Vacuum filled

Via Whiteboard Technician, this story:

Smith and his colleagues at Shirley Street Watch have become the scourge of low-level criminals in their little corner of Solihull in the West Midlands since they started patrols in January. Police credit them with effectively forcing drug dealers away from parts of the suburb and significantly reducing antisocial behaviour.

While Smith bristles at the term “vigilante”, the volunteers are one of a rising number of groups springing up across Britain as crime surges and police officer numbers hit a record low. Added into the mix is the very low and falling detection rate – 75% of thefts unsolved. Victims of crime are willing to take matters into their own hands.

Regular readers of my blog won’t be tremendously surprised by this. As I’ve said before, the role of the police is to protect suspected criminals from the mob by helping to dispense justice; if the police opt out of that role, the mob will take its place. Now this bunch in yellow jackets in Solihull thankfully don’t look like an African mob who suspect a young woman of being a witch, but we’re heading in that direction. And these groups are sprouting up everywhere:

This week Hartlepool was called the town “where the police don’t come out” in reports about a neighbourhood group formed to try to fill the void left by police. On one recent Saturday not a single officer was on duty in the town of 92,000 as all were called to another job.

Perhaps the police were checking Twitter for racism? Or were they busy putting LGBTQ decals on their patrol cars?

A new Midlands-based group, We Stand Determined, has amassed nearly 3,000 members on Facebook in the past week, with splinter groups already forming in Manchester and elsewhere.

I rather like this development, mainly because it’s focusing minds. Unsurprisingly, Plod doesn’t:

The emergence of these unofficial groups, formed on social media, has led to fears among the police that a new breed of “have-a-go heroes” are putting themselves at risk and jeopardising investigations.

I rather think it’s the lack of investigations which are the problem.

Insp Iftekhar Ahmed, of West Midlands police, told the Guardian he was concerned that well-meaning citizens were “hindering the situation” by taking matters into their own hands.

Ah yes, mustn’t do that now, must we Inspector Iftekhar Ahmed? Far better the British people just meekly tolerate criminals running rampage while the police do nothing. What they’re really afraid of is their own irrelevance.

Ahmed runs the force’s Street Watch scheme of 350 volunteers who patrol neighbourhoods under the supervision of the police, who pay for their insurance and provide a basic training course on safety.

I know nothing about these groups, but if they’re subject to the same SJW doctrines as the regular police, they’ll be useless.

He said: “Citizenship is what they’re doing: look, see, report, don’t have a go – that’s the ethos. They’re a vigilant group, not a vigilante group.”

Spy, snitch, tell…but don’t do anything. Ah, modern policing.

Smith said residents were “majorly disappointed” when Shirley police station shut down two years ago – one of 27 West Midlands police buildings closed as a cost-cutting measure.

“We have had a couple of people say: ‘You’re just policing on the cheap.’ But things aren’t going to change any time soon. If you want to make a difference you’ve got to get boots on the ground, you’ve got to get off your arse and do something for your community.”

The fact these groups are being given a sympathetic hearing in The Guardian of all places is illuminating.

Share

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.

Share

Racism spotted, close all airspace

This story is causing a lot of handwringing:

A Ryanair passenger who racially abused an elderly woman sitting next to him on a plane may “get away with it”, a shadow transport minister said.

The man was filmed calling the 77 year-old victim an “ugly black bastard” and shouting “don’t talk to me in a foreign language you stupid ugly cow”.

The video pretty much captures what happened. If a crime was committed, why can they not prosecute?

Labour MP Karl Turner, a qualified barrister who was once Labour’s shadow attorney general, said Ryanair had ”failed spectacularly”.

“Ryanair failure to deplane the alleged racist offender, handing him over to the Spanish authorities probably means that he isn’t now prosecuted.

Would the Spanish have been interested in prosecuting a British man for racially abusing a fellow passenger? Is that even a crime in Spain?

“Suspect the pressure to turn this aircraft around quickly and get it airborne meant that they have allowed this alleged offender to remain on the aircraft,” said Mr Turner. ”He may now get away with it.”

Apparently racially abusing someone is now a crime so heinous aircraft should be grounded while the police are called to investigate. Never mind the inconvenience to the rest of the passengers and the knock-on effect on other flights coming in and out of Barcelona.

Now the man in the video is likely a pr*ck of the highest order and if he said stuff like this without serious provocation, he needs a good thrashing. But the situation is a little more complicated than the media is letting on. Ryanair had an opportunity to call the Spanish police to say a passenger is being unruly, but what would they have said? One passenger is yelling at another? Unless he’s presenting a security threat, I’m not sure the Spaniards would have been interested. Better for them to let the plane depart taking these assh*le Brits with them. So they couldn’t have got him arrested for security offences in Barcelona even if they’d wanted to, and now everyone’s complaining he’s not been arrested for racism. But it happened in Spain, and:

“Unfortunately because Ryanair is registered in Dublin not in the UK the alleged offence could only be tried by UK authorities if it was ‘in flight’ to the UK. Section 92(1) Civil Aviation Act s.92(4) defines ‘in flight’.

“If this incident had have happened on an alternative airline under ‘British Control’ or it was already ‘in flight’ to the UK the prosecuting authorities could have prosecuted.”

So the outrage is really that the rest of the world isn’t as interested in prosecuting Brits for being racist as the British police are.

Essex Police said they believed the incident had taken place at Barcelona Airport.

“Essex Police takes prejudice-based crime seriously and we want all incidents to be reported,” a spokeswoman said.

“We are working closely with Ryanair and the Spanish authorities on the investigation.”

The sole justification for the involvement of Essex Police is that the plane landed in Stansted. But when racism is the issue, the entire world apparently comes under their jurisdiction. I suspect the authorities in Barcelona didn’t even answer the phone when they called.

Share

Post Abandoned

Earlier this year I wrote of the bravery of Lt-Col Arnaud Beltrame, the French policeman who traded places with a woman being held hostage by an Islamist terrorist and paid for it with his life. I contrasted his actions with those of the police who responded to the school shooting in Florida by standing well back as children got murdered. In the comments, Julia M remarked:

I cannot imagine a British policeman doing this.

To which I responded:

I could perhaps imagine an ordinary PC acting on impulse and in defiance of his orders doing this, but it’s not what Lt-Col Arnaud Beltrame did. It appears he, a senior officer, took the sober and measured decision to swap places with the hostage believing he thought it was his duty to be placed in danger rather than her, an ordinary civilian.

The idea of a senior British policeman of similar rank swapping places with a hostage in an ongoing situation is literally incredible.

Well, we no longer need to speculate, because we now have an account of what a senior British policeman did during a terror attack:

The acting Metropolitan Police commissioner locked himself in his car as he watched terrorist Khalid Masood kill one of his colleagues in Westminster because he had “no protective equipment and no radio,” he has told an inquest.

Sir Craig Mackey, now deputy commissioner of Scotland Yard, said that despite witnessing Masood “purposefully” lunge at everyone in his path with a butcher’s knife, he realised that had he got out of his vehicle, he would have been a target.

Instead, he remained in his black saloon car, within the Palace of Westminster, and witnessed Masood, 52, fatally stab PC Keith Palmer.

I might forgive this coward if the terrorist had been mowing people down with an AK-47, but if one of your colleagues is being attacked by a lone man with a butcher’s knife you go and bloody help him. Unless the knifeman is very well trained, his odds of doing damage are considerably shortened in a two-on-one situation, and if it’s three-on-one he’ll be lucky to survive.

“I could see Pc Palmer moving backwards and then go down,” he told the jury at the Old Bailey.

“The next thing I could see is the male over Pc Palmer and I saw two stab attempts into this side of the torso.

“The attacker had one of those looks where, if they get you in that look, they would be after you.

“He seemed absolutely focused on getting further down and attacking anyone who was in his way.”

Remember, this man has been knighted by the Queen; shift over Brave Sir Robin, we have a new benchmark.

“First and foremost I was a police officer so I went to open the door to get out,” he added.

I wanted to get stuck in, honestly.

“One of the police officers by the side of the car quite rightfully, said: ‘Get out, make safe, go, shut the door,’ which he did, and it was the right thing to do.

Run, hide, tell.

“That’s when I thought: ‘I have got to start putting everything we need in place. We have got no protective equipment, no radio,

And no risk assessment has been carried out. Plus, wouldn’t any intervention have been a bit racist?

I have got two colleagues with me who are quite distressed,’ so we moved out.”

Your colleagues were “quite distressed” so you drove off leaving a murderer running rampage in the streets? What would Lt-Col Arnaud Beltrame have done, do you think?

The officer’s widow, Melissa, accused the Metropolitan Police of leaving her unarmed husband to die with no protection, failing to take responsibility for its mistakes and failing to investigate his death properly.

I can only imagine how she feels having heard her husband’s boss fled in his car because he wasn’t properly equipped. Was PC Palmer properly equipped? Contrast the behaviour of Mackey with that of the MP Tobias Ellwood:

Tobias Ellwood MP, 52, heard the crash as terrorist Khalid Masood drove his car into the perimeter fence of Parliament on March 22 last year, then heard “shouting and screaming” as pedestrians fled.

Mr Ellwood, who reached the rank of captain in the Royal Green Jackets during a military career before entering politics, said he saw “two waves of people” running away from the scene of the attack “in a panic”.

“I ran into one group of people shouting and screaming with panic in their eyes”.

Asked if he knew he was heading into potential danger, Mr Ellwood replied: “very much so”.

The MP added: “There is always a concern of a secondary attack. It didn’t cross my mind but my brother was killed in a secondary attack in Bali.”

Mr Ellwood was among the people who offered medical assistance to PC Palmer as he lay gravely wounded on the ground.

So we’ve seen considerable bravery from a man under no obligation to act, and appalling cowardice and abandonment of duty from a man who struts around with a chest full of medals.

Welcome to the modern ruling class.

Share

Shot for being at home

I’ve written before about America’s police being way too aggressive and trigger-happy, resulting from poor training, low standards, and outright cowardice. Now we have this story:

A white Dallas police officer who says she mistook her black neighbor’s apartment for her own when she fatally shot him has been arrested on a manslaughter charge.

It’s worth bearing in mind that she’s only been arrested after several days of public outrage at her having been initially merely suspended. I imagine if any non-police officer walked into someone else’s house and shot the owner dead, they’d be treated rather differently.

Lawyers for the family questioned why it took three days for Guyger to be charged. One said Guyger should have been in handcuffs the night of the shooting, but she was only booked on a manslaughter charge Sunday night.

Indeed.

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings says an off-duty police officer charged in the shooting death of a neighbor had parked on the wrong floor of their apartment complex’s parking garage.

Rawlings said Sunday that the 30-year-old officer , Amber Guyger, drove to her apartment complex Thursday night after her shift. Authorities say the four-year veteran of the police force told officers after she shot 26-year-old Botham Jean that she had mistaken his apartment for her own.

Was she drunk? Was she high? We don’t know, because the police aren’t saying. Got to protect their own, you see.

Authorities say a Dallas police officer said she shot a neighbor whose home she mistakenly entered last week after he ignored her “verbal commands.”

Why should a man going about his business in his own home react to the “verbal commands” of a policewoman who has no business being there?

David Armstrong of the Texas Rangers wrote in an arrest affidavit released Monday that Officer Amber Guyger said she didn’t realize she was in the wrong apartment until after she shot 26-year-old Botham Jean and went into the hallway to check the address.

Again, it must be asked: how drunk was she?

An investigator says a Dallas police officer who shot and killed her neighbor after mistaking his apartment for her own said that when she inserted her key in his door, it opened because it had been slightly ajar.

The affidavit says Guyger was on the phone with 911 reporting the shooting when she turned on the apartment lights and discovered she was in the wrong apartment. It says Jean’s apartment was the one right above Guyger’s and the apartment layouts and exterior hallways were nearly identical.

There is an old Soviet film called Ironiya Sudbii, which is based around a man from Moscow getting completely drunk and dumped on a plane to Saint Petersburg. When he arrives he assumes he’s still in Moscow, takes a taxi to his address where he finds an identical building – and an identical apartment whose door can be unlocked by his own key. The owner returns and hilarity ensues but – unlike the story in Dallas – nobody winds up dead.

It’s one thing for police to be heavy-handed when carrying out their duties; they have a difficult job after all, and America is full of violent criminals carrying guns. However, there is absolutely no excuse for a policewoman to mistake a neighbour’s apartment for her own and shoot the occupant dead. She needs the book thrown at her, just the same as if she was an ordinary citizen. The fact the police are dragging their feet and seemingly protecting her while an innocent man lies in the morgue is indicative of how badly things need to change.

Share

The Shamelessness of South Yorkshire Police

From the BBC:

Ministers do not know the impact funding cuts have had on police forces, the UK’s public spending watchdog says.

According to the National Audit Office, the Home Office does not know whether the police system in England and Wales is “financially sustainable”.

It calls the approach to police funding “ineffective” and “detached” from the changing demands faced by officers.

Changing demands, eh? Such as dealing with reports of non-crimes sent in by the public at the behest of the police themselves?

Now it may be the police are understaffed and underfunded, but one thing is for sure: the allocation of existing money and human resources in British police forces is an absolute disgrace.

But put that aside for a minute and consider what South Yorkshire police are saying here. Not content with prosecuting people under the dangerously vague and arbitrary definition of “hate crimes”, they now see fit to hound the population for expressing unapproved opinions which don’t even fall under that category. In other words, whatever you say is Plod’s business. Lest you think I’m reading it wrong, here’s how they clarified their position in a later Tweet:

This has gone viral and many people are outraged, but the tin ears of the British police and whoever in government they take their orders from are legendary; shame isn’t a word in their vocabulary. Proof of this comes in no better form than the fact that South Yorkshire police, by refusing to take complaints seriously through fear of being called racist (or perhaps out of ethnic solidarity with the perpetrators), were complicit in allowing Pakistani rape gangs to abuse dozens of underage girls in Rotherham for years. And here they are, smug as ever, trying to bully into silence ordinary citizens who they happily admit committed no crime.

The British police are rotten to the very core; scrap the whole lot of them and start again.

Share

African gangs and racist stubby holders

The incomparable Steve Sailer brings us news from Melbourne:

According to the Australian Establishment, Melbourne has two African gangs problems: the African gangs of street criminals themselves, and, far worse, the Australians who have noticed and even talked about this new problem that the politicians have imported for them to endure.

How can Australia be a democracy when rifts are turned into election issues? The essence of democracy is that elections shouldn’t decide anything.

I understand a good portion of those African gangs are Sudanese, whose presence in the city I heard about during the first week of my arrival. I was in the gym at the astoundingly expensive and very average Novotel watching the news, and a story came up about how a bunch of policemen in the Melbourne suburb of Sunshine had been distributing racist stubby (drinks) holders. They then showed a picture of one of  the offending items:

At which point I stopped the treadmill and said, “Eh?” Apparently, the above image was so racially aggravating to local Sudanese that three police officers were eventually sacked, because:

“Mudfish” is a type of fish and is a common food in many African countries. It is used by some people as derogatory slang for Africans.

Is that cartoon fish with human arms and hands unmistakably a mudfish? Judging by the photos, mudfish don’t even have barbels; it looks more like a catfish to me. And a Google search of “mudfish Africans” brings up several pages of how to catch one but not a single item which might indicate who these “some people” using it as derogatory term might be.

At the time I assumed this would be laughed out of the police complaints office, but oh how naive I was! Now bear in mind I’d spent the previous 10 years living in Kuwait, Dubai, Russia, Thailand and Nigeria where political correctness of this sort simply doesn’t exist. Certainly, in none of those countries is the local police going to find themselves in trouble over complaints made by foreigners, let alone refugees complaining about drinks coolers. I didn’t realise it at the time, but this was my first real exposure to how utterly craven the ruling classes in the west had become. Take this statement:

Chief Commissioner Ken Lay said the police force would not tolerate racist behaviour in any form.

“There is large numbers in the African community that were enormously disturbed by what has happened,” he said. “It sent a very bad message to the broader community that police were not tolerant.

You’ll not tolerate racist behaviour in any form, but you’ll invent it where there is none. Now the Sudanese would have learned from this. They tested the water and found they could get policemen fired in their new home simply by making the most silly of complaints, and now – five years later – they’re running riot around Melbourne confident that the ruling classes who took their side previously will continue to support them. The rot set in a long time ago, and nothing is going to change until those in charge are run out of town on a rail and left to die of thirst in the desert.

Share

Ineffective policing brings forth vigilante justice

In March 2017 I wrote a post centred around this remark left by commentator Duffy:

Here’s what many people often seem to forget. Police are there to protect us from criminals. But they are also there to protect the criminals from mob justice.

I referenced cases in Nigeria and Argentina where ordinary people, utterly fed up with the police being unwilling or unable to deal with miscreants, took matters into their own hands and I speculated we’re probably not far off such vigilante justice appearing on the streets of Britain. Then yesterday, via Natalie Solent at Samizdata, I discovered this story:

This shocking footage reveals the moment a gang of vigilantes beat a man in street after he tried to attack people with acid.

The suspect is shown being kicked to the ground outside Maryland train station in East London and battered with a plank of wood before having milk poured over him.

A mob claim to have caught him shortly after he had thrown acid inside a shop after someone refused to hand over some change.

Well, if useless fools like Cressida Dick, Sadiq Khan, and their private army of uniformed enforcers won’t protect the public from such things as acid attacks, sooner or later the public will start protecting themselves:

Footage of the latest incident was filmed by a witness, who shared it on Facebook.

It shows the the alleged acid attacker lying face down in the road outside Maryland railway station in Stratford, surrounded by a group of men.

As he stands up a man kicks him back to the tarmac and somebody in the crowd shouts: ‘Kill him, bro.’

Another man attempts to intervene but the first man continues to kick and stomp him while he is down, making him scream out in pain.

The cameraman warns: ‘Yo, if you bring acid ever again.’

A second man then douses the suspect with what appears to be milk and boots him in the back.

The crowd shouts: ‘Kill him, bruv. P****.’ Somebody then strikes him with a plank of wood.

If this happened in Nigeria the man would be dead, either beaten to a pulp or doused in petrol and set alight. But more importantly, and this was the crux of my previous post, if the police had tried to intervene the crowd would likely have murdered him too. Would the same thing ave happened in London? Probably not but, with recent stories of policemen being mocked and pelted with bottles and stones, I suspect it’s a matter of time before a British policeman intervenes in vigilante justice and meets the same fate as the victim.

Share

Sorry Plod, you’re on your own

Plod doesn’t really get it, does he:

Firstly, the reason a lone policewoman is struggling to get the cuffs on a drunk male is because someone decided women could do the job just as well as men and physical standards went out the window. This is what happens when the purpose of an organisation is changed to serve as a vehicle for progressives to enact their deranged fantasies as part of an overall aim of undermining society and the institutions on which it depends.

Secondly, people are reluctant to intervene in such situations because – largely thanks to Plod’s idiocy – the personal risks are too high.

Thirdly, as I said the other day, the public are increasingly seeing the police if not quite aligned against them, then certainly not on their side. Only if you pointed this out to Twitter Plod, they’d close ranks, start issuing threats, cite dubious government surveys which say “the emergency services” are as popular as ever, declare you a problem and “biased against the police” and, finally, block you. I’ve learned not to bother. Proposals like this amuse, though:

Is this going to be reciprocal, do you think? So if an ordinary citizen requests help from the police and they do nothing, Plod gets charged with the same offence? Yeah, sure. But what’s ironic is the police have spend decades creating a monopoly of force by disarming the public and prosecuting anyone who defends themselves, or “takes the law into their hands” as they call it. They are insistent the public should stand well back, or submit to getting their houses burgled or their heads kicked in, until the police show up as only Plod is permitted to deal with such things. Only now we find the police are manifestly incapable of doing half the stuff they’ve claimed a monopoly over and need the public’s help. But it’s not there, and Plod’s on his own. Who’s fault is that, then?

Share

Public Feedback

I’ve written several posts expressing my belief that the British police are not on the side of the public, and they are rapidly losing their support. In particular, this:

I think it’s high time British policemen were shunned from polite society, particularly those in the higher ranks, unless they have unequivocally demonstrated whose side they are on. The default approach to a policeman should be that afforded to a bouncer at a Manchester nightclub, someone to be avoided except when absolutely necessary and even then contact kept to an absolute minimum. The day policeman cannot arrest ordinary citizens on trumped-up terror charges and expect to interact with normal society afterwards is the day they will start to change. But while the middle-classes support this stuff and engage with policemen on supposedly equal terms, rather than demand those responsible are fired on the spot, things will only get worse.

I will not ever call for policemen to be lynched by a mob. I would not ever condone policemen being lynched by a mob. But I suspect there will come a point in future where, if I see a mob lynching policemen, I will walk on by having seen nothing. If the police don’t wise up soon and change course, there is even a chance I’ll stop and watch. I doubt I’ll be alone.

Today I found this story:

A police officer has condemned people who cheered a man escaping police after a confrontation which left two officers requiring hospital treatment.

The incident on Romford Road, Newham, east London, was filmed and shared on social media with laughter and shouts of encouragement clearly audible.

Sorry, but if the police make it abundantly clear, day after day, they are not on the public’s side they can hardly complain when the public treats them with contempt.

But Supt Roy Smith described it as a “sad state of affairs”.

This adequately describes British policing in the modern age, particularly their contemptuous attitude towards ordinary, law-abiding citizens.

Supt Smith tweeted it was “disappointing to see members of the public filming this and laughing at the officers”.

I’d say Supt Smith doesn’t know his public very well, then. Too much time on diversity training and not enough walking the beat, perhaps? Now I’m sure policemen of yore would have found themselves in similar situations, i.e. low-lifes cheering on a criminal. The difference is they’d have expected it, and not gone bleating to the public about how “disappointed” they are. Here’s the tweet in full:

So how did this affairs come about, eh? What changed? And as for the police are the public, spare me. Remember this:

A van driver was arrested by a group of police officers after challenging them because they were parked on a double yellow line. Andy Mayfield, 53, was held in custody for 12 hours and strip searched under anti-terror laws after he started filming the cops, who were parked illegally outside their own police station in Ashton-on-Ribble, Lancashire in January. He was detained under the Terrorism Act and submitted to a rigorous questioning at the Newton Heath terrorism centre in Manchester before eventually being released.

This is more like the behaviour of an occupying army than a police force, and now they’re complaining the public is jeering them when they’re in difficulty. Like their political masters, the British police seem to suffer from a severe lack of self-awareness. I expect we’ll be seeing more incidents like this.

Share