Declining attitude to law and order

Status
Not open for further replies.
Judges on the streets.

In general the Police are excellent (traffic cops aside) and the term minimal force needs to be dropped and replaced with a "good kick-in" and zero paperwork to go with it.
 
Hades said:
Every one has 'rights' nowadays. They can't be criticised. They can't be reprimanded and teachers can't discipline school kids. They grow up with no respect for authority. There are very few male teachers because we are led to believe that many men who want to work with teachers are predators. There is less discipline in the home too where many young men are brought up by single mothers. So there are few direct male role models in these people's lives.

Then they get out into the real world and the situation is similar. They learn that being aggressive and shouting gets you further than being respectful, because people are scared to challenge them.

Having fewer police, combined with much weaker police (reduction of the physical requirements to become an officer - done in the interests of inclusion and equality) means they know they have a good chance of avoiding arrest.

It's going to get a lot worse.
Click to expand...

Nail on head.
 
azazl187 said:
What by wildly swinging her night stick around? All 3 of them were useless in this case and in my eyes non of them had a hand on the situation from an individual perspective or group
Click to expand...

I'm not saying she had things under control. I'm saying that she was outmatched and wasn't backed up by her colleagues.

I think the people being recruited in to the police these days are the academic types who don't mind form filling. All of the police in the video didn't have any intimidatory qualities at all. The only one that had size on his side was pepper spraying the offender.
 
Tefal said:
Still way less crime than there used to be.

So all this rose tinted stuff seems a bit odd
Click to expand...

The crime survey was debunked a couple of months ago in a thread.

It limits the amount of crime that can be reported to 5 times per year, and it also excludes most of the crimes increasing today.

Here is an excerpt about it;

Professor Ken Pease, former acting head of the Home Office's police research group, and Professor Graham Farrell of Loughborough University, estimated in 2007 that the survey was underreporting crime by about 3 million incidents per year due to its practice of arbitrarily capping the number of crimes one can be victimised by in a given year at five. If true the error means that violent crime might actually stand at 4.4 million incidents per year, an 82% increase over the 2.4 million previously thought. Since the five crimes per person cap has been consistent since the BCS began this might not affect the long-term trends, however it takes little account of crimes such as domestic violence, figures for which would allegedly be 140% higher without the cap. The ONS has responded by explaining that because victims of ongoing abuse often are unable to recall the detail and number of specific incidents it makes sense to record this crime as a series of repeat victimisation. These are only recorded in this manner if the incidents described were ‘the same thing, done under the same circumstances and probably by the same people’. Because the number of victims captured by the survey that experience high levels of repeat victimisation are relatively low, spurious volatility in the data will occur from year to year. However, the ONS has admitted that the cap of 5 incidents is crude and will be publishing a review. This will also "explore alternative approaches to dealing with high frequency repeat victimisation."

Lord de Mauley has said the BCS omits rape, assault, drug offences, fraud, forgery, crime against businesses and murder, while accepting that it "is accepted as a gold standard by most British academics and internationally".

One criticism is that both the youth survey and the adult surveys do not distinguish between a) crimes not reported to the police because they thought the police would do nothing or b) crimes not reported to the police because the victim thought them too trivial
Click to expand...
 
Chris Wilson said:
The Swedish police are armed and obliged to carry their firearm when on duty in public places, so why the hell didn't those female cops put some lead in him? No wonder the public are voting Right, what a carry on... In Russia or the US he'd have looked like a colander after that.
Click to expand...

Check out what is happening with Sweden. Those female officers probably have a mandate NOT to shoot immigrants. The Swedish government have constantly covered up/not investigated crimes that are associated to immigrants in their country.
 
BowdonUK said:
The crime survey was debunked a couple of months ago in a thread.

It limits the amount of crime that can be reported to 5 times per year, and it also excludes most of the crimes increasing today.

Here is an excerpt about it;
Click to expand...


Your own quote says it's always been that way so won't have affeed the results when comparing between years

But does stop somone being finally convicted of domestic abuse from massivly distorting the stats
 
BowdonUK said:
The crime survey was debunked a couple of months ago in a thread.

It limits the amount of crime that can be reported to 5 times per year, and it also excludes most of the crimes increasing today.

Here is an excerpt about it;
Click to expand...

That's interesting to know the limitations of the study, but I think going as far to suggest it's "debunked".
 
Orionaut said:
Elsewhere in the news.

Of course, the big problem is that we do not have enough ex-cons in the Judiciary.

Having a few more criminals on the bench will, of course, solve everything!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...st-diversity-end-chronic-shortage-judges.html

<Insert "Cry" emoticon here...!>
Click to expand...

The thing is, i am a believer in serving time and coming out the other end clean. Some crimes are a portrayal of a character that is unsuitable to enter the system but lets not pretend there is no benefit to having the reformed serve in one way or another. Labeling people as criminals forever does not really help anyone.

Criminal justice is a tricky and i can most definitely see the benefit with such a policy. The article seems to push it is for the sake of diversifying and appeasing rather than to improve our justice system. Having people have have gone through it and have seen that side of it may make a difference. Obviously these people would likely undergo a fair amount of vetting. Working to make a system where punishment does not take precedent over reform is important to reducing crime and making sure the system does not fail people who could become useful and functional members of society.

The policy reminds me of those who have had struggles with mental health or addiction becoming people who offer support for others years after their recovery. You may say these people are unsuitable because of their past mental instability or addiction but reality is that these people end up as some of the best people to help others going through their struggles.
 
Avenged7Fold said:
The thing is, i am a believer in serving time and coming out the other end clean. Some crimes are a portrayal of a character that is unsuitable to enter the system but lets not pretend there is no benefit to having the reformed serve in one way or another. Labeling people as criminals forever does not really help anyone.
Click to expand...

Within reason, I've always felt that it's a very good idea - to take reformed criminals and let them serve in the justice system. I suppose the only real problem, is that the higher levels of the criminal justice system, are currently governed by such a bunch of total cretins, that any ideas that might improve things, would probably never be considered. According to them; we just need to keep doing the same thing over and over again for infinity, even though on the whole - it never really works...
 
Screeeech said:
Within reason, I've always felt that it's a very good idea - to take reformed criminals and let them serve in the justice system. I suppose the only real problem, is that the higher levels of the criminal justice system, are currently governed by such a bunch of total cretins, that any ideas that might improve things, would probably never be considered. According to them; we just need to keep doing the same thing over and over again for infinity, even though on the whole - it never really works...
Click to expand...

In all seriousness, I have always felt that those who are in the business of dishing out sentences should actually do a bit of time "Brubaker" style.

As for having reformed criminals serving as Magistrates or Judges.

Be aware that this might not end the way one might think.

Reformed criminals might actually end up rather less sympathetic.

Like the BLM/Police shooting Black suspects thing in the USA. I am sure I read somewhere that actually Black suspects are MORE likley to be shot by Black Police officers than by White ones..
 
Orionaut said:
Be aware that this might not end the way one might think.
Click to expand...

It would come down to the implementation of it, the people doing that would almost certainly mess it up, before they got it right - however I still think it's a good idea in principle, if we were ever lucky enough to live in a world where authority was made up of high quality, competent people.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
That's interesting to know the limitations of the study, but I think going as far to suggest it's "debunked".
Click to expand...

Tefal said:
Your own quote says it's always been that way so won't have affeed the results when comparing between years
Click to expand...

The problem with the survey is that it is limited in the amount of crime it will record.

If 10 people suffered 5 crimes in year 1, which would equal 50. Then it year 2 those same 10 people suffered 8 crimes the survey would still only record 50, and based off a growing population it would look like the percentage of crime was going down.
 
BowdonUK said:
The problem with the survey is that it is limited in the amount of crime it will record.

If 10 people suffered 5 crimes in year 1, which would equal 50. Then it year 2 those same 10 people suffered 8 crimes the survey would still only record 50, and based off a growing population it would look like the percentage of crime was going down.
Click to expand...

I understand that limitation. The likelihood of someone being an aggrieved in more than five crimes in 12 months is low and usually related to domestic related crimes. It's not ideal, but it's not likely to undermine much of the statistical value.

So in my mere 8 year's service, I can say that I have seen an anecdotal decline in more serious violent offences. Take pub brawls. I used to go to them all the time. That simply doesn't happen on anywhere near the same scale anymore. GBH offences were similarly more frequent when I started and they are rarer now.

We deal with more low level violent offences, which are often domestic related now though. Another thing I've noticed is a decline in theft jobs, but I doubt this is due to reduction in offending, but more of the fact we don't get deployed to thefts much anymore unless they've been detailed by security.
 
Stretch said:
Two officers armed with batons and pepper spray should easily be able to deal with that problem. They were pathetic.
Click to expand...
probably to worried about disciplinary action from all the thugs filming it.

They should have just batoned the hell of of the guys shins, knees or back of his legs until he couldn't stand any more.
it's crazy how these days you can pretty much fight against the police and they aren't really able to fight back on even terms because of fear of public opinion or losing their job.


It wasn't all that long ago that most people wouldn't dare strike a police officer


and LOL at the video someone posted "female police officer looking fit" can she even run in those skin tight pants?
 
arknor said:
It wasn't all that long ago that most people wouldn't dare strike a police officer
Click to expand...

Yeah but it's like what one of the guys said in one of the videos I posted, the police are in such a self-inflicted mess now due to anti-discrimination gone mad that it's hard not to laugh at them when 2-3 of them can't even arrest a single suspect without calling for backup. Most of the rank and file probably see it but daren't mention it due to political correctness and the establishment blame police numbers rather than the scientifically obvious inefficiencies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom