government institution, it will be top heavy and far too inefficient (far more costly than it needs to be) with far too much arse covering red tape...but as usual the people at the coal face (Police Constables/sgts, nurses/Doctors etc) will be doing their absolute best (with exceptions of course) with what they are given...and they will be the ones feeling the most pressure.
Trouble is that without the right accountability at the top...senior snivel servants especially nothing will change. The politicians can control budgets, but they cannot control how money is wasted...although it would be true to say that they do a pretty good job of wasting it themselves too!
The point is, from the point of view of the vast majority of the population this proposal is a no brainier.
There have to be priorities and the priority has to be fighting real crime not someone who calls in having perceived their gender has been slighted in some way. Gender etc ‘issues’ have a known perpetrator so IMO should at the very most be dealt with by going to a solicitor- which would knock most of them dead in the water anyway.
There have to be priorities and the priority has to be fighting real crime not someone who calls in having perceived their gender has been slighted in some way. Gender etc ‘issues’ have a known perpetrator so IMO should at the very most be dealt with by going to a solicitor- which would knock most of them dead in the water anyway.
V6 Pushfit said:
There have to be priorities and the priority has to be fighting real crime.
What do you think falls into the category of "real crime" ?There are differences in people's perception of crime and also how different types of crime affect different people.
For example, you may think a burglary dwelling trumps antisocial behaviour.
Not always the case when the impact on the victim is taken into account ...
Red 4 said:
What do you think falls into the category of "real crime" ?
Crime in the historical sense is a good place to start. Since the beginning of civilised society prevention of theft, murder and physical harm have been the the grounds of which laws have been based.In times where resources are scarce surely the most proven course of action is to focus on the basics.
caelite said:
Red 4 said:
What do you think falls into the category of "real crime" ?
Crime in the historical sense is a good place to start. Since the beginning of civilised society prevention of theft, murder and physical harm have been the the grounds of which laws have been based.In times where resources are scarce surely the most proven course of action is to focus on the basics.
Are you suggesting the most serious crimes should be dealt with ? Murder, serious assaults, gun/ knife crime, that kind of stuff ?
It's a fair comment (and I would expect these types of crime to be dealt with robustly) but these types of crime do not usually affect the vast majority of the public.
Joe Public wants his burglary investigating by a huge team of forensic investigators even when there is no evidence left at the scene, wants cars he thinks are speeding past his house reporting and wants the police to step in and sort the tit for tat feud he has been having with his neighbour for the last 10 years so he can claim victory.
The reality of what the police do (and what the public really expect of them) is massively different to just investigating serious crime.
It has been like this for a very long time (decades) and if there is suddenly a change in what the police will and will not deal with - there will be a backlash from the public.
83% of calls to the police are non-crime related.
There will be many unhappy people.
I'm not sure the bosses and the PCCs could cope with the criticism.
Much easier just to carry on as before (for some).
After all, they're not the ones dealing with the non-jobs and trying to fit everything else around that, whilst being castigated for not doing enough.
Kudos to any Chief who has the balls to meet the storm head-on though.
Sadly, ime, they are a rare breed.
Edited by Red 4 on Friday 2nd November 14:00
caelite said:
Red 4 said:
What do you think falls into the category of "real crime" ?
Crime in the historical sense is a good place to start. Since the beginning of civilised society prevention of theft, murder and physical harm have been the the grounds of which laws have been based.In times where resources are scarce surely the most proven course of action is to focus on the basics.
Career criminals will hate the idea.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff