I'm behind Rhino and the other bobbies on here.
Rhino's response to the original posting was pretty much spot on I think. None of us like to be or want to be the victim and if and when that happens we expect a reasonable job from those whose responsibility it is to deal with it; the Police in this circumstance.
But pause for a while please before you toss anymore shit at the police officers of this forum and their profession. Society's general perception of social justice, police powers, legislation and criminal proceedings are far removed from the actual abilities and powers that the Police actually have.
The Police Service is constantly playing catch up with villains and criminals because these people know their chosen aspect of criminality inside out and are able to push the envelope and exploit loop holes in laws. Police officers are not experts in law, they are general practioners in the application of the law. Lawyers and crown prosecutors are the experts that judge whether something is worthy of being taken to court. All the Police can do is present as much evidence, gathered in accordance with PACE, and ensure that conduct throughout investigation is within the law and operating procedures. Once loopholes or areas of non-legislation are identified, the government acts subsequently to create further legislation to address such issues. Hence the catch-up situation.
Police officers are not social workers, relationship councellors or parenting advisors. They are not responsible for ensuring little Johny gets home by 9 because otherwise he gets in with the wrong crowd. Yet the police have countless phone calls from the public because they can't deal with their willful teenagers.
Society and Government all have their part to play in what Joe Public perceive as a failing or under-performing police service. Liberalisation since the 60's has produced a challenge culture to authority. Professionals are no longer trusted to know what's best for us. Coupled with the rights based welfare state and human rights legislation, we all have choices that our forebearers never had. But that has produced a laissez-faire attitude to parenting standards and a general opinion in society that problems are always someelses fault. So now you see we all know our rights and priveleges in society, when it comes to police issues and crime and we can challenge the Police because that's our right. Its easy to see therefore that those with mal-intent have certain cards in their hand that the Police don't.
In misguided efforts to drive up performance, the Home Office produce quantitative statistical procedures and standards that police forces have to adhere to (or they dont' get funded) and are judged by. Quality policing procedures have been eroded in favour of these because they provide easy political evidence of how good the government are at driving down crime. Crime recording standards and groupings change year on year to ease Home Office figures, so that they can be seen to be having a positive effect on whatever the public are worried about at the time. Money from government often relies on complying with Home Office initiatives, that are often flash in pan good ideas and increase bureaucratic burdens on frontline officers.
Many police forces across the country aren't getting enough money from central government. So police authorities try to raise more revenue through council tax but councils aren't allowed to raise taxes because of legislative capping. Does that make sense? Funding local policing from local people? How radical. You'd be surprised how many towns and cities are policed by so few police officers of a night-time because forces can't afford to put bobbies out on the streets. Overtime bans for anything other than targetted statistically sensitive crime are the norm.
That given, you see that increasing demands from the public about media hyped crime and a general attitude by the public that the police are responsible for parenting and are either too busy issuing speeding tickets or drinking tea plus increased bureaucratic and human rights burdens mean the overstretched, under-resourced frontline officer is a juggler of a lot of balls.
I came to a conclusion 5 years ago that the society I wanted my children to grow up in needed to improve. Decay in social standards are something that we all have an opinion on. But too many people stand on the sidelines and have a pop without thinking too much about it and without taking on some responsibility. I decided then to do something I believed was a positive step to make changes to my world. I volunteered as Special Constable and have given 4.5 years of my freetime to support frontline regular police officers. And before you say 'hobby bobby, all you do is stand around at carnivals and church fetes', I and many others like me have put ourselves out there, exposing ourselves to the same risks as regular PCs. I've dealt with town centre friday night street fights, chased de-camped car thieves on foot, been threatened at the end of a blade during violent domestics, attended sudden deaths, searched for missing children and handed them back to glassy-eyed mums etc etc.
So I've got a reasonable insight into what goes on in policing our towns and cities so that most of us can go about our daily business enjoying our rights and priveleges. The police don't get it right all the time, but most of the officers out their, regular or volunteer, believe in doing the best job possible under difficult circumstances and without full support.
Now I've had my say, before you sound off and slag off the whole of the Police Service, if it's something that grips you so much get out there and do something about it or let the people who do it get on without having to dodge more crap.
