Police spend no time investigating certain crimes

Burnsy summed it up before I could even post.

All comes down to cost, it isn't worth the cost of them coming out.
Everything is down to money over responsibility.
 
If you want crimes like burglary and car theft to be solved then everyone needs fitting with a tracking device. Otherwise there's no way to solve them all.

Edit: Obviously I'm not in favour of that.
 
There is no incentive in state police forces to investigate and solve crime and even prevent crime.

By contrast as an example, in SA everyone pays private security too look after their homes due to the amount of burgarly and lack of police. When you pay for private police you see how police should operate, they come around to your house and they assign you a security officer who does a security audit of your house. He then makes a note of all the people that live there and where they sleep. Then you have a button in your house that you press and within 2 mins they are at your door and they know who lives there and who should be there. Even if its a false alarm they will still insist on searching your house and back garden for security reasons.

Similar story a guy car was stolen while on a trip in europe in france. He was german, he went to french police, they filed a report and added it to a pile and were not very enthusiastic about it ever being found, weeks later he went back to germany and contacted his insurance about the theft, within 3 days the insurance company had tracked down the vehicle and delivered it to his house.
 
It is a shame where we have a 2 tier policing system, I do understand the lack of resourcing has driven them to make certain choices but it does not make good reading for victims of the crime.
 
GAC said:
stolen from a locked stone shed at the back of my house, the door and frame where flat and dry and perfect to get prints from id imagine.

the kicker is i knew who stole it and he was seen with it by a couple of people yet the police didnt seem interested and wrote it off and sent me yet another letter with a crime number.
Click to expand...

It's a difficult but predictable situation. When you don't have enough resources to investigate all crimes, what do you do? Don't investigate the less serious crimes that either can't be solved or are very expensive to investigate. It's a crap situation but what other option do the Police have?
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It's a difficult but predictable situation. When you don't have enough resources to investigate all crimes, what do you do? Don't investigate the less serious crimes that either can't be solved or are very expensive to investigate. It's a crap situation but what other option do the Police have?
Click to expand...

What resources do they need? they have everything they need. they just do not allocate their time adequately, they spend too much time doing crowd control and not enough time investigating crimes. They also waste too much on victimless crimes and they also have their time wasted a lot. When i was arrested for section 5, for shouting at the police officer. They wasted 30-1 hour with me, they should be investigating real crime. Also they spend so much time doing simple things, like arresting someone for something insignificant, they spend like hours processing them and so on. It should just be a on the spot penalty notice and that's it but they want to waste their time by booking them in and all that.

I bet if there was an independent audit of the police activity, most of the activity will just be time wasting.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It's a difficult but predictable situation. When you don't have enough resources to investigate all crimes, what do you do? Don't investigate the less serious crimes that either can't be solved or are very expensive to investigate. It's a crap situation but what other option do the Police have?
Click to expand...

It may cost a lot or be difficult, but in the long run surely a product use of police time, imagine for instance you knew you could get away with low level crime without punishment, what do you think is likely to deter the criminal from trying their luck with something a bit more mid or high level.

Identifying and deterring at the beginning is better than ignoring and punishing later on. There are plenty of real life examples of this in society.
 
Last edited:
If the police spend time protecting you and your property they won't have time to spy on animal rights campaigners or cannabis smokers or protect the frackers destroying the countryside get your priorities right.
 
I'm curious as to what people would want the police to actually do in the case of (using one of the examples above) a bike stolen from a shed, with no witnesses, no CCTV and no fingerprints?
 
Haggisman said:
I'm curious as to what people would want the police to actually do in the case of (using one of the examples above) a bike stolen from a shed, with no witnesses, no CCTV and no fingerprints?
Click to expand...

How about verify that there were no witnesses, no CCTV and no fingerprints?
 
scorza said:
How about verify that there were no witnesses, no CCTV and no fingerprints?
Click to expand...

Well, I would hope the person who's just had their bike stolen would know if they had CCTV or not ;)

As for witnesses, check how exactly? Put up a poster on your front door asking people to come forward if they saw anything suspicious?

The fingerprints one I'll give you, although any burglar with more than 2 braincells to rub together would be wearing gloves anyway.
 
I don't think it's a case of the police not caring, if you spoke to anyone serving in the police I'm sure the overwhelming majority would wish they could help more and helping people was one of the reason's they joined.

The police themselves aren't to blame, the same way the doctors and nurses aren't to blame with problems in the NHS. It's the management, budgets, paperwork and targets that's killing the ability of these people to do their jobs effectively.
 
Speeding is much more important to stamp out, those people doing 53MPH in a 50 zone need to be hunted down and exterminate.
 
anything I don't mind said:
What resources do they need? they have everything they need. they just do not allocate their time adequately, they spend too much time doing crowd control and not enough time investigating crimes. They also waste too much on victimless crimes and they also have their time wasted a lot. When i was arrested for section 5, for shouting at the police officer. They wasted 30-1 hour with me, they should be investigating real crime. Also they spend so much time doing simple things, like arresting someone for something insignificant, they spend like hours processing them and so on. It should just be a on the spot penalty notice and that's it but they want to waste their time by booking them in and all that.

I bet if there was an independent audit of the police activity, most of the activity will just be time wasting.
Click to expand...

If you don't do crowd control and you get an affray, suddenly you'll have 5-10+ assaults to investigate. That's obviously not ideal.

As for your s5. Don't be an arse and you won't get nicked. You can't complain for being dealt with when you blatantly breaking the law in front of a police officer.

ChroniC said:
It may cost a lot or be difficult, but in the long run surely a product use of police time, imagine for instance you knew you could get away with low level crime without punishment, what do you think is likely to deter the criminal from trying their luck with something a bit more mid or high level.

Identifying and deterring at the beginning is better than ignoring and punishing later on. There are plenty of real life examples of this in society.
Click to expand...

I agree, but if you don't have the resources then as sensible as this is, it's not an option. We're doing more incident firefighting than crime prevention these days.

Whilst police officer numbers have gone down, they haven't been slashed like police staff numbers have. That means that police officers have to do much more admin that otherwise would have been done by someone else.
 
Haggisman said:
Well, I would hope the person who's just had their bike stolen would know if they had CCTV or not ;)
Click to expand...

Well there might be CCTV on the streets nearby. I keep hearing about the civil liberties brigade bleating on about how much surveillance there is in this country, why don't we actually use it to our benefit. The police should be better at knowing where CCTV cameras are than the victim of the crime.

Haggisman said:
As for witnesses, check how exactly? Put up a poster on your front door asking people to come forward if they saw anything suspicious?
Click to expand...

They can ask the neighbours, re-assure the public that the crime is actually taken seriously.

Haggisman said:
The fingerprints one I'll give you, although any burglar with more than 2 braincells to rub together would be wearing gloves anyway.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but if the police don't even bother checking then it just makes it easier for the burglars.
 
Haggisman said:
I'm curious as to what people would want the police to actually do in the case of (using one of the examples above) a bike stolen from a shed, with no witnesses, no CCTV and no fingerprints?
Click to expand...

If there are no outstanding lines of enquiry, then the job will just be filed. It may come up in wider MO analysis though and be reopened when more evidence comes to light.

scorza said:
How about verify that there were no witnesses, no CCTV and no fingerprints?
Click to expand...

We don't have the people to do that for every bike theft or criminal damage.

the_chicco said:
They haven't done bugger all for years!
Click to expand...

My team's workboxes say otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom