Sad HYS comment from serving BiB
Discussion
This is in the HYS about "Have government targets destroyed trust in police?".
BBC HYS said:
I Police a middle England Market town and have found myself along with my shift colleagues forced into target Policing. An unnecessary use of fixed penalty notices against motorists, being criticised for using discretion, as "I would not achieve my monthly figures". Easy and unnecessary arrests to boost my volume crime figures. a league table chart in the office for all shifts, league tables on the computer. I have 20 years front line experience and i am ashamed of what i am doing for stats.
Jon, North East Essex
Any BiBs recognise this picture or is it just a one-off?Jon, North East Essex
mark69sheer said:
One good way to alienate people like myself. I actually believe very strongly in law and order but more strongly in punishments fitting crimes at all spectrums.
I'm just as disgusted with the average murder getting an average two and a half years inside.
Mark I can't believe it but on this occasion I 100% agree with what you have said!!!!I'm just as disgusted with the average murder getting an average two and a half years inside.
My own force has I am happy to say resisted this and I hope it remains that way.
The big problem is that police forces are no longer being run as a public service, they have to have business plans for Christs sake!
This is down to them having to prove to the government that they require a certain amount of funding to function. More often than not this figure is renegotiated and not the full amount is handed over.
To try and combat this some forces appear to be employing this tactic to keep the figures up to try and ensure they get the required funding.
I for one could not work like that and I can only imagine what the morale in the force referred to is like.
G51CAV said:
The big problem is that police forces are no longer being run as a public service, they have to have business plans for Christs sake!
This is down to them having to prove to the government that they require a certain amount of funding to function. More often than not this figure is renegotiated and not the full amount is handed over.
To try and combat this some forces appear to be employing this tactic to keep the figures up to try and ensure they get the required funding.
I for one could not work like that and I can only imagine what the morale in the force referred to is like.
I don't have a problem with the idea of the police bring treated like a business, in fact I'd like to see this principle extended.This is down to them having to prove to the government that they require a certain amount of funding to function. More often than not this figure is renegotiated and not the full amount is handed over.
To try and combat this some forces appear to be employing this tactic to keep the figures up to try and ensure they get the required funding.
I for one could not work like that and I can only imagine what the morale in the force referred to is like.
However, real businesses aren't targeted on sheer volume of activity, they have to actually achieve something. For instance, why not reward traffic police based on the level of deaths and serious injuries in their area each year? Cue big shift from issuing scamera tickets to driver education, drink/drug testing and targeting lunatic unlicensed/uninsured numpties.
Markbishop said:
G51CAV said:
The big problem is that police forces are no longer being run as a public service, they have to have business plans for Christs sake!
This is down to them having to prove to the government that they require a certain amount of funding to function. More often than not this figure is renegotiated and not the full amount is handed over.
To try and combat this some forces appear to be employing this tactic to keep the figures up to try and ensure they get the required funding.
I for one could not work like that and I can only imagine what the morale in the force referred to is like.
I don't have a problem with the idea of the police bring treated like a business, in fact I'd like to see this principle extended.This is down to them having to prove to the government that they require a certain amount of funding to function. More often than not this figure is renegotiated and not the full amount is handed over.
To try and combat this some forces appear to be employing this tactic to keep the figures up to try and ensure they get the required funding.
I for one could not work like that and I can only imagine what the morale in the force referred to is like.
However, real businesses aren't targeted on sheer volume of activity, they have to actually achieve something. For instance, why not reward traffic police based on the level of deaths and serious injuries in their area each year? Cue big shift from issuing scamera tickets to driver education, drink/drug testing and targeting lunatic unlicensed/uninsured numpties.
Just how long has this been going on ,or the truth now being revealed --- few years ago we had cause to report a few things like a broken window ( thrown stone ) to get a crime report for Landlord to get fixed .Apologised to PC at time for bothering him -reply was that although they might not get a result - the more reports might lead to no reduction in strength or perhaps even more funding - so keep them coming. And that was a few years ago.
Jasandjules said:
Why should the police be run as a business? It is a Service, a public force, one which has a simple aim, to Serve and Protect the public. By catching criminals and preventing crimes where possible.
Easier said than done, but there we go.
So targets should be on reducing the number of crimes committed, not on crimes detected. We all want to see less crime, not more prosecutions. They are different!Easier said than done, but there we go.
OK, a bit simplistic perhaps. We also want to see crimes detected when they've been committed. But that's secondary to stopping them in the first place.
Peter Ward said:
Jasandjules said:
Why should the police be run as a business? It is a Service, a public force, one which has a simple aim, to Serve and Protect the public. By catching criminals and preventing crimes where possible.
Easier said than done, but there we go.
So targets should be on reducing the number of crimes committed, not on crimes detected. We all want to see less crime, not more prosecutions. They are different!Easier said than done, but there we go.
OK, a bit simplistic perhaps. We also want to see crimes detected when they've been committed. But that's secondary to stopping them in the first place.
On placing a requirement on individual officers to deliver a certain number of cases or tickets you would be taking away what is arguably the best tool any police officer has, Discretion!
Here's a suggestion or 2:
Instead of taking the BiB's off the streets to fill out 6 forms for and offence/arrest they put all the details on a computer and it does it automatically! OR (even better than that) have officers that have been removed from the beat for health reasons/retirement working in a processing department who liaise with the officers on the beat so that details are recorded immediately and properly.
Secondly, give officers back the power to pick up scrotes by the scruff of the neck and scare the bejeezers outta them without fear of retribution (teachers should have the same powers too, imo).
Thirdly, stop using cameras instead of eyes and common sense! The trust has been eroded between the public and the Police to such as extent the public generally now turns a blind eye to crime and says "not my problem, mate"
Instead of taking the BiB's off the streets to fill out 6 forms for and offence/arrest they put all the details on a computer and it does it automatically! OR (even better than that) have officers that have been removed from the beat for health reasons/retirement working in a processing department who liaise with the officers on the beat so that details are recorded immediately and properly.
Secondly, give officers back the power to pick up scrotes by the scruff of the neck and scare the bejeezers outta them without fear of retribution (teachers should have the same powers too, imo).
Thirdly, stop using cameras instead of eyes and common sense! The trust has been eroded between the public and the Police to such as extent the public generally now turns a blind eye to crime and says "not my problem, mate"
justamin said:
Here's a suggestion or 2:
Instead of taking the BiB's off the streets to fill out 6 forms for and offence/arrest they put all the details on a computer and it does it automatically!
Oh no! Not another computer system that will cost a fortune, be delivered late and not work properly when it is delivered.Instead of taking the BiB's off the streets to fill out 6 forms for and offence/arrest they put all the details on a computer and it does it automatically!
justamin said:
OR (even better than that) have officers that have been removed from the beat for health reasons/retirement working in a processing department who liaise with the officers on the beat so that details are recorded immediately and properly.
So long as the retired officers are working for a different force or company (to protect their pension rights), they could supplement civilian staff in the back-office or even on the front desk. Good idea.justamin said:
Secondly, give officers back the power to pick up scrotes by the scruff of the neck and scare the bejeezers outta them without fear of retribution (teachers should have the same powers too, imo).
No arguments there!justamin said:
Thirdly, stop using cameras instead of eyes and common sense! The trust has been eroded between the public and the Police to such as extent the public generally now turns a blind eye to crime and says "not my problem, mate"
And none there, either!Streaky
PS - on your last point, see: Fighting back against CCTV ... USA style and A London road has 102 CCTV cameras in 2 miles - S
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff