Senior Police Officer fined for mobile use
Discussion
A bit of a silly thing for Strathclyde Police Chief Superintendent Kenny Scott to do considering his job. Well done the traffic officers for not letting him off. Phone law traps officer
The 4th comment on the article is interesting, though may elicit a response...
They are the main problem with law and order, a pack of mindless drones, following the 'letter of the law' WHEN IT SUITS THEM!!!!!! Police wages? Fine, Crime Rate skyrocketing! Give them a bonus, SACK THEM FOR INCOMPETENCE!!
They are the main problem with law and order, a pack of mindless drones, following the 'letter of the law' WHEN IT SUITS THEM!!!!!! Police wages? Fine, Crime Rate skyrocketing! Give them a bonus, SACK THEM FOR INCOMPETENCE!!
jasandjules said:
And I am sure he breaks the speed limit often too. It isn't the end of the world, just a shame that the Govt appear to want to ensure that motoring is as horrible and offensive as possible.
A pity they don't feel so strongly about robbery, rape, burglary etc..
A pity they don't feel so strongly about robbery, rape, burglary etc..
But Policing plan priorities & distribution of Police resources (comparing roads Policing with more serious crime), undermines that statement.
jasandjules said:
Conviction rates however verify that statement.
The conviction rate (result) doesn't reveal how strongly those attempting to deal with the problem feel about it as you seem to suggest. The greater indicator of that feeling is how they deploy their resources (action) in an attempting to deal with the problem.
You don't after all, dismiss a football teams efforts based simply on the number of goals they score.
There are also the defensive qualities to consider (prevention) & if we look at the BCS we have seen massive reductions in both violent crime & household acquisition crime over the past 10 years.
Sorry but I beg to differ.
Changing the names/classification of crimes and refusing to log them as crimes does not mean they don't exist.
Basically, as with everything to do with this Govt, lies to support the statistical "target".
Sadly, targets are easily met by speed cameras. Not too easily met by finding car thieves and burglars. Much the same as the clear up rate Just before targets are due being upped by putting every officer on the street. Once the target date has passed, the crime rates go back up as officers are taken back off the streets.
Changing the names/classification of crimes and refusing to log them as crimes does not mean they don't exist.
Basically, as with everything to do with this Govt, lies to support the statistical "target".
Sadly, targets are easily met by speed cameras. Not too easily met by finding car thieves and burglars. Much the same as the clear up rate Just before targets are due being upped by putting every officer on the street. Once the target date has passed, the crime rates go back up as officers are taken back off the streets.
jasandjules said:
Sorry but I beg to differ.
Changing the names/classification of crimes and refusing to log them as crimes does not mean they don't exist.
Basically, as with everything to do with this Govt, lies to support the statistical "target".
Sadly, targets are easily met by speed cameras. Not too easily met by finding car thieves and burglars. Much the same as the clear up rate Just before targets are due being upped by putting every officer on the street. Once the target date has passed, the crime rates go back up as officers are taken back off the streets.
Changing the names/classification of crimes and refusing to log them as crimes does not mean they don't exist.
Basically, as with everything to do with this Govt, lies to support the statistical "target".
Sadly, targets are easily met by speed cameras. Not too easily met by finding car thieves and burglars. Much the same as the clear up rate Just before targets are due being upped by putting every officer on the street. Once the target date has passed, the crime rates go back up as officers are taken back off the streets.
Well we've seen roads Policing numbers steadily decline as a proportion of total officers for many years (from something like 15% to 5% of service strength). 1999/2000 to 2000/2001 saw a 12% reduction (517 officers) in their numbers alone. So it is not a case of movement just before targets being due as you suggest. That in itself displays that the Police are targeting their resources away from road traffic offending & towards other matters, displaying the higher degree of importance placed on those other matters.
vonhosen said:
jasandjules said:
And I am sure he breaks the speed limit often too. It isn't the end of the world, just a shame that the Govt appear to want to ensure that motoring is as horrible and offensive as possible.
A pity they don't feel so strongly about robbery, rape, burglary etc..
A pity they don't feel so strongly about robbery, rape, burglary etc..
But Policing plan priorities & distribution of Police resources (comparing roads Policing with more serious crime), undermines that statement.
Jasandjules referred to "Govt" priorities, not "Police" priorities.
It's best when police officers use their discretion appropriately and in a grown-up way, which they usually do.
One cannot blame them, however, if they choose to enforce the law rigidly. When something in law enforcement is wrong, it's usually the "law" part.
flemke said:
vonhosen said:
jasandjules said:
And I am sure he breaks the speed limit often too. It isn't the end of the world, just a shame that the Govt appear to want to ensure that motoring is as horrible and offensive as possible.
A pity they don't feel so strongly about robbery, rape, burglary etc..
A pity they don't feel so strongly about robbery, rape, burglary etc..
But Policing plan priorities & distribution of Police resources (comparing roads Policing with more serious crime), undermines that statement.
Jasandjules referred to "Govt" priorities, not "Police" priorities.
It's best when police officers use their discretion appropriately and in a grown-up way, which they usually do.
One cannot blame them, however, if they choose to enforce the law rigidly. When something in law enforcement is wrong, it's usually the "law" part.
Policing plans/priorities are based on an amalgamation of the National Policing Plan (3 year plan published by the Home Office) & local priorities, which will be expressed by local government & communities.
vonhosen said:
There are also the defensive qualities to consider (prevention) & if we look at the BCS we have seen massive reductions in both violent crime & household acquisition crime over the past 10 years.
Sorry to go a little off topic- but with regards to household burglary, isn't the fall very much to do with the falling value of electronics and other typically stolen items such as DVDs and CDs? When you can buy a brand new DVD player for £20 odd, and music/ films can be downloaded/copied on the cheap, the market for those typical stolen goods becomes far less, I would imagine.
Not that we want that fact to stop the Government heralding such great statistics.
10 Pence Short said:
vonhosen said:
There are also the defensive qualities to consider (prevention) & if we look at the BCS we have seen massive reductions in both violent crime & household acquisition crime over the past 10 years.
Sorry to go a little off topic- but with regards to household burglary, isn't the fall very much to do with the falling value of electronics and other typically stolen items such as DVDs and CDs? When you can buy a brand new DVD player for £20 odd, and music/ films can be downloaded/copied on the cheap, the market for those typical stolen goods becomes far less, I would imagine.
Not that we want that fact to stop the Government heralding such great statistics.
No, it's the reclassification of burglaries to criminal damage (or something similar) - so burglaries go down. It's complete crap when they say the rate of burglary is going down.
nobleguy said:
10 Pence Short said:
vonhosen said:
There are also the defensive qualities to consider (prevention) & if we look at the BCS we have seen massive reductions in both violent crime & household acquisition crime over the past 10 years.
Sorry to go a little off topic- but with regards to household burglary, isn't the fall very much to do with the falling value of electronics and other typically stolen items such as DVDs and CDs? When you can buy a brand new DVD player for £20 odd, and music/ films can be downloaded/copied on the cheap, the market for those typical stolen goods becomes far less, I would imagine.
Not that we want that fact to stop the Government heralding such great statistics.
No, it's the reclassification of burglaries to criminal damage (or something similar) - so burglaries go down. It's complete crap when they say the rate of burglary is going down.
Criminal damage is not a household acquisitional crime. Burglary may or may not be.
There has to be an element of acquisition for it to be an acquisitional crime & it has to be within a household for it to be a household acquisitional crime.
That will mean only offences such as residential burglaries that involve theft, or other thefts that happen within residential premises qualify.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff