No more singing policemen
Discussion
when will corporal punishment be reintroduced in schools and encouraged again at home?
To the do gooders and human righton'ists...
we now reap what you sowed in your middle class nirvanah.
get real.
and the police
start earning your wage rises before you start moaning about how small they are.
To the do gooders and human righton'ists...
we now reap what you sowed in your middle class nirvanah.
get real.
and the police
start earning your wage rises before you start moaning about how small they are.
Read that in The Times today. Interesting article until you realise how shit it is.
I wonder how many times the people who committed this crime had been put before the Courts because of the Police? Funny how we don't focus on the people who are put in place to punish / prevent reoffending.
I wonder how many times the people who committed this crime had been put before the Courts because of the Police? Funny how we don't focus on the people who are put in place to punish / prevent reoffending.
Presumably if their had been 2 officers in the victims street the offenders would have gone somewhere else.
I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
I wish he could have come to some of my briefings when I had 5 officers to cover a town of 80,000 people for 8 hours.
And each of them was given 2 jobs from the previous shift before they even started.
Sadly all this article displays is that this gentleman does not know what he is talking about.
I would have more respect for him if he joined the specials and contributed something to solving the problem, he then might see first handwhat I am talking about.
I tell you what I'll write an unresearched artcle about how shit journalists are, based on my own prejudices and see if anyone prints it.
I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
I wish he could have come to some of my briefings when I had 5 officers to cover a town of 80,000 people for 8 hours.
And each of them was given 2 jobs from the previous shift before they even started.
Sadly all this article displays is that this gentleman does not know what he is talking about.
I would have more respect for him if he joined the specials and contributed something to solving the problem, he then might see first handwhat I am talking about.
I tell you what I'll write an unresearched artcle about how shit journalists are, based on my own prejudices and see if anyone prints it.
Chrispy Porker said:
Presumably if their had been 2 officers in the victims street the offenders would have gone somewhere else.
I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
Police resourcing issues are of little concern to the victims of crime, and the sanctimonious words of apparatchik senior police officers trying to deflect the blame from the police force are of course MORE than adequate compensation to Mrs Newlove and her kids.I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
I do not pay the various taxes and levies that I do for an inadequately resourced police force that spends its life chasing meaningless but easy to measure targets. I do not pay them in order that the only time I ever see an actual policeman in town is when he's walking over to the sandwich shop for lunch. I do not pay them so that police officers can tell me on the phone that random damage to my vehicle is not sufficiently important for someone to pitch up, and here is my case number so that I can claim from my insurance. I do not pay them so that when I am the victim of a hit and run accident I can go for over a year without the whizzy ANPR (that all the police witter on about) tracking down an 54-plate car.
No, I pay them with a cheery grin so that I can hear wonderful reasons why it's perfectly acceptable for the police not to do their job.
The main murderer had already been in front of a Court within hours of the incident because of the work the Police had done! Exactly the getting stuck in to the gangs etc that writer wants and describes, no? How much 
ing more can they do? They charged him and tried to get him remanded, which failed. Where next? Follow him around 24/7 in case he turns into a total psycho and murders someone the same day?
Again, how much more can they do.
ing more can they do? They charged him and tried to get him remanded, which failed. Where next? Follow him around 24/7 in case he turns into a total psycho and murders someone the same day? Again, how much more can they do.
FishFace said:
Read that in The Times today. Interesting article until you realise how shit it is.
I wonder how many times the people who committed this crime had been put before the Courts because of the Police? Funny how we don't focus on the people who are put in place to punish / prevent reoffending.
The Times has run a lot of anti police articles since the time the Home Sec blocked the negotiated pay rise. It is what is not included in this article that is important. The ACC was putting his point of view to the government, not to the public. He was doing it on a public forum because what ACPO says is so often ignored by home secretaries.I wonder how many times the people who committed this crime had been put before the Courts because of the Police? Funny how we don't focus on the people who are put in place to punish / prevent reoffending.
I am not suggesting the the Times' report is political propaganda, I'm saying it is. Propaganda: simple, but not pure.
The vast majority of officderfs who are not after promotion long to deal with such scroats but are prevented doing so by the government's rules and regulations. We now police by targets. No chief constable can ignore them but all senior officers worth their pips and crowns ridicule them.
I had a controller complain to a Sussex chief constable on one of his morale building trips that the new guidelines prevented her from helping solve callers' problems. The chief then said, if you don't like what you're doing, then leave.
And this is repeated time and again. The job of the police is to tick boxes. It's not what the police officers themselves want and it is not what the public want. It is the fault of the government that the police are unable to be effective.
I knew the two most successful CID officers in my force for clearups. They visited prisons and got convicted offenders to cough to crimes they may or may not have committed. This ticked the right boxes but took two experienced officers off the streets and provided no service to the public in any way, shape or form. Yet the chap in charge of CID would have been severely criticised if he had pulled them off and got them doing proper work. And this is the fault of the government, not the police.
Forget what the Times says. It is political eyewash. You might was well believe what Blair spouts.
Spokey said:
Chrispy Porker said:
Presumably if their had been 2 officers in the victims street the offenders would have gone somewhere else.
I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
Police resourcing issues are of little concern to the victims of crime, and the sanctimonious words of apparatchik senior police officers trying to deflect the blame from the police force are of course MORE than adequate compensation to Mrs Newlove and her kids.I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
I do not pay the various taxes and levies that I do for an inadequately resourced police force that spends its life chasing meaningless but easy to measure targets. I do not pay them in order that the only time I ever see an actual policeman in town is when he's walking over to the sandwich shop for lunch. I do not pay them so that police officers can tell me on the phone that random damage to my vehicle is not sufficiently important for someone to pitch up, and here is my case number so that I can claim from my insurance. I do not pay them so that when I am the victim of a hit and run accident I can go for over a year without the whizzy ANPR (that all the police witter on about) tracking down an 54-plate car.
No, I pay them with a cheery grin so that I can hear wonderful reasons why it's perfectly acceptable for the police not to do their job.
If you were a sgt with 5 available officers in a large town, and 10 jobs that need attending urgently how would you deploy them.?
Bear in mind new jobs are coming in all the time...............oops times up. There's another one.
PLease tell me.
I may learn something.
Derek Smith said:
FishFace said:
Read that in The Times today. Interesting article until you realise how shit it is.
I wonder how many times the people who committed this crime had been put before the Courts because of the Police? Funny how we don't focus on the people who are put in place to punish / prevent reoffending.
The Times has run a lot of anti police articles since the time the Home Sec blocked the negotiated pay rise. It is what is not included in this article that is important. The ACC was putting his point of view to the government, not to the public. He was doing it on a public forum because what ACPO says is so often ignored by home secretaries.I wonder how many times the people who committed this crime had been put before the Courts because of the Police? Funny how we don't focus on the people who are put in place to punish / prevent reoffending.
I am not suggesting the the Times' report is political propaganda, I'm saying it is. Propaganda: simple, but not pure.
The vast majority of officderfs who are not after promotion long to deal with such scroats but are prevented doing so by the government's rules and regulations. We now police by targets. No chief constable can ignore them but all senior officers worth their pips and crowns ridicule them.
I had a controller complain to a Sussex chief constable on one of his morale building trips that the new guidelines prevented her from helping solve callers' problems. The chief then said, if you don't like what you're doing, then leave.
And this is repeated time and again. The job of the police is to tick boxes. It's not what the police officers themselves want and it is not what the public want. It is the fault of the government that the police are unable to be effective.
I knew the two most successful CID officers in my force for clearups. They visited prisons and got convicted offenders to cough to crimes they may or may not have committed. This ticked the right boxes but took two experienced officers off the streets and provided no service to the public in any way, shape or form. Yet the chap in charge of CID would have been severely criticised if he had pulled them off and got them doing proper work. And this is the fault of the government, not the police.
Forget what the Times says. It is political eyewash. You might was well believe what Blair spouts.
I thought it was as if an editor had stuck his head round the office door and said 'Oh give me the usual 1500 words on how crap the police are . No hurry, when you get back from the pub will do...'
Chrispy Porker said:
Spokey said:
Chrispy Porker said:
Presumably if their had been 2 officers in the victims street the offenders would have gone somewhere else.
I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
Police resourcing issues are of little concern to the victims of crime, and the sanctimonious words of apparatchik senior police officers trying to deflect the blame from the police force are of course MORE than adequate compensation to Mrs Newlove and her kids.I wish I had enough officers to put one in every street where there might be trouble.
I think this journo ought to look at the resourcing issue before trying to tell professional supervisors how to manage what little staff they have got.
I do not pay the various taxes and levies that I do for an inadequately resourced police force that spends its life chasing meaningless but easy to measure targets. I do not pay them in order that the only time I ever see an actual policeman in town is when he's walking over to the sandwich shop for lunch. I do not pay them so that police officers can tell me on the phone that random damage to my vehicle is not sufficiently important for someone to pitch up, and here is my case number so that I can claim from my insurance. I do not pay them so that when I am the victim of a hit and run accident I can go for over a year without the whizzy ANPR (that all the police witter on about) tracking down an 54-plate car.
No, I pay them with a cheery grin so that I can hear wonderful reasons why it's perfectly acceptable for the police not to do their job.
If you were a sgt with 5 available officers in a large town, and 10 jobs that need attending urgently how would you deploy them.?
Bear in mind new jobs are coming in all the time...............oops times up. There's another one.
PLease tell me.
I may learn something.
Derek Smith said:
The ACC was putting his point of view to the government, not to the public. He was doing it on a public forum because what ACPO says is so often ignored by home secretaries.
The ACC came across as a complete arse. Instead of trying to play politician, he should have been telling the residents of Cheshire what steps he would be taking to try and prevent any repetition of this tragedy. The people of Warrington would I'm sure, have been heartened to hear of some resulting zero tolerance policing initiative or other direct action from the ACC. Instead, many like the Times journo will be wondering why they are paying his wages .
The useless inadequate git should be charged with bringing the force into disrepute and replaced by someone with a spine.
The real world of policing, I would say no.
How can you unless you have taken part.
The public only see the product, not what goes on behind the scenes.
You may consider that what happens beneath the waterline is not relevant. But before you can criticise the competance of police supervisors surely it would be as well to know what it is they actually do.
How can you unless you have taken part.
The public only see the product, not what goes on behind the scenes.
You may consider that what happens beneath the waterline is not relevant. But before you can criticise the competance of police supervisors surely it would be as well to know what it is they actually do.
sparkythecat said:
Derek Smith said:
The ACC was putting his point of view to the government, not to the public. He was doing it on a public forum because what ACPO says is so often ignored by home secretaries.
The ACC came across as a complete arse. Instead of trying to play politician, he should have been telling the residents of Cheshire what steps he would be taking to try and prevent any repetition of this tragedy. The people of Warrington would I'm sure, have been heartened to hear of some resulting zero tolerance policing initiative or other direct action from the ACC. Instead, many like the Times journo will be wondering why they are paying his wages .
The useless inadequate git should be charged with bringing the force into disrepute and replaced by someone with a spine.
Any BiB worth their salt could tell you exactly who the repeat offenders are and who is likely to progress to committing serious crimes long before they actually go on to commit them.
Unfortunately the police can only report the evidence available and in some circumstances make recommendations as to what course of action should be used.
I'm sure I speak for the majority of us when I say that it is extremelt disheartening for us when these recommendations are ignored by social work or the courts and they are allowed to roam free yet again.
Guess who's left to go through the whole process again or face a neurotic media backlash when they then go on to commit further offences?
G51CAV said:
So the police adopt a zero tolerance approach, I can almost hear the public and civil liberties outcry now.
Any BiB worth their salt could tell you exactly who the repeat offenders are and who is likely to progress to committing serious crimes long before they actually go on to commit them.
Unfortunately the police can only report the evidence available and in some circumstances make recommendations as to what course of action should be used.
I'm sure I speak for the majority of us when I say that it is extremelt disheartening for us when these recommendations are ignored by social work or the courts and they are allowed to roam free yet again.
Guess who's left to go through the whole process again or face a neurotic media backlash when they then go on to commit further offences?
If BiB "worth their salt" know who the repeat offenders are, then surely they don't need to wait for them to commit further offences and try to prove their guilt. Wouldn't it be better to pre-empt this and use disruptive tactics to stop them offending in the first place ? Any BiB worth their salt could tell you exactly who the repeat offenders are and who is likely to progress to committing serious crimes long before they actually go on to commit them.
Unfortunately the police can only report the evidence available and in some circumstances make recommendations as to what course of action should be used.
I'm sure I speak for the majority of us when I say that it is extremelt disheartening for us when these recommendations are ignored by social work or the courts and they are allowed to roam free yet again.
Guess who's left to go through the whole process again or face a neurotic media backlash when they then go on to commit further offences?
That way they wouldn't need to either, blame the failings of courts and social workers or "face a neurotic media backlash" thus obliging them to trot out some complete arse of an ACC
Chrispy Porker said:
The real world of policing, I would say no.
How can you unless you have taken part.
The public only see the product, not what goes on behind the scenes.
You may consider that what happens beneath the waterline is not relevant. But before you can criticise the competance of police supervisors surely it would be as well to know what it is they actually do.
I don't live in the real world of policing. I live in the real world of being a victim of crime. And as an occasional victim of crime, I feel that the police are as much use as tits on a bull. Now, you can hem and haw about why it's so difficult for you, but the fact of the matter is that as "your" customer, "you" give a shit service. Not you personally, but the police in all my dealings with themHow can you unless you have taken part.
The public only see the product, not what goes on behind the scenes.
You may consider that what happens beneath the waterline is not relevant. But before you can criticise the competance of police supervisors surely it would be as well to know what it is they actually do.
I can imagine what my customers would say if I told them it was tough shit that their systems were down because we were under-resourced because my manager was incompetent. How come it's different for you?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff