Contempt breeds contempt

Over the weekend a couple of readers alerted me to a video that was doing the rounds on Twitter of what looked like a couple of diminutive British police officers patrolling downtown Mogadishu. Inevitably for that part of the world, a bunch of hooded thugs gave the two – a man and a woman – a good thrashing. I later learned that the incident happened in London and the tweet had been deleted. Now we have Plod bleating:

Violent suspects could be released by police if officers do not get “backed up” by members of the public, a federation leader has warned.

Given the British government invites violent thugs from abroad to live among us and the justice system ensures they are free to continue being violent thugs in perpetuity, I feel ordinary folk are entitled to ask what, exactly, will change.

Ken Marsh spoke out after a video of officers being attacked was shared widely on social media.

Several cars can be seen driving past the encounter without stopping.

Met Police Federation chairman Mr Marsh said: “We don’t come to work to get assaulted, and if we’re not going to be backed up…then what is the point?”

What is the point, you say? Funny, I’ve been asking that question for quite some time now. And I love how the police have spent years elevating themselves to special status whereby only they can have weapons, only they can protect you, only they can do X, Y, and Z and ordinary people “must not take the law into their hands” but instead wait for Plod to show up three days later. Yet here they are whining that they don’t want to  come to work if the public won’t join them in hand-to-hand combat with a bunch of feral thugs the very same police forces won’t let us criticise.

However, Mr Marsh added this did not mean he was asking members of the public “to suddenly jump in to assist police officers, because we are highly trained in what we do”.

Yes, your high-level of training is apparent in the video. Oddly, forty-three hours of diversity training followed by a week-long seminar on unconscious racial biases didn’t adequately prepare these two officers for encountering actual diversity and vibrancy on the streets. That aside, what do you want the public to do, other than meekly go to jail where you can keep an eye on wrongthinkers more easily?

A member of the public wearing a motorcycle helmet helped the male officer, but several cars went past without stopping.

So drivers navigating city streets are supposed to be able to asses whether they should stop and intervene in an ongoing ruck they happen to drive by? What idiocy is this? And even if they did realise what was going on, as I said before, why risk it? The potential downsides vastly outweigh any upsides, even if the police were deserving of the public’s support.

Talking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Marsh said: “If the public now think it’s OK to stand and film and mock my colleagues…then we are in very dangerous grounds.

“What I’m trying to get across is the simple fact that society has changed so much lately that it seems to be OK [to be] more interested in mocking us and filming us.”

Sorry, what did you expect? You’ve made it abundantly clear you’re not on the public’s side, so why should they hold you in anything other than the same contempt you have for them? You were warned, time and again, that this would happen and what did your colleagues do? Go ultra-defensive, engage in self-gratifying circle-jerks, and threaten anyone who doesn’t kow-tow to you. You’ve brought this on yourselves.

He added: “We’re going to come to a point where we’re going to start pushing messages out to our colleagues: ‘Risk-assess it dynamically and, if you think you can’t detain a person, just let them go’.”

If the public doesn’t hold you in higher regard, you’ll carry out yet more risk assessments leading you to shirk your responsibilities? Yes, that’ll help turn things around.

A former Met officer, who left the force in 2014, said officers were attacked on a daily basis.

By people who, if criticised on social media, can look forward to the sight of their detractors being arrested by the Met for hate speech. Perhaps you ought to work out whose side you’re on?

Assistant commissioner Steve House of the Met Police said: “Whilst officers should never expect to be attacked as part of their job, a core part of officer safety training is ensuring they know how to respond to volatile situations.

Which is rather hard to do if diversity and inclusion are the driving factors in police recruitment and retention.

“This training is substantial and delivered in accordance with national guidelines and we regularly review it to make sure it is fit for purpose.

Then please explain the scenes in the video.

“Officers are also issued with personal protective equipment to help protect them and the public.

And if they don’t have them, they’ll stay in the car and watch their subordinate get murdered. Yes, we know.

We’re going to see a lot more of this, as we are of this:

Hundreds of residents have formed a ‘vigilante’ neighbourhood watch group following a failed campaign to increase the number of police officers on the streets.

The community watchdog group, known as ‘We Stand Determined’, stage twice-weekly patrols across Birmingham since it was set up on social media three weeks ago.

Members say they are working together to report any dangers the community may face across Britain’s second largest city amid fears crime is spiralling out of control.

Three organisers, only known as Wayne, Tracy and Michael, said they founded the group after discovering a friend had been attacked in his home by thieves armed with hammers.

A corrupt, dysfunctional, politicised police force who treat the public with contempt leading to vigilante groups forming in order to stop ordinary people being attacked with hammers. Britain is turning third world under our very noses.

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

43 thoughts on “Contempt breeds contempt

  1. So drivers navigating city streets are supposed to be able to asses whether they should stop and intervene in an ongoing ruck they happen to drive by?

    If senior police officers cower in their cars in the face of danger, then they can’t expect anyone else to stop, get out of their cars and help the police when the police are getting a shoeing from violent thugs.

  2. the public now think it’s OK to stand and film and mock my colleagues

    Yeah, only it’s not ‘the public’ in general, is it Plod? It is the feral scum the nation has been importing for 2 decades filming and fighting the police.

    I would not get involved in a ruck between the police and some ‘yoot’ for the following reasons:

    Risk of getting stabbed
    Risk of getting banged up if I armed myself in order to intervene
    Risk of a hate crime allegation if my intervention worked
    Inevitability of months of my life taken up with procedure whatever the outcome

    Also, despite the individual bravery and competence of many individual officers, I do not trust the farce to collectively look after me or act in my defence (most likely the opposite) so why should I do it for them?

    Finally, we get a lot of this whinging from senior Plod, much of which is a demand for money with menaces.

  3. There was another video doing the rounds of a stabbing in Shoreditch [ https://twitter.com/999London/status/1064664170686238720 ]. It’s blurry, but you get the idea.

    If I see a bunch of swarthy youths jostling each other, I maintain a wide berth. Chances are there’s a knife in the mix, so I won’t even risk getting close enough to see. If a police officer (or two) are at the scene, I can usually assume that the situation is under control; and if they call for backup, it will actually come. After all, if two fit & trained coppers can’t defuse the situation, what use will I be?

  4. Somebody once said, “As you sow, so shall you reap”. But he was only some unrepresentative Christian.

  5. Several cars can be seen driving past the encounter without stopping.

    Well obviously. Why would you stop and get a ticket for obstruction / leaving a vehicle unattended / parking on a yellow line / driving in a bus lane?

    Also members of the public would need to conduct a risk assessment on the likely religion and race of their potential counterparty or risk being guilty of a hate crime.

    The busies would switch their attention to the more tractable offender so best drive on.

  6. If I was the male officer in the vid I’d never patrol with a WPC again as she was less than useless. In our new order of things women are apparently capable of anything except containing an aggressive male, something I’d presume was essential to the job….better stick to tea and biscuits.

  7. Years ago I was at a late night club out in the wilds of Essex when a couple of car loads of Plod were in an altercation with a bunch of lads been making themselves a nuisance in the bar. Up shot was there was a WPC on the ground in the car park getting the worst of it from some bloke twice her size. This is not a situation you mess about if you wish to intervene. He got hit, just the once. Sufficient, it transpired, to put him in hospital. The WPC, now joined by one of her colleagues, suggested now would be a good time to get my car & fuck-off out of it. And that I was never there, she’d never seen me* & nor had anybody else.
    Would I do the same, now? You’re kidding!
    I saw that video. But this isn’t the movies. You’re not going to get involved with that lot without someone getting hurt. Either you or one of the brothers. You would hope the latter. In which case you’ll now be standing over a severely damaged ethnic with the police looking round for someone to blame for the damage. Because there’s no way they’re going to want to take it. And muggins is right there, isn’t he?

    *Subsequently, the WPC recognised & arrested me. And took me back to her place for questioning. Several times as it turned out. Sandra I think her name was. Quite a tasty blonde, out of uniform. Police were more approachable in those days, weren’t they?

  8. It’s the sub-standard diversity training which needs to change. Some cultures are violently appetitive, and it’s their way of life to express this in public. Some police officers still have the old-fashioned residual attitude that these cultures are somehow “wrong” and the people need to be challenged. But that’s just old-fashioned regressive Brits imposing their way of life on minorities. Future diversity training needs to concentrate more on the real threat to the public: dodgy jokes on twitter and elderly white folks not knowing the correct pronoun for a trannie.

  9. Spend the past decade or so telling the public explicitly not to intervene in situations and that they risk arrest for assault if they do, and you don’t get to U-turn like this.

    Sorry, this is a bed making / lying in it situations of their own making.

  10. A very, very small subset of the wider problem of Rulers vs Ruled. A seemingly never-ending civil war between our political class and normal folk. Normal folk don’t even have a party to vote for right now. We see with Brexit that the political class has the upper hand for the time being. I don’t think it will end well.
    (and then some people have the stupidity or effrontery to ask how it is that populist politics is on the rise and/or how did we get Trump!).

  11. Slightly o/t, but I am reading Popper just now and it is striking the parallels between the behaviour of the Athenian oligarchs during the poloponnesian wars and the establishment clique (I struggle to use the word elite for what is essentially a bunch of nobodies) in the UK today and especially as regards brexit.

    Gratifying in a way that human nature has changed so little in nearly 2 1/2 millennia – no doubt things will be just as good/shite 2500 years hence.

  12. Talking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mr Marsh said: “If the public now think it’s OK to stand and film and mock my colleagues…then we are in very dangerous grounds.

    Yet here we are.

    If you didn’t want to be mocked and lose the support of the general public you shouldn’t have tossed those rather important “Peelian principles of Policing” out the window then should you?

    The ethnics weren’t invited in by us, aren’t wanted by us and yet if we complain about their imported behaviour in even the mildest forms we are accused of racist behaviour and hate crimes by the plod, despite a mountain of evidence (as the “asian” rape trials in Huddersfield, Rotherham and elsewhere have demonstrated).

    It is not that “we, the public” have changed, but very much that the police have changed and our relationship with them has changed accordingly. In general the police are now too dangerous to deal with even as a bystander or victim. The likelihood of getting arrested for little more than being in the vicinity are simply too great and as has been said before “…the punishment is the process”

    For myself, I’m not a timid person, but if I saw the cops being given a good hiding by a bunch of ethnics, I wouldn’t hang about or film it, I’d just take the next turn and get out of the vicinity pretty sharpish. Don’t want to be there when the police do finally intervene and get fitted up (because they can’t charge the ethnics for injecting a bit of cultural enrichment into WPC Plod, because that would be wah…wah…wah…wacist).

    It should be understood that the common law offence of “Refusing to assist a constable” only exists in very specific circumstances and this is part of the reason why it is is rarely used (indeed the last FOI request in 2018 showed there had been no prosecutions in the preceding 3 years, indeed I’ve struggled to find a successful prosecution in modern records).

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/crime_statistics_refusing_to_ass_2

    At common law it is an offence to refuse to assist a constable when called on to do so. To establish the offence you need to prove that:
    – the constable saw a breach of the peace being committed; and
    – there was a reasonable necessity for calling upon the defendant for assistance; and
    – when called on to do so the defendant, without any physical impossibility or lawful excuse, refused to do so.

    All three elements need to be there for even the possibility of a prosecution, never mind a successful one.

  13. I really really hope its finally dawning on all those coppers who’ve sat by while their bosses turned the police into a sort of cross between the thought Gestapo and a rainbow ethnic diversity workshop, to the detriment of the broad mass of the public who are fed up with their stuff being nicked by pikeys and feral youths of a diverse nature making their lives a misery, that they are on their own now.

    The police used to be on the side of the public against the crims, and the public would support the police, and both parties would support the other, even when either stepped out of line a bit. If a householder got hold of a burglar and beat him about a bit, the police would ignore that, and when the police were caught trying to fit up bank robbers the public would turn a blind eye to that too.

    Now they’ve decided they are neutral between the criminals and the public, which in reality means biased against the largely law abiding as they are far easier to catch and take to court – the feral scum are violent, know ‘their rights’ and are are often of no fixed abode, so much more work to deal with. Hence the police will ignore chav scum criminal behaviour and nick middle class white householders for some far lesser infraction, usually done under provocation from the aforementioned, anything for an easy life.

    So to any coppers reading this, you’re on your own. We, the law abiding masses will walk on by when you’re getting a shoeing from some criminal elements. You don’t look after us, so we’re leaving you to the tender mercies of the diversity you keep telling us is so wonderful. Good luck.

  14. “All three elements need to be there for even the possibility of a prosecution, never mind a successful one.”

    Given that any person accused of such an offence could now point at the senior policeman who hid in his car because he didn’t the right ‘equipment’ to deal with a violent assailant, I doubt there could ever be a prosecution for this offence ever again.

  15. I must admit that Commissioner Coward (aka Sir Craig Mackey deputy commissioner of London’s Metropolitan Police) has set a fine example for both fellow officers and the general public at large. 🙂

    Having said that, a perfectly reasonable defence to “Refusing to assist a constable” would be that you feared for your own personal safety, especially with all those knife carrying foreign imports wandering the streets. Probably why there have been no successful prosecutions within living memory.

    As Richard Littlejohn would always say of Plod incompetence and excess:

    Mind how you go now

  16. “If the public now think it’s OK to stand and film and mock my colleagues…then we are in very dangerous grounds.”

    I think the bold section is the important part. If the public had generally reacted with horror at the mistreatment of the officer, the police would not have reacted this way. But if policemen are being mocked… well, the only thing the police will defend more resolutely than the feelings of criminals is the feelings of the police force – specifically, of its senior officers.

  17. Sadly, Mud Island is all tip and no iceberg these days, there isn’t much left to go. What happened to the descendants of those men that once ruled over and brought law and order of sorts to a quarter of the planet?

  18. Bardon,

    It must be because we jolly well haven’t had a bloody good war for a damn long time, what?

  19. “What happened to the descendants of those men that once ruled over and brought law and order of sorts to a quarter of the planet?”

    They ended up in Australia and burst into tears when caught cheating at cricket.

  20. Bardon, still many of them here, I’m happy with those I’m in daily contact with and I doubt I’m not alone in this.

  21. It must be because we jolly well haven’t had a bloody good war for a damn long time, what?

    I seriously wonder if we didn’t just lose too many of ’em in the last couple.

  22. I`d like to know how much time the average copper spends on diversity and cultural sensitivity training as opposed to unarmed combat,seems to me they`ve got the balance wrong.

  23. “They ended up in Australia and burst into tears when caught cheating at cricket.”

    Ball tampering is a serious crime in the colonies, far more so than cattle thieving. Those that break down in weep are obvious descendants of convicts unlike the colonial freemen who are losing the good fight down under as well. I don’t follow cricket so I am not that close to these type of cultural mishaps.

    “I’m happy with those I’m in daily contact with and I doubt I’m not alone in this.”

    Fat load of good some busted ass Dads Army sending each other polite message by carrier pigeon from the relative safety of the New Worlde are, whilst a darkie usurps James Bond in the mother country in plain sight. At least “its a he and straight” was mentioned in detaches from the front.

    “I seriously wonder if we didn’t just lose too many of ’em in the last couple.”

    The Globalists certainly did win both of the world wars at the expense of the good guys.

  24. The fitness entry standards were all but dropped in 2004. The sports trophy cabinets in each police station are empty. The police football team has only 3 police officers. The comments about diversity training are an understatement of the truth. There are two sections on all promotion forms. One is for competence and the other is how you’ve improved police relations with the minority community, not the local community. Every senior officer is there because they are either from a minority group, or they have pandered to one.
    Police officers are increasingly avoiding confrontation.

  25. “Busted ass? arse my good man…English.”

    Quite right, it’s good to see that some are still holding the line.

  26. As others have said better than I (but this is the Interweb so I get to rant anyway) a few decades of telling Members of the Public that they must not intervene, must not act themselves, must call the police who will Deal With The Problem, has brought us here: the days where an ordinary decent citizen, seeing a police officer in a fight they weren’t winning, might be willing to join in and assist the Law have been excised, and not by the ordinary decent citizens.

    Having demanded that law-abiding citizens should be unarmed, placid and refrain from any intervention… the police are now living with the consequences. (I’m unconvinced about easy access to, let alone casual carry of, really effective weapons by citizens not convicted of previous wickedness; but the limited data for and against is described by people who understand sampling and statistics better than I as ‘confusing’ rather than decisive. My doubt is merely that with a decent handgun – a Glock 19, say – costing around £500 if you just paid UK prices plus VAT, those keen and willing to pay for a no-questions-asked here’s-your-handgun sale would tend to be those you would prefer not to have a compact, concealable, lethal, reliable 9mm pistol with a 15-round magazine easily to hand)

    Most particularly, if a pale, stale male weighs in to assist a policeman beset by an attacker… assuming I survive without serious injury (lacking either weapons, or protective clothing, against a good chance of a knife, and having little training or experience in hand-to-hand combat) will I be praised for my civic-mindedness and courage, or thrown to the wolves for launching a racist / religiophobic / homophobic / sexist / insert category attack on one of our vibrantly diverse residents who was merely engaging in their customary debate with law-enforcement in the traditional manner of their home community?[1]

    The potentially nasty part comes when, having lost confidence in the police, the Ordinary Decent Citizens revert to the olden times of forming the Mob, and in the aftermath of a sufficiently nasty crime there’s a torches-and-pitchforks attack on the suspected perpetrators, which is not good for those caught up or wrongly accused (Paulsgrove, where the 2000 News of the World kiddie-fiddling kerfuffle was particularly vehement, is not a long drive from my home and the lynch mobs formed back then might have been willing to be violent, but weren’t troubled by trivia like ‘evidence’ or ‘facts’…)

    [1] An eye-opener for a naive analyst early in his tour was a report of “grenade attack on police station” in Iraq. In the UK someone throwing several hand grenades into a police station during working hours is… even now, quite a big deal, probably headline news. In 2005 it really got my attention. For Majar-al-Kabir in Maysan Province?That’s just polite protest, if they wanted to actually hurt someone they’d have either walked in with assault rifles or driven a truck bomb into the building.

  27. @Tim N

    Agree. Police have only themselves to blame. Decades of pandering to politicians & SJWs and treating the mostly law-abiding middle class as easy cash-cow crimes solved whilst ignoring more serious crime has bitten back.

    I saw it much earlier; regularly stopped in 80s for the “crime” of riding an MC – not a clunker/rat-biike, but a few months old latest model. In car, entirely different.

    The Video:

    Guess which “community” is watching & filming, a politically protected one?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmaRfp1gtLM

  28. @Jason Lynch on November 21, 2018 at 11:37 pm

    [1] An eye-opener for a naive analyst early in his tour was a report of “grenade attack on police station” in Iraq. In the UK someone throwing several hand grenades into a police station during working hours is… even now, quite a big deal, probably headline news.

    However, not in Sweden where it’s now common.

    Tack så mycket EU & Mekel /sarc

  29. “Having demanded that law-abiding citizens should be unarmed, placid and refrain from any intervention… the police are now living with the consequences.”

    Here lies a root cause of some of the rot that we see now. Whatever law that devised and offered up by lawmakers elected by the people, proposing that citizens should be unarmed, should absolutely under no circumstances received royal assent, this is a very intentional check point that was built into in the separation of powers that has been abused and is in fact unlawful.

    Why?

    The constitution and particularly the Bill of Rights and the Coronation Oath were precisely established to prevent this kind of abuse of power and erosion of inalienable citizens rights from occurring. Firstly, any statue law proposed by lawmakers that is unconstitutional, can not receive royal assent and even if it has, that law itself would be unlawful. We should petition the Monarch first for providing her assent to a statue that is in breach of her contract in maintaining the rights of her subjects.

    The Declaration of Rights, is a common law contract between the Monarch of the day and the people. It became statute through the Bill of Rights. This contract provides, among other things, for the people the right to bear arms and to defend themselves by reasonable force including by lethal force if necessary.

    The Queen in this case has broken her common law contract with the people by providing royal assent to the unconstitutional statue law that set out specifically and wholly to deprive the people of their right to bear arms.

    British people still have the right to bear arms to defend themselves including the use of lethal force. This is a fact of constitutional law, but you wouldn’t want to be the poor bunny that challenged it in the judiciary of this day.

    The Queen has acted unlawfully and broken the terms of her Coronation Oath in providing Royal Assent to this statute and it is therefore not enforceable at law.

    The British system was well set up and the main aspects of citizens rights were summarized and crystallized after the Stuarts were kicked out and was set up such that despots, tyrants, the sovereign, the judiciary and the executive could not act against the interests and inalienable rights of its citizens.

    I know it sounds a bit out there and kind of like those guys that don’t pay their telly licence because they haven’t consented or contracted to, but this is very serious, is entirely clear and not talked about in the family. That is why there is a massive push by lawmakers to document a new Bill of Rights.

    The British Constitution is written, it is applicable, takes precedence over any statute law and is being abused by the executive and the sovereign and there are remedies at law for each.

  30. “‘Risk-assess it dynamically and, if you think you can’t detain a person, just let them go’.”

    They weren’t doing this already? Seems like this should have been standard practice right from the start. Or did they expect cops to just run in heedless of the risk? And by that I mean to themselves and others. Don’t need to risk causing an accident with your cruiser to get a guy you just saw jaywalking.

    Risk assess – can you do it with the resources on hand? No? Call for backup. Will backup get there in time? Contain or follow and observe if you can’t. Until you can.

    ‘Risk assess *dynamically*’ – takes a freakin’ bureaucrat to think you need to add that in. All risk assessment is dynamic.

  31. It is to be hoped that the more often this happens, the more often others are encouraged to have a go themselves and put the resulting video on youtube, as sort of one-upmanship. Once we see the vibrancy kicking the shit out of plod on a regular basis we might see a change of policy from plod, even if unofficial.

  32. Civilization and civilized behavior either comes from within, or it is imposed by force. The UK has had the experience of the former for a very long time, and has forgotten the necessity of the latter, in the public mind, when the former is absent or non-existent in the populace.

    I knew a British police officer who was over here in the US, visiting. Nice young guy, helped set him up with a ride-along with the local cops, in a suburb of Chicago. They further set him up to do a ride-along in one of the hairier parts of Chicago’s South Side.

    It was interesting to contrast his somewhat sanctimonious attitude vis-a-vis the arming of American cops vs. the British Bobby, from before the ride-alongs, and after. Changed his tune, that did, and not just because the criminals were armed, either. The mentality and the observed behavior of the public where he went on the ride-along in Chicago were probably the most instructive, and he admitted afterwards that he’d sooner volunteer to walk naked and covered in pork chops through the Serengeti than walk through South Side Chicago unarmed.

    Y’all have imported the uncivilized; you had best grasp that many of them aren’t going to respond to sweet reason and genteel engagement. At the rate things are going, observed from this remove, I think you’re going to be abandoning the unarmed British Bobby in fairly short order, or you’re going to lose control of large swathes of your cities–Probably only for limited hours of the day, at first, and then completely. Conversations I’ve had with a couple of expat Brits lead me to suspect that the whole thing is already going on, and will probably eventually go the way Hemingway described going bankrupt–“Gradually, then suddenly…”. Cops being beaten up in plain view of the public, videoed, and then mocked? That’s a canary in the coal mine.

    Just like Lee Rigby was. That moment is going to be another one that some future historian references, when discussing the history of this period we’re in, whatever end it meets.

  33. and here I thought that I wasn’t surprised by this shunt any more:

    Met Police Federation chairman Mr Marsh said: “We don’t come to work to get assaulted, and if we’re not going to be backed up…then what is the point?”

    sorry, PARDON? What’s the point? Are you serious with that? The point of ‘coming to work’ is doing your job, i.e. protecting the community and maintaining order. If you can’t do this without a layperson stepping in, then this sounds like a ‘you’ problem. If you seriously don’t see any purpose to the role of the police… well…
    Honestly, you don’t see pilots screaming at passengers to come and land the damn plane because they missed that day of training, or a neurosurgeon demanding a orderly close up after surgery as they have to take a dump.

    “We’re going to come to a point where we’re going to start pushing messages out to our colleagues: ‘Risk-assess it dynamically and, if you think you can’t detain a person, just let them go’.”

    …aaaaaand we have it by laaaaandslide here, the winner of: Worst idea ever – Unthinkably stupid division.
    Three things will happen:
    1. Excuse to shirk responsibility (as stated previously).
    2. The most violent people are left to terrorize. A person who can’t be detained poses the greatest risk to the public and themselves and is the last person you should ‘just let go.’
    3. Offenders will be motivated to ‘up the violence’ to avoid the police making an attempt to detain them, actually increasing the risk to the public.

  34. “aaaaaand we have it by laaaaandslide here, the winner of: Worst idea ever – Unthinkably stupid division.”

    Its already in practice, on a larger scale, this is just pushing the principle down to the individual level. At the moment if a bunch of pikeys steal your caravan, and you follow them back to their site, and can see where they’ve stashed it, and you call the cops and say ‘There’s my property and there’s the people who nicked it, go and arrest them and get my caravan back’ they’ll refuse to do so – ‘Elf&Safetee Innit?

    In some respects this principle needs to be brought down to the lower level so the reality is there for all to see – eventually people will be being murdered on the street while police watch, and things ‘might’ then change. I still wouldn’t hold my breath, as the case of Commander ‘I’m staying safe in my car’ Mackay proves.

  35. The rot set in with the Police & Criminal Evidence Act. This was a response to previous police corruption & a rather too flexible attitude to due process. However it very much constrains them to The Book with significant downside for them if they step out of the boundaries. So there is now a CYA approach by the police which in turn makes them go after low-hanging fruit rather than sorting the real problems. That probably hasn’t impacted on the investigation of murders but for the average person murder isn’t much of a risk. In contrast to burglary & other forms of theft, which the police seem now to regard as an issue for the insurance industry, not for them.

  36. In contrast to burglary & other forms of theft, which the police seem now to regard as an issue for the insurance industry, not for them.

    In which they might be right, so just reduce the pay conditions and police budget in line with their reduced responsibility and you’re left with a couple of offices in the town hall and maybe a few “scene of crime” officers to deal with the inevitable murder here and there and a few detectives per county / major city to deal with the crime that they are prepared to deal with (mostly murder, since dead bodies seldom resist).

    What do you mean “The ethnics have taken over the ghetto they were housed in and have instituted Sharia Law”? What did you expect?

    The police don’t seem to have realised that they are not there to prevent the ethnic take-over, just to stop the indigent locals from killing them before they have achieved supremacy.

  37. The police don’t seem to have realised that they are not there to prevent the ethnic take-over, just to stop the indigent locals from killing them before they have achieved supremacy.

    I hear this a lot. What I’ve never heard is any evidence that it’s actually going to happen.

    I don’t think immigrants have anything to fear from the “indigent” locals.

  38. @Agammamon on November 22, 2018 at 3:50 am

    Risk assess *dynamically*’ – takes a freakin’ bureaucrat to think you need to add that in. All risk assessment is dynamic.

    Yep, even down to “Do I cross road now, or after car drives past”

    Bureaucrat’s have insisted one must now risk assess, complete a form, then do it – bang, thump, dead as another car now arriving.

    Every Gov’t Dept and FTSE250 should sack 50% of Admin, few would notice.

  39. @Tim N

    BBC Louis Theroux Altered States Series 1 1of3 Love Without Limits
    Torrent Magnets
    TPB
    magnet:?xt=urn:btih:d64f5c236b20261cd86dbc3da01a7581336ec8f8&dn=BBC+Louis+Theroux+Altered+States+Series+1+1of3+Love+Without+Limi&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.leechers-paradise.org%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fzer0day.ch%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fexodus.desync.com%3A6969
    Zoogle
    magnet:?xt=urn:btih:D64F5C236B20261CD86DBC3DA01A7581336EC8F8&dn=%5Bzooqle.com%5D%20BBC%20Louis%20Theroux%20Altered%20States%20Series%201%201of3%20Love%20Without%20Limi&tr=udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969&tr=http://tracker1.itzmx.com:8080/announce&tr=http://announce.xxx-tracker.com:2710/announce&tr=http://open.acgtracker.com:1096/announce&tr=http://www.megatorrents.kg/announce.php

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *