Yes, because 9/10 its was bad people that got fit-up, every organisation that size has some corruption that is why independent units exist inside them to try and counter it. It is not perfect but it was better than it is today. I feel for the Police in this day and age (not traffic cops though) it the politicians and left wing PC brigade which has turned them into nothing more than pointless UN peacekeepers with a less than cushy pension.
Declining attitude to law and order
- Thread starter MookJong
- Start date
- Status
Yes, because 9/10 its was bad people that got fit-up, every organisation that size has some corruption that is why independent units exist inside them to try and counter it. It is not perfect but it was better than it is today. I feel for the Police in this day and age (not traffic cops though) it the politicians and left wing PC brigade which has turned them into nothing more than pointless UN peacekeepers with a less than cushy pension.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
I don't think anyone suggested they did, you've got the wrong end of the stick if that's your position.
But there'd be fewer, which isn't something that can be achieved right now.
Depends who you mean by "they", there are various different roles and their workloads vary drastically.
The CPS take cases to court, and as much as they're feeling the pain of budget constraints and resources too they're often responsible for letting the police down when it comes to refusing to prosecute.
The police need to be in amongst the community.
It's like an over flowing water dam. In the old days the police would put their finger in the hole and contain the water. These days the police are in the dam using buckets to scoop the water out, meanwhile the water is still coming out through the hole. Probably not the best hypothetical example but the principle is the same i.e. the flow of crime will always increase if its not being stopped at the source, in this case the community.
Some serious questions need to be asked about the whole criminal justice service. The Judges for not sending people to prison for longer. The CPS for not charging people "just 1 in 15 reported crimes result in a charge". The police for not properly investigating crimes.
I get the feeling that society as already collapsed and certain authoratives aren't doing proper investigations because the amount of prison places we'd need would be nearly double than what we have now.
This situation can only be resolved by the police themselves demanding answers from people higher up the chain.
The problem isn't police numbers, we've had less police in the past controlling bigger populations. The problem is the police don't have direct intelligence from the communities they are supposed to be helping. The police shouldn't be waiting until Johnny from Manchester as to call them about anti-social behaviour. The police should already be on the ground investigating it as part of their normal job.
Judges have to follow the government's guidelines on sentencing and give explanations for why they've chosen the sentence they have, including the full reasoning - which includes things like mandatory reductions due to guilty pleas, or where they've chosen a fine and community sentence rather than a custodial one because the government has warned them there are not enough prison places available (IIRC at one point a couple of years ago some areas were basically out of spaces). Oddly enough cutting prison places and increasing sentence lengths has an effect on availability of spaces for new convictions.
The CPS are struggling as they're basically not funded sufficiently to do the job even for serious crimes, and the whole justice system is falling over due to lack of funding yet being expected to do things like go paperless when the courtrooms haven't even got sufficient sockets to charge the tablets/laptops the government requires them to use (but won't pay to maintain). let alone things like reliable fast internet connections and IT backends that are required to go fully paperless.
The "just 1 in 15 reported crimes results in a charge" sounds bad, but will include things that are not found to be a crime upon checking (IE someone reports speeding in their village but no evidence, or complains about something and the police check and find out nothing illegal happened), and things where the crime is reported but there is nothing to go on.
For example I had someone try and break into my house (and according to the police there were additional attempts in the same time period on neighbouring streets), the police came out*, they sent along a soco but there was nothing to find, the guy had worn gloves and my description was basically "about 6 foot tall, dark hair, jeans, looked odd wearing a dark puffer jacket given it was quite warm".
It will also include all the "nonsense internet crimes" (threats online etc) that I know some of the same people who call for the death penalty for virtually any offence love to mock.
Things like getting the intelligence from communites, back in the day, the council used to have money to run things like youth clubs which directly impacted low level crime as it gave youths who'd otherwise be bored and wandering the streets a place to go, and the police would often make an effort to get involved a bit with those clubs so that they had an idea of what was going on and they could be seen a being there to help, not just as someone you see when your mate gets nicked for being drunk, or you call when your car is stolen.
Oddly enough cutting back on policing etc because "crime has been dropping" tends to be a great way to reverse that trend, IIRC various very successful schemes to reduce crime were cut when "Austerity" meant the police had their funding slashed and all the "non front line officers" were sacked leaving the front line officers to now spend more time doing paperwork. I'm fairly sure I'm not the only person who remembers the obvious lie about "we're not cutting frontline officers, only the excess so it won't affect policing", as it was clear straight away that if you got rid of people whose sole job was do to the specific paperwork needed to support the officers, you'd end up taking officers from the street to do that same job but they'd be doing it slower, more prone to mistakes and costing more because they'd be doing it irregularly as opposed to constantly and the officers were paid more than the office staff.
*I was actually really impressed, they were here within about 30 minutes, apparently they'd been heading my way because of the number of reports.
So the point of the stickers was? You agree it doesn't reduce crime or hate incidents. It doesn't help with any core function of the work we expect the police to be doing, as tax payers.
You're happy that this force spent £30k just so "show solidarity" with the LGBT community? What's sad is that of that community, a large proportion are likely to be less than impressed with the wasted money. Being gay doesn't make you an idiot, appeased and impressed by car stickers
That £30k could have been spent in any number of ways which might actually help the community/society; instead it was wasted.
Except that the police's core thing isn't just to "prevent crime" or "solve crime", remember the old core principle of "policing by consent", oddly enough to "police by consent" you need to have the confidence of the people that you'll take them seriously and not ignore or worse persecute them.So the point of the stickers was? You agree it doesn't reduce crime or hate incidents. It doesn't help with any core function of the work we expect the police to be doing, as tax payers.
You're happy that this force spent £30k just so "show solidarity" with the LGBT community? What's sad is that of that community, a large proportion are likely to be less than impressed with the wasted money. Being gay doesn't make you an idiot, appeased and impressed by car stickers
That £30k could have been spent in any number of ways which might actually help the community/society; instead it was wasted.
It's not too long ago that the Police were actively persecuting people for being gay, not much further back it was illegal. There is still a lot of mistrust in the police in the LBGT community because it's only relatively recently that the police have taken crimes against them seriously. The stickers may mean nothing to you except a waste of money, but is it a waste of money if they help reduce that level of mistrust and potentially result in people coming forward with information about crimes that the police would otherwise have had problems getting?
Even today the LGBT community is often reluctant to come forward about "minor" crimes against them because they're worried they'll be ignored, and in the past that has meant serious criminals have gotten away with things for a long time because people were put off reporting things that seemed minor in isolation but when put together gave the police vital information*.
All it takes for those "worthless" stickers to more than pay for themselves, is for them to help push someone into having that little bit of extra trust in the police to report something that they'd otherwise have kept quite about.
To me that is priceless, as everyone should feel confident that they can report crimes, without fear of being ignored or persecuted by the very people people who are meant to protect the public.
*IIRC it was only about 3-4 years ago there was a guy who was killing homosexual men but the police at the time were ignoring the similarities between the deaths as "just part of the gay lifestyle" and didn't treat them as suspicious at first (or indeed do full tests of things found at the scene).
You honestly think a car sticker will build trust in the police from the LGBT community?
I guess there's no arguing with logic like that.
Oh actually it was a rainbow sticker anyhow. They could have been expressing solidarity with Rainbow Dash for all that means.
Come on. You must think people are complete idiots if you think a rainbow sticker will convince people that the police are taking homophobia seriously.
After all, we all know that the individual police will have had no choice but to accept the sticker. It means nothing. Like a mandatory corporate email sig means nothing. My sig says I support the Cornish language, because I was forced to put that in there. I couldn't give a flying toss about a dead language. But my email sig says I do.
I guess there's no arguing with logic like that.
Oh actually it was a rainbow sticker anyhow. They could have been expressing solidarity with Rainbow Dash for all that means.
Come on. You must think people are complete idiots if you think a rainbow sticker will convince people that the police are taking homophobia seriously.
After all, we all know that the individual police will have had no choice but to accept the sticker. It means nothing. Like a mandatory corporate email sig means nothing. My sig says I support the Cornish language, because I was forced to put that in there. I couldn't give a flying toss about a dead language. But my email sig says I do.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
As I mentioned, it's to reduce under-reporting of crime. By increasing community confidence that the police will take it seriously, they will be more likely to report crime (which can then be investigated) and give community intelligence which is vital for the Police.
Being a tax payer gives you no more insight or authority to talk about a subject you clearly know little about on an operational basis.
@Burnsy2023 It would be hilarious if it wasn't so tragic, that you honestly believe putting rainbow stickers on police cars is £30k well spent.
I've got nothing more. It's just sad. Pathetic, even.
Don't expect the public to back up the police when you actively defend waste of public money in this way. You're doing more damage to public confidence in the police than you realise (or want to see).
I've got nothing more. It's just sad. Pathetic, even.
Don't expect the public to back up the police when you actively defend waste of public money in this way. You're doing more damage to public confidence in the police than you realise (or want to see).
On it's own, no, but as part of a campaign the Police have been working on for years, it probably helps reinforce the message and a subtle reminder that the Police today are a little more accepting and likely to take you seriously than the police of say 1990.
It's slightly amusing that on the one hand people in this thread are saying about how the police should be more involved in the community to get intelligence, then on the other hand getting their knickers in a twist about something that is basically intended to be a small gesture to remind a group of people who are often vulnerable and historically less likely to go to the police for help that the police are there to assist them and are willing to listen to their concerns.
It's slightly amusing that on the one hand people in this thread are saying about how the police should be more involved in the community to get intelligence, then on the other hand getting their knickers in a twist about something that is basically intended to be a small gesture to remind a group of people who are often vulnerable and historically less likely to go to the police for help that the police are there to assist them and are willing to listen to their concerns.
I think the point is there is too many crimes being committed that the police can't keep up.
I remember growing up in the 80s and 90s when there was the 'no ball games allowed' signs in certain council estates. All we did was take our ball to the local playing field, not go and harass members of the public. I never went to a youth club.
The police are chasing crime numbers and losing. It isn't possible to keep up with the amount of crimes being committed.
I'm not anti-police. I believe in law and order. But at the moment the police are overwhelmed. What they are currently doing isn't working. There is now a culture of crime amongst ordinary people.
I remember growing up in the 80s and 90s when there was the 'no ball games allowed' signs in certain council estates. All we did was take our ball to the local playing field, not go and harass members of the public. I never went to a youth club.
The police are chasing crime numbers and losing. It isn't possible to keep up with the amount of crimes being committed.
I'm not anti-police. I believe in law and order. But at the moment the police are overwhelmed. What they are currently doing isn't working. There is now a culture of crime amongst ordinary people.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,746
- Location
- Southampton, UK
See, this is the problem with populism. People like yourself want easy answers to difficult problems. You think that getting the police to catch criminals and imprison them will sort crime. All criminals are bad people and should be punished, the harsher the better. So when you see the police doing things that don't fit that simplistic model you get up in arms. The fact is there aren't easy answers to issues like crime. It's complex, it's difficult to understand and full of unintended consequences, so you don't bother to understand it. You don't bother to look under the surface and realise that there are people with different perspectives and different issues that colour the world differently for them. You can't see the value and therefore it's stupid and pathetic.
You're not alone, there are plenty of people who also don't care to understand the big picture (some of them even get into positions of power). There will always be armchair generals, and in this case, armchair Chief Constables.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
That pretty much sums it up
and
coincidentally
coincidentally
brings us back to what this thread originally purported to be about, the seemingly declining attitude to law and order and the lack of respect for others in society
@Burnsy2023 it's not a question of big picture. It's a question of (VERY) limited resources and benefiting the maximum number of people possible given those confined resources. As I said earlier, every penny the police currently have access to should be spent towards the benefit of all. Not trying to show specific groups that they're loved. That group would already benefit by reductions in overall crime.
As one of our homosexual members has pointed out above, these rainbow stickers will do crap all to them! Sure, it may make someone, somewhere, maybe feel like the police care about them vs not having stickers. I'd love to see a source back this up!
Oh, and loving the statement about armchair CCs. Most on here are probably way more qualified to comment on the matter than PCCs? I've already pointed out the factual situation behind mine (as corroborated by another poster).
As one of our homosexual members has pointed out above, these rainbow stickers will do crap all to them! Sure, it may make someone, somewhere, maybe feel like the police care about them vs not having stickers. I'd love to see a source back this up!
Oh, and loving the statement about armchair CCs. Most on here are probably way more qualified to comment on the matter than PCCs? I've already pointed out the factual situation behind mine (as corroborated by another poster).
It could be said that showing the police are friendly with LGBT people does reduce homophobic crimes, what measure it does is completely unknown, but i'd imagine it's hardly a negative.
Then there's the fact that they need that community to pipe up more about abuse, so looking welcoming is entirely justified, just because one person thinks its not worth it doesn't mean it's useless, maybe visuals isn't particularly amazing but apparently people don't want children to learn about it in School so where else are people going to confront it?
At the end of the day it confronts **** **** homophobes that the police are not their friends like the US police were, and increases visibility. It wasn't too long ago that Police were arresting people for being gay, so there's that context for older people as well.
Then there's the fact that they need that community to pipe up more about abuse, so looking welcoming is entirely justified, just because one person thinks its not worth it doesn't mean it's useless, maybe visuals isn't particularly amazing but apparently people don't want children to learn about it in School so where else are people going to confront it?
At the end of the day it confronts **** **** homophobes that the police are not their friends like the US police were, and increases visibility. It wasn't too long ago that Police were arresting people for being gay, so there's that context for older people as well.
I suspect that if the Police want the general population (or any special interest groups) to feel more confident about dealing with the Police, the best way of doing that is for the Police to be seen to be doing an effective job of tackling crime. The best PR in the world (let alone coloured stickers on the cars) doesn't help when the newspapers are full of stabbings, home invasions, drugs crimes, etc and it's only getting worse.
We know it's down to Tory austerity and the disaster that was Theresa May, but PR isn't going to change that if all we're seeing is criminals getting away with it.
We know it's down to Tory austerity and the disaster that was Theresa May, but PR isn't going to change that if all we're seeing is criminals getting away with it.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Actually I suspect that the best way for the general population to feel more confident about dealing with the Police would be to see Police Officers in their locality rather than whizzing down the road in a car. I'm not quite sure to what extent people actually see criminals getting away with crime.
As you suggest, Tory cuts have significantly reduced numbers.
I admire that you are defending the police (I wouldn't expect you to do anything else). But the police wasn't founded to be the way you are advocating. It was founded with the primary motive to be a deterrent of crime. But now, since the police started zooming around in police cars, it removed itself from the communities it was once embedded and now chases an ever longer list of criminals.
All people are asking on the thread is for the police to go back to the founding principles set by Robert Peel.
https://www.durham.police.uk/About-Us/Documents/Peels_Principles_Of_Law_Enforcement.pdf
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Ahhhh, Sir Robert Peel
The father of the modern Tory party
which drastically cut police numbers.
- Status