Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 13 March 2010 at 12:06am
Originally posted by tty75
The article angered me at first, but then when I think about all the sick lame and lazy polishing seats doing jobs a civilain could do I think why not???
I hear about a big drive to offer early retirement to lots of cops after the 2012 Olympics is on the cards..../ rumour mills.
Such a move would not surprise me in the slightest. The Police Force, like everything else of worth in this Country, is gradually being wound down. Look what has happened to our Armed forces in recent years.
The result of this will be even less Police on the streets that there is today and criminals will be able to operate with impunity.
An example of what may come to pass occurred the other day when Mappin & Webb, the Jewellers near Picadilly, was the subject of a `smash and grab' in which the raiders are alleged to have spent a full 5 minutes breaking the glass of the shop's windows and there was not a copper to be seen.
Those who committed this crime were probably well aware there was unlikely to be any Police about when they committed the crime, even though it is probably one of the busiest thoroughfares in the UK.
It may well be that the criminal element have now realised how few Police there really are on patrol and are taking full advantage of the situation. I understand this is not the first blatant and audacious raid of this type to be carried out in this area in recent times. I don't think these villains would be too bothered if a PCSO stumbled across their nefarious activities.
Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 12:44am
Originally posted by M&MBM
Originally posted by oldcopper
Originally posted by M&MBM
I think it's a good idea, since police officers seem so stretched they apparently won't attend some reports of ASB and you're lucky if you get a copper to a shed burglary. Volunteer work makes the number of officers spread further, gives them more time to do proper police work.
If we employed volunteer unpaid bin men and road sweepers it would give the `real' ones more time to do THEIR job properly.
You can apply your argument to almost any occupation but the fact remains that using volunteers in this fashion is detrimental to the pay and conditions of Police officers and should be seenas such.
The reason Police Officers rarely attend indicents of the type you describe is because there are too few of them around and those who are on patrol duties are taken from the streets to deal with (unnecessary) paper work if they make even a minor arrest.
If we continue to paper over the cracks by using volunteers, PCSOs etc and massaging crime figures the situation will continue to deteriorate.
Exactly! Great idea.
Our road rarely gets swept. There are weeds growing in the gutters. We can either whinge about it and get the Council to send the roadsweepers round more often, and increase our council tax etc, or we can get out there and do something about it.
I recently had to clear sno from my street because the Council coild not cope but that is totrally different from the Local Authority taking me on as a volunteer road worker.
There is a limit to the amount of taxation, police precept etc people in this nation are willing to pay. There is a limit which people are able to pay. After that they either leave the country or lose their homes etc because they can't afford the mortgage.
Agreed, and there does comer a moment when we have to say,with any service, we can't afford it and we won't be providing it OR we shall provide it on a reduced basis.
If you can't afford a service, it doesn't get done. Unless someone does it without payment. Simple truth.
Correct, and I believe we shal see fewer services being provided in the near future.
This country is in dire financial straits. The truth is we can't afford as many coppers, nurses, doctors, roadsweepers etc however much we might want them. So if we don't have volunteers, then the work doesn't get done, simple as that. So if there are no Specials, you won't see more regular officers employed (unless they took a pay cut, of course.)
Very true, and because we are in such a financial crisis I believe small.minor Police Station where Police Officers no longer operate from should be closed and sold in the interests of economy. It is a waste of money if the only service they provide is from volunteers whose usefulness is extremely limited.
That.is what happened in my old Force area as retaining the buidlings as `unoccupied' Police Stations only led to them being vadalised. In fact, to have left a volunteer in most of those areas would only have left the volunteer liable to assault. In the rural area I have retired to many Police Stations have been closed and sold but they are served by a mobile Police Station which visists at pre-arrangd times
If there are no Front Desk staff, the police stations will close to the public. If there are no RNLI people will drown.
In the current financial crisis I think that is eaxctly what will happen as the Police may not even be able to affiord Civilian Support Staff. That is just one of the crosses we may have to bear. I have always thought the RNLI should be part of HM Coastguard but they have always chosen to operate as a charity and as a volunteer organisation and I respect thjat choice. The Police is neither a charity or volunteer organisation. If the RNLI cesed to exist its duties would be taken over by HM Coasguard so there would not be as much drowning as you might imagine.
Volunteers don't deprive people of jobs they augment the jobs and relieve the pressure off the ones paid to do the more difficult aspects of the job. That stops those people having a nervous breakdown, going off sick, or leaving the job altogether.
Most volunteers probably do what they do with the finest of motives and intentions. However, people like senior Police management have other agendas and motives and would have no compunction about using volunteers to affect the jobs and conditions of Police Officers.
It may not be ideal; in yor ideal world everyone would be paid a fair wage for a job well done. Great. But the world doesn't work like that.
Having spent 34 yrs of my life as an operational Police Offiucer I am well aware that life is unfauir. However, I always try to do what I can to make it as fair as possible.
So yes, let's have voluntary bin men and more neighbours cleaning up their neglected streets from a sense of civic pride. Good idea. And we could have voluntary hygienists to help people with their teeth, since NHS dentists are rarer than hen's teeth. And volunteers in schools. Excellent idea. Voluntary counsellors. etc. Good idea.
I suspet the Utopia you envisage is some way off.
It saves me Council Tax, I think it's great.
Even with a plethora of volunteers making massive savings for Local Authorities you would not see a reduction of your Council Tax. The Local Authorities carry too much debt for that. In fact, I predict that your Council Tax will rise, Volunteers or not.
Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 10:13am
Originally posted by Maverick22
Why not make all those claiming benefit work one day a week, even if only picking up litter etc, make them earn the money they get.
I have long been of the opinion that those who have been on the `dole' for a lengthy time, and appear to have little hope of obtaining employment in the normal fashion should be required to work for their Benefits.
However, the type of employment I would use them for would go far beyond picking up litter and would encompass such things as building sea walls to reduce coastal erosion and other such schemes which cannot be done due to financial constraints.
If they declined to be so employed, their Benefits would be removed or cut to the minimum.
Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 10:26am
Originally posted by Maverick22
Originally posted by BIkerider
Originally posted by Maverick22
Why not make all those claiming benefit work one day a week, even if only picking up litter etc, make them earn the money they get.
It' ag'in their 'uman rites mate. Not doing work for nuffink! To bizzy watchin 'orse racin on tele to do that!
Bikerider, your spelling is getting worse since you joined the Forum.
Is it really contarary to their Human Rights? I have heard that said when I have raised the prospect of using the long term unemployed on certain works projects, so that they may `earn' their dole but I am also informed that certain other European countries do this and that it is also the practice in ceretain States in the USA.
Joined: 05 December 2007
Online Status: Online
Posts: 3014
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 1:04pm
Originally posted by oldcopper
If they declined to be so employed, their Benefits would be removed or cut to the minimum.
There was a programme on the telly the other day where an unemployed mother and father of 5 (all under the age of 5 with another on the way) were getting £29,500 on benefits and lived in a 6 bedroom house.
They were shelling out kids as fast as their productive organs could manage it........and not giving a toss how they were going to afford to feed them - because the state was affording it.
Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 5:02pm
Originally posted by IveToldYouOnce
Originally posted by oldcopper
If they declined to be so employed, their Benefits would be removed or cut to the minimum.
There was a programme on the telly the other day where an unemployed mother and father of 5 (all under the age of 5 with another on the way) were getting £29,500 on benefits and lived in a 6 bedroom house.
We have all encountered these types somewhere along the way but nobody seems to have the `bottle' to do anything about them. The Labour Government won't because individuals such as these are a significant part of their core support and they don't want to lose the votes they provide. The Conservatives don't seem to have the backbone to do anything about them either in case in makes them appear `uncaring toffs.'
They were shelling out kids as fast as their productive organs could manage it........and not giving a toss how they were going to afford to feed them - because the state was affording it.
As I said in my previous post, we should compel them to work on schemes of National importance and reduce their Benefits if they decline. We should also remove their kids from them as they will only influence their offspring to live indolent lives like themselves.
Perhaps a few of the `volunteering brigade' could come along for a few hours each day and either supervise the work efforts of the parents or look after the kids taken into care . TCF.
Joined: 05 December 2007
Online Status: Online
Posts: 3014
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 5:13pm
Originally posted by oldcopper
As I said in my previous post, we should compel them to work on schemes of National importance and reduce their Benefits if they decline. We should also remove their kids from them as they will only influence their offspring to live indolent lives like themselves.
Perhaps a few of the `volunteering brigade' could come along for a few hours each day and either supervise the work efforts of the parents or look after the kids taken into care
Totally agree OC...............the parents that I mentioned had little to no parenting skills - for instance, allowing their kids to run around the house until gone 0230hrs............you've got to feel sorry for the kids.....
Joined: 23 July 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 113
Posted: 14 March 2010 at 6:51pm
Originally posted by IveToldYouOnce
Originally posted by oldcopper
If they declined to be so employed, their Benefits would be removed or cut to the minimum.
They were shelling out kids as fast as their productive organs could manage it........and not giving a toss how they were going to afford to feed them - because the state was affording it.
TCF.
But can the state afford it any longer?
No goverment of recent times has the balls to confront it.
Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown haven't done it. Cameron will not do it.
Joined: 07 November 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 477
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 9:42am
Originally posted by tty75
The article angered me at first, but then when I think about all the sick lame and lazy polishing seats doing jobs a civilain could do I think why not???
I hear about a big drive to offer early retirement to lots of cops after the 2012 Olympics is on the cards..../ rumour mills.
Yes we have a PC helping out in our office who had both his legs shattered after being rammed by a stolen motorvehicle. He has a few more operations to go before he can walk properly again-He's just too much trouble to keep-You are right we should bin him, people are disposable right?
Ok I knew you meant the wasters that we have but there is more to it than that which is the point I was making.
On the original issue-We all knew this was coming-Since the arrival of PCSO's we all knew that Police Officers would be replaced. We said it and they lied and denied it.
Politically a time of crisis is the time to take away freedoms and feed "emergency" hardships to the populace as it's "unavoidable(lie)". At the moment we have the recession which justifies taking more services away and taking more money off us for less. This recession is merely the excuse and damn good timing to implement what they had in mind from day one. To the hopelessly naieve that are swallowing the government spiel-Just look at how many of us predicted this. Too many to be coincidence.
As for we MUST cut back on public services..This is the first time since Peel that we have seen the beginning of the death of the Police. The Police force as you know it is at the beginning of it's end.
The problem is that the Police are sworn to the Crown and do not make good political weapons. The HO asked us to swear to them instead and we wouldn't-They have explored the options.
MMBM, I'll ask you-When a PCSO comes round to your house to take a crime report of burglary-Who do you think investigates that?
What do you think will happen when every call we get is answered immediately by a PCSO who cant do anything about it, often creates more work for the investigator due to lack of training in their initial dealings then hands it on...to less and less Police.
Who do you think deals with the violent? Who deals with the preparation of cases?(and I dont just mean paperwork-I mean putting something together that will stick), who do you think really protects you?
PCSO's achieve our objective of creating a feeling of safety for the public by being there- The reality is if something happens what they will do is call the Police for you and what you are advocating is having less of them to come to your rescue.
I sincerely believe that what you are advocating will end the Police as we know it. On the plus side I think you will have a lot less admin to do on this site-We will all be doing something else.
You enjoy the best most even handed Police Service in the entire world. In Italy you would be being bribed, In France you would be being battoned for looking at an officer the wrong way as a matter of course. In America you would be being shot.
Want to see us go? Maybe better the Devil you know.....
Joined: 07 November 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 477
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 10:19am
Realistically where do you want your service-Do you want a uniform that sits and has a cup of tea with you probably in the middle of a scene that should be being protected while giving you the feeling that someone cares- or do you want someone to try and catch the b*****d that did it?
What do you really want-Do you want Jack Regan or PC Whatsisname from Ballamory?
The Ballamory guy is going to make you feel a lot better, Jack on the other hand might have locked up your burglar, or maybe he's tactically holding off while covert stuff is being done. Jack isn't likely to have a cup of tea with you though.
They have been cutting back on the Jack's for years and if you feel nothing is happening when you get burgled or raped it's because people are in support of less Police more PCSO's.
The up side for me is when they privatise Policing people like me are going to make a fortune-Because I can make your estate safe, I can totally eliminate anti social behaviour and I can ensure that anyone who dares break into your house wishes to Hell they hadn't afterwards. It will have a price though....Are you ready to pay? The government wants you to-You will supply the Police and the Govt will supply the PCSO's. I won't come cheap because I will deliver safety and when confronted with the resultant chaos and fear you will pay, after all it's your children you need to protect.
Beyond all this we will have ghettos in the UK- The areas that can pay alongside the crime ridden ghettos that can't. Squalour and poverty alongside the middle class.
I can't believe the threat to our way of life isn't perceived...The future of the Uk is being shaped now and the destruction of the Police is a big part of it.
It's been done before, it's been written about, please see it for what it is...Before it's too late.
Joined: 12 August 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 56985
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 10:42am
HM, you are absolutely right. The trouble is that the bulk of the population seem keener to believe the politicians and ACPO than work out the truth for themselves.
Now, with a General Election just weeks away, is the time for them to make themselves heard. But, do you hear anything? I don't. There is an old saying that people get the police they deserve. You can now see it happening right before your very eyes.
Joined: 22 November 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61075
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 11:42am
But the choice isn't a copper who will get something done, or a PCSO who will have tea. It's a choice of a PCSO or bugger all.
Of course I'd rather have a copper who would get something done, but the emphasis at the moment is on seeing the victim and screw getting the evidence, because, after all what is the point if the CPS drop it.
So in some respects siince the rest of the CJS is defunct, why not spend the effort on the reassuance?
I have seen this happen, ie personal expperience, in that evidence which was ephemeral was not obtained, and despite Roger Baker's edict about every victim of crime seen, we had to make the effort rather than the other way round. We were later told the evidence vanished because of time management issues. I still believe there was too much on the officer's plate, and that's why he didn't get to the evidence in time.
Now, if a PCSO has to visit to take a statement, then sobeit, If a volunteer statement-taker has to take the statement, then sobeit, because this may free up an overburdened copper and give them enough time to actually be effective instead of having to make a choice about which job in the pile gets done satisfactorily.
There is nothing wrong with volunteers taking on some of the more mundate tasks.
I don't know what you mean by Ballamory.
And that is the point. If costs can be saved by having volunteers manning the front desk, say, in a police station which would otherwise shut at 5.00pm
MOP, Joker & reformed character. Honest. I moderate with purple prose
Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 11:47am
Originally posted by M&MBM
MMBM, I'll ask you-When a PCSO comes round to your house to take a crime report of burglary-Who do you think investigates that?
Nobody... or so it seems. Unless the burglar left a signed card.
There are more people in prison for burglary (and similar crimes) than there ever were. It seems the Police are still reasonably good at catching them.
Oh, sorry. I seem to have my cynical hat on today. I'd rather see a PCSO than nobody at all... and that's the way things are going.
PCSOs only manage to walk the streets because there are `real' Police around to come to their aid if something goes wrong. If all the `real' Police were off sick I suspect it would be rather difficult to find a PCSO willing to atick his/her head above the parapet.
They are no more than `window dressing' and a facade designed to `con' gullible members of the public.
Judging by the salaries they are paid, they are also a waste of taxpayers' money.
Joined: 21 May 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 593
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 12:42pm
Originally posted by M&MBM
But the choice isn't a copper who will get something done, or a PCSO who will have tea. It's a choice of a PCSO or bugger all.
To be honest, I suspect you would be betteroff with nobody. The cost of PCSOs who are paid to do no more provide a false form of reassurance which is just one big lie is wasteful of taxpayers' money and of your teabags.
Of course I'd rather have a copper who would get something done, but the emphasis at the moment is on seeing the victim and screw getting the evidence, because, after all what is the point if the CPS drop it.
There are probably more burglars and thieves in prison now than ever, so the `real' Police must still be effective to some extent in this area. If the CPS drop the case then it doesn't really matter much whether the victim had a cup of tea with the victim or not.
So in some respects siince the rest of the CJS is defunct, why not spend the effort on the reassuance?
Currently, the population of this Country, having been `dumbed down' by a diet of football, TV Soaps and `Big Brother' are now being `conned' by gimmicks such as PCSOs, an expansion of the Special Constabulary and `volunteers.'
Eventually, it WILL get through to them that they are being `conned' into feeling `good' or `assured' or `safe.' when (in fact) that is not necessarily the case. It's like drinking alcohol. It makes you `FEEL' warm' but in actual fact it reduces your body temperature.
I have seen this happen, ie personal expperience, in that evidence which was ephemeral was not obtained, and despite Roger Baker's edict about every victim of crime seen, we had to make the effort rather than the other way round. We were later told the evidence vanished because of time management issues. I still believe there was too much on the officer's plate, and that's why he didn't get to the evidence in time.
Now, if a PCSO has to visit to take a statement, then sobeit, If a volunteer statement-taker has to take the statement, then sobeit, because this may free up an overburdened copper and give them enough time to actually be effective instead of having to make a choice about which job in the pile gets done satisfactorily.
I pay taxes for the services of `real' Police and because I served in the Force for 30+ years, and know how things work, I am able to recognise that there is a garguntuan `con' afoot. If any civilian statement taker or `door to door' enquiry person comes seeking information from me I shall inform them that I will impart anything I know to a `sworn officer.'
There is nothing wrong with volunteers taking on some of the more mundate tasks.
In itself, that is fine, but as the title of this thread suggests it is only the thin end of the wedgeand, in the final analysis, it will be the public who are the losers. If the Government lack the funds to provide the Police Force we require then let them be honest and admit this is the case.
I don't know what you mean by Ballamory.,
It's a TV Programme of pre school children which features a somewhat gormless, but exceedingly friendly, silly Policeman.
And that is the point. If costs can be saved by having volunteers manning the front desk, say, in a police station which would otherwise shut at 5.00pm
When I enter a Police Station I wish to deal with a `real' Police Officer, not a `volunteer' who can come and go as they wish and has no Police training or knowledge and will resign the first time some `Yob' comes in off the street and assaults them or gives them a `mouthful.'
There may be exceptions to the rule but if a Police Station is only manned during the day, it is probably not worth while incurring its running costs and, in these times of financial constraint, serious consideration should be given to closing it down and selling off the building.
Joined: 22 November 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 61075
Posted: 15 March 2010 at 1:18pm
Originally posted by oldcopper
Originally posted by M&MBM
But the choice isn't a copper who will get something done, or a PCSO who will have tea. It's a choice of a PCSO or bugger all.
To be honest, I suspect you would be betteroff with nobody. The cost of PCSOs who are paid to do no more provide a false form of reassurance which is just one big lie is wasteful of taxpayers' money and of your teabags.
I don't agree.
Of course I'd rather have a copper who would get something done, but the emphasis at the moment is on seeing the victim and screw getting the evidence, because, after all what is the point if the CPS drop it.
There are probably more burglars and thieves in prison now than ever, so the `real' Police must still be effective to some extent in this area. If the CPS drop the case then it doesn't really matter much whether the victim had a cup of tea with the victim or not. There are also more burglaries and purse dippers than before. So I shopuld hope there are more people serving time for burglary.
So in some respects siince the rest of the CJS is defunct, why not spend the effort on the reassuance?
Currently, the population of this Country, having been `dumbed down' by a diet of football, TV Soaps and `Big Brother' are now being `conned' by gimmicks such as PCSOs, an expansion of the Special Constabulary and `volunteers.' "Expansion"? I was under the impression that there are far fewer Specials than say, 20 years ago... but that's only an impression and a vague memory of something someone said to me... I may be wrong there.
Eventually, it WILL get through to them that they are being `conned' into feeling `good' or `assured' or `safe.' when (in fact) that is not necessarily the case. It's like drinking alcohol. It makes you `FEEL' warm' but in actual fact it reduces your body temperature. Since the fear of crime usually far outweighs the actual chances of being a victim, and since the damage is usually to the cvictim from a sense of violation, then I think it is approp[riate to focus on making the victim feel better. That point has been raised on the News this morning with regard to rape victims.
I have seen this happen, ie personal expperience, in that evidence which was ephemeral was not obtained, and despite Roger Baker's edict about every victim of crime seen, we had to make the effort rather than the other way round. We were later told the evidence vanished because of time management issues. I still believe there was too much on the officer's plate, and that's why he didn't get to the evidence in time. Nothing to say about the overburdening of the police officer.
Now, if a PCSO has to visit to take a statement, then sobeit, If a volunteer statement-taker has to take the statement, then sobeit, because this may free up an overburdened copper and give them enough time to actually be effective instead of having to make a choice about which job in the pile gets done satisfactorily.
I pay taxes for the services of `real' Police and because I served in the Force for 30+ years, and know how things work, I am able to recognise that there is a garguntuan `con' afoot. If any civilian statement taker or `door to door' enquiry person comes seeking information from me I shall inform them that I will impart anything I know to a `sworn officer.' And I dare say if any volunteer was to do door to door wenwquiries, they would be asking the person to do exactly that; contact the NSO or the OIC. That's what goes out on our NHW appeals for imnformation. No way would it be appropriate for volunteers to actually take the information, but they can spread the word regarding the need for information.
There is nothing wrong with volunteers taking on some of the more mundate tasks.
In itself, that is fine, but as the title of this thread suggests it is only the thin end of the wedge It may suggest it. I can make all sorts of suggestions, but that doesn't mean it will happen. and, in the final analysis, it will be the public who are the losers. If the Government lack the funds to provide the Police Force we require then let them be honest and admit this is the case. OK, and then what? Ask for volunteers or let thingsd slide into anarchy? Or ask for donations? Maybe the Police should become a registered charity.
I don't know what you mean by Ballamory.,
It's a TV Programme of pre school children which features a somewhat gormless, but exceedingly friendly, silly Policeman.
And that is the point. If costs can be saved by having volunteers manning the front desk, say, in a police station which would otherwise shut at 5.00pm
When I enter a Police Station I wish to deal with a `real' Police Officer, not a `volunteer' who can come and go as they wish and has no Police training or knowledge and will resign the first time some `Yob' comes in off the street and assaults them or gives them a `mouthful.' And how will that yob assault them? Verbally perhaps. Hard t0o get at someone behind glass, isn't it? And I think you underestimate the calibre of your average volunteer. They would be trained and they would be security checked.
There may be exceptions to the rule but if a Police Station is only manned during the day, it is probably not worth while incurring its running costs and, in these times of financial constraint, serious consideration should be given to closing it down and selling off the building. Our police staion is manned all the time, but the front office is only open during the day. A couple of years ago the hours were increased after a dictater from RB. Fine, but that increased front desk costs which presumablky had to be met from cuts elsewhere. Volunteers might have been able to fill the gap.
MOP, Joker & reformed character. Honest. I moderate with purple prose
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Active Topics
Memberlist
Calendar
Search
Help
Register
Login
IP Logged
I moderate with purple prose
The trouble is that the bulk of the population seem keener to believe the politicians and ACPO than work out the truth for themselves. 
