BuRR

Crossbow = potentially lethal weapon in the wrong hands.



As for having our hands tied, please let me give you an example.

Recently, I was called to a local supermarket @9am to arrest a shoplifter who had been detained by security. He'd been there 1 hour before we had a free unit available to attend.

He'd attempted to steal about £10 worth of razor blades, and was a heroin addict stealing to pay for his next score.

I knew him, very well in fact, as he is a prolific shoplifter.

The guy is of the "its a fair cop" ilk, and is happy to accept the charge on the chin. We arrive at the station, and book him in (10am by this stage due to being in the queue in the custody area due to overnight prisoners going to court.)

Upon being booked in, as the guy is a registered heroin addict, the force surgeon must be called, thus delaying proceedings. Also, at this time, his solicitor is contacted (who he is on first name terms with btw - AND on legal aid)

2 hours later, 12pm, the surgeon arrives and deems our friend fit for interview. By this time, I've already obtained statements and done most of the file. (approx 25 sheets of A4 paper by now)

We call the solicitor to arrange an interview. After a lot of messing around, the solicitor eventually turns up at 3pm and proceeds to have a 1 hour consultation with his client about the case (which he is going to admit, as he told me there was no point denying it)

After the consulation, the prisoner requires a review and a meal, then a smoke. 4:30pm before we get started on the interview.

5 minutes later the interview is concluded and we have an admission from our friend.

Due to his persistant offending, he is remanded into custody, therefore a remand file is required.

5:30pm, our friend is charged and remanded in custody for the next available court.

7:00pm I sign off duty after completing a remand file.






Now I know this happens all over the country. So much of our time is taken up by solicitors playing the game, and fleecing us of legal aid for these guys and girls that would be more than happy to interview without legal advice. Also, I wish they would review the file system, as far as I'm concerned far too much of our time is spent on paperwork following an arrest.

I ought to go to bed.

[Edited by BuRR - 7/19/2002 12:26:41 AM]

LEE P

Well off the original post, but ive called the police to a gun incident in my town.

There was alot of arguing at the local drug dealers house and then these two guys pulled up and got out of a old mini with a shotgun!

i must admit the police were there like a shot (no pun intended)
the were feckng fearless. straight in and gave chase.

the main players iin the arrest were some friggin meaty motorway police men. not just the usual panda boys n girls.

but they sorted the job and didnt hide hoping they would all have gone if they waited long enough.

scoobynutta555

put said addict in a cell with tony martin and plant tonys baccy tin on him, bet he wont ever nick again.

johnfelstead

Burrs last post is spot on what the major problem is with the UK police, too much time spent wasted on paperwork and interviewing. Why the hell cant they have the aresting police giving there statement and then handing the scumbag over to station based staff to carry out the rest of the procedure?

And dont say the aresting oficer has to be present for interviewing because thats not true, statements can be taken by police from diferent forces if need be, that happens quite often when you have people being interviewed for traffic ofences when they live in a diferent county to the oficers interested in the offence.

We need more police out policing, not sat inside getting wound up by the procedures, admin staff should do that crap and interview staff should do the interviewing in the majority of cases.

Can you imagine running a business with the ineficiency the police have and the procedures they follow? It's barking mad!

Katana

90% of the police force are ill-trained in the UK when it comes to fighting violent criminals. The 10% are from the armed police unit and are only used in serious matter (like some Arab blowing themselves up). The rest of them can only tackle a crime if the suspect does not resist (ie motorists).

This was all right until recent times when the criminals realise this and has used it to their advantage. I don't blame the cops for not stopping the teenagers from playing William Tell. How are they supposed to deal with this situation? Using their little stick? I don't think so. Who wants to get killed anyway?

As for investigating crimes like burglary or vandals, again they are ill trained for that. Of the several times that my house was burgled, I managed to find the culprit myself even before the police can. What I propose is that they should hire me to investigate for them and deal with things that they're incapable of dealing with.

All I ask in return is not to pay any more taxes and that I shall never be charged for any traffic offenses. Its a good deal too if you ask me. I can help reduce the crime rates..

dazzaTypeR

BURR

I agree that no officer should be put in a situation where they have to go up against some spot inflicted teeny that wants to show off to his pals, but for nobody to turn up at all thats just ridiculous, why can't a normal officer just turn up to observe and prevent normal folk endangering themselves untill someone properly equiped to do the job, and make sure that said **** does'nt decide he's Robin hood on a grifter. Just to say nobody should arrive coz they aint armed for it is just not doing the job that your surely paid for. If a lone fireman saw a petrol station ablaze he would'nt bugger off coz he don't have fire engine he'd surely stay to make sure nobody else of lesser experience would put themselves in jeopardy.

I agree that your hands are tied on many things and when you do arrest proper crims judges let them go, It strikes me that most cops are'nt in it coz they wanna help the public and make the world a safer place by arresting crims, they just wanna nice little job, a nice bit of power over people, get regular pay rise and good money, a decent pension @ 50 and entry to the pub back room 1st thursday of every month.

WHERE DO I JOIN.....

logiclee

B-E-W,

Just stated the facts on the phone.

3 Teenagers of around 15-18 years using large crossbow to cause damage around old persons property. One old chap been told to "F*** off back inside or they might practice on him". Also metioned I believed they were firing sharpened wood rather than crossbow bolts.

The answer is not to put officers lifes at risk but to allocate resources (increase them?) more affectivly.

I just wonder what would have happened if it was an armed robbery I was reporting.?

Lee

BuRR

I'll say it again, I'm reporting what the procedures are and how things are dealt with...... I'm NOT saying its right or wrong.

I'm just a pawn in the whole scheme of things, and there's no way I can change legislation or policy, so please direct your disappointment towards your local MP.

As for 90% of police officers not being trained to deal with violent criminals....... I wouldn't even say that even 5% of the people we deal with on a daily basis are violent towards us..... although it is increasing and a growing concern.

I don't know why they didn't attend.... the least you could have expected was a courtesy phone call back explaining the delay. Take it up with the police force in question.

Here you have direct evidence of a threat of using the weapon against someone...... this was probably the reason that the job was placed in the hands of the armed units.

Anything (like a crossbow bolt) fired from a crossbow can be potentially lethal. I've attended a call before where someone was fired at with a bolt made from a knitting needle with some nylon attached as flights.... The bolt had been fired from the rear and had pierced the guy's leather jacket and had stuck about 2" into his back. Imagine what it could have done if fired from the front.

[Edited by BuRR - 7/19/2002 8:06:24 AM]

DemonDave

iTrader: (13)

At the end of the day it is a lack of clear direction, money and management.

I have seen first hand the amount of grief from scum officers have to take and then fill in realms and realms of paperwork. The armed response units in nottingham also perform as traffic cars and the traffic cars are not in the same prolific numbers as they used to be.

We cannot have a go at the officer on the street they are doing the job and are more frustrated then we are at the fact they cannot do there job properly.

We are being run by politicians who think it is more important to spend money on "quick wins" like all the new signs that have appeared in Nottingham saying "speed kills" and "186 serious injuries to march 02"

Surely they should spend the money to review the process and effort we put the police through to streamline the process and allow the police to police !

Perhaps we should spend the politicians to deal with the lads with the crossbows !

dazzaTypeR,

Of all the police I have meet there are a few jobs worths but the majority do not fit to what you have said, they are just as frustrated as we are ! Ask to spend a day with them , then still say you want to join !

Dave.

[Edited by DemonDave - 7/19/2002 8:09:42 AM]

BuRR

Motorists have always been the easy target...... its the paying public.....

Let's face it. You pay VAT when you buy the car. (or tax on your company car)
You pay road tax
You pay a shedload of tax on fuel
You pay tax on your insurance.

Fines and prosecutions are streamlined (ie. fixed penalty system)

why the hell don't we have fixed penalty systems for real crimes?


Also..... as you can probably tell, I was tired when I posted that last night.... my rambling on was an attempt to show you that a huge amount of time was spent on paperwork and messing around whilst legal aid solicitors pull their fingers out.


Anyway, I'm going to be starting my new job next Monday, so I'll be off the streets. (and yes, its another officer off the streets) BUT let me assure you its a worthy role, and NOT in relation to persecuting motorists (because I'd be a bit of a hypocrite there, wouldn't I?)

Neil Smalley

As a member of scoobynet i'm grateful to Burr to giving us 'the other side's' point of view and spending his valuable free time to try and answer all the complaints being directed at the police force.

The problem is clearly the lack of resources and red tape, not any lack of dedication or bravery by the police themsevles.

I liken the situation to working in a company, where the senior management and shareholders dictate to the workers that, for example every telephone call taken has to be recorded on paper three times and then signed off by the guy working next door.

Now who's fault is it if a worker misses a vital phone call that loses the company a big order? The guy who missed the call, or the management who, by red tape and demanding focus be put onto lots of small deal calls, made it impossible for a worker to answer every call?

I take the point about 'the police are expected to get into danger' but these guys have families too. However they're not the army. Going back to the work place analogy. Let's say this companies servers crash, the tech support people are all dealing with another server crash on another site. Who would you want to fix the problem? The proper support team, or the vending machine repair guy?

Most police I know are sick to death with the rules and regulations that are imposed on them from on high. That stops them doing the job that motivates them.

BuRR

Thanks Neil, as I was mentioning earlier, I'll try and find that article that I was referring to in an earlier post.

chiark

Sorry to pick on B-E-W's point, but...
Are you telling me that you'd take on an armed person that has threatened to shoot someone with a silly helmet and a stout stick? This is not what the police are paid for. Have to disagree with this one.

The point of that training is that approaching a dangerous situation that you cannot handle is not a good idea, potentially leading to two deaths and two shootings. Age of the example does not affect the "moral of the story".

Have to agree with the thread in general tho, it is quite embarassing. Thing is, as has been brought up, it seems that it's the management's fault, that's all.

I'm sure someone sometime in management will point out that 10 people die on the roads every day and the occurrance of death by crossbow is almost nil, and thus feel justified. Not saying it's right, but I reckon that'll be the argument.

mutant_matt

Firslt, BuRR, I'd like to second Neil's points and it is quite an eye opener seeing things from the other side.

Chiark,I think you've hit the nail on the head there - that *IS* the argument I've heard before and they will argue that "Speed Kills" so they will try and convince you that their priorities are correct.

We all of course know that Speed in itself rarely kills (the TRRL say that speed is a possible cause in 6% of accidents and a deffinate factor in only 3%) but if the police are being run as a business as BuRR says, then I can't think of a better revenue generator that targeting every motorist, driving faster than some arbitrary road sign dictates....

Matt

Pavlo

The next Police officer to be killed because the armed response should have been called is the next police officer not available to the public.

So why should we needlessly risk the lives of police officers?

In the incedent that started this thread, was anybody actually hurt?

Paul

Scot123

Somebody mentioned the army.

Maybe we should let the police deal with the lesser crimes but have the army involved with orginised and armed crime as all they seem to do is spend their time jollying off to another countries.

Neil Smalley

Or

Bring back national service and let them deal with it.

Katana

No no! My idea was better. Haven't you guys seen The Punisher, Knight Rider and Guyver?

SWRTWannabe

As an aside...

Speed may kill, but so do those signs - nearly crashed while reading one when I was in Nottingham last weekend

King RA

Here's an idea. Police target motorists because they can make the most money from us with fixed penalties right?? Well like somebody said earlier make REAL crime more profitable for them buy having even bigger fixed penalties for violence, theft, drug dealing e.t.c and if they can't pay it make them work for it. Prison is too "cushy" for criminals these days, if prison meant breaking rocks every day of your sentence I doubt there would be half the amount of crime there is, add a £1000 fine per burglary/drug deal e.t.c and that'd be justice.

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

Going back to Neils point about them not being the Army, I was in the Army and I did have a Gun and I was trained how to use it and we also did unarmed combat, but we were not allowed to interveen in what was deemed a police matter, as we were the army and not a civil protection force, so even if there was an armed robbery going off in the newsagents over the road from a barracks, the guards are not allowed to get involved. It is crap I know but thems the rules. As for national service I 1000% agree with it, bring it back, most other countries in europe have it, and don't have half the scroaty scumbag kids that England does, alos isn't Britain the only country in Europe that doesn't have armed police?

BuRR

hmmmm........ it appears that the document I was referring to earlier is too large to post on here.

I'll link to it --> link

I'll leave it to you guys to come to your own conclusions.


[Edited by BuRR - 7/19/2002 2:46:12 PM]

logiclee

Some very interesting points made.

From my own background in safety there is no way any Police officers life should be put at risk. I deal with Her Majesty's Inspectors and the HSE weekly, the Police (Management) know what sort of situations arise and know what control measures need to be in place to prevent injury and death to their officers.

It seems though that the people who control the budgets for any number of reasons decide that resources are better spent in other more unpopular areas. I assume the majority of the general public are against such spending but the lack of noise we make to our MP's means that it will continue as it is.

As regards the incident, no one was harmed but what would have happened if the old chap or myself had challenged them about the damage to property? Would we be seeing another pensioner beaten up? Regular scoobynetter killed thread, or some one locked up for the manslaughter of another yob?

What if these youths were firing at your car / home?

Lee

[Edited by logiclee - 7/19/2002 3:05:08 PM]

GazP

Typical plod. Sat on their bums making money when real people need them they are never around. This country has gone down the pan, can it get much lower?

Too much emphasis on money collecting and persecuting motorists as they are easy targets, not enough time spent fighting real crime like burglaries, rapings, muggings etc.

medders

Good constructive reply Gazp
What are you basing your "typical plod" statement on?
Do you know the majority of policemen / women ?
I think not.
Some of you lot should really think about what you are saying.
This thread started with a reasonable comment of a situation that
"looked bad" and warranted discussion.
Slagging off "typical plod" is going to upset many people myself
included.
Most people have no idea what goes on or why things happen in the police service. Maybe some of you should try and find out (or listen to what burr is trying to tell you) before making rash statements.

A couple more facts for you from Gloucestershire police

1) If a firearm or similar call comes in an "ordinary" officer CAN NOT attend in an active role. Control will tell you NOT to do anything (cordoning the area etc is fine but you do NOT approach armed suspects). If you disobey the rules / orders, the way health and safety now works, you run the risk of not being insured Should you get injured. How many of you would risk this I wonder?
2) Traffic officers do traffic. Nothing else. They aren't supposed to. Armed officers do firearms jobs. Nothing else. If they do see something (same with traffic) they will act, but get an "ordinary" officer to deal with it asap.
"ordinary" police do not do traffic. They deal with everything thats left.


cheers

medders

Katana

Thats why I prefer the cops in countries like Thailand. The criminals get to live a life of hell because not only are the cops well trained, they also have a background in military training. Best thing about that place is, that motorists that drive fast are often ignored and if you do ever get stoped by a cop for speeding, the "let-off fee" is only 5 quid...

DemonDave

iTrader: (13)

Stop picking on the "plod" and the officers. This is not their fault but the management and politicins who leave them no alternatives.

dazzaTypeR

The only thing I have a question over is why did no police turn up at all, Ok, a normal plod can't deal with an armed person, does'nt mean they should just stick their heads in the sand and hope situation difuses, If some15 year old fool was waving a crossbow around I know plenty of blokes who would'nt hesitate to step in if there were no law around thinking it's just some young kid and he would'nt have the ***** to use the thing.

Surely if there were some police there to just prevent have a go hero's having a pop, the situation would be at least under some control.

If that kid has been twating around with his mates waving his crossbow about and he's had absouloutly no comeback from the law whats he gonna come out with next, dads 12gauge or home made bomb he's built from the net, surely your better of not letting him get away with the first offence.

As for GazP's comment, how many times have you broke the speed limit, how many times have you driven dangerously, made a mistake and never been nicked for it. Your comment makes it sound like there's a speed trap round every corner and there gonna get you no matter what.

The law have a hard job, I would'nt want it, it's not just a job it alters your whole life, they are blamed when nobodys prosecuted even if they are arrested, and never praised when they actually do put someone away. It's one of those no win situations,

I've met some real ******* coppers but I've also met some top ones, (even had one follow me at 140 once and he let me off with and SP50), I've been screwed over by the local law where I live big time, but I also had one who was determined to find my stolen motorbike once that he found it in his own personal time, for it to go to court and the judge found the culprit not guilty coz he said he was looking after for a friend but he could'nt remember his mates name...

There's a lot more crime that goes on than there are police to deal with it. Maybe we would all be better off if we backed up the law a little more than criticised the guys who are just doing as they are told.

How many times have you been told by your boss (or wife) to do something that you knew just would'nt work, but had to do it coz its the only way your gonna get anywhere.

BURR you sound like a top cop who has head on his shoulders and can see the probs within his own proffesion.

Keep up the good work.

Blow Dog

Had the car broken into again a few weeks ago. That makes it 5 times in 2 years.

Policemen arrive at 2.00am and basically tell me point blank that they won't bother to take fingerprints as it's a total waste of time. Even if they do catch the perpetrator, it's a slap on the wrist as he makes his way home before hitting another car.

2 weeks and a nice police 'Victims Guide' booklet later, I'm wodering about the benefits of living in this country.

I quote the policeman concerned:
"I come in at 9.00am, do my job, and go home at 5.00pm. There is nothing else I can do. I caught someone breaking into a car the other day. Grabbed him and 'angrily' put the cuffs on him. 3 hours later, I'm in the Chiefs office getting a warning for 'Police brutality'. I wonder why I bother"

Neil has it spot on:
"Most police I know are sick to death with the rules and regulations that are imposed on them from on high. That stops them doing the job that motivates them."

Cem - wondering when the public can take back control of their country.

Jerome

I friend of mine lives in Hackney (well he is Russian and even Hackney probably seems civilised ) and recently he saw a man waving a very large knife in the middle of the road outside his house. The guy was strung out on drugs and/or alcohol. He dialled 999 and said what was happening. It took over an hour before any Police attendance, by which time the loon in question was long gone.

Obviously it wasn't the Officers on the ground's fault, but a resourcing issue. If a place as notoriously violent as Hackney does not warrant extra Police Officers - especially at night - then what hope do less violent areas have?

London now has more murders than New York City. NYC turned the tide against crime with - amongst other initiatives - a zero tolerance policy. Also, the US has some pretty stiff procedures with respect to protecting a suspect's rights, and they still managed to successfully tackle (or at least dramatically reduce) violent crime. It obviously helped that NYC also increased the size of the Police Force significantly.

The only way we are going to improve things in this country is to allocate extra resources. Extra Police Officers, and a heap of admin staff to take the paperwork burden away from them so Officers can concentrate on their real job. Reducing the ridiculous paperwork mountain anyway wouldn't go amiss either. Unfortunately, this will cost money, and the current Govt seem rather keen on taking money from the public (especially motorists), but seem reluctant to spend it wisely.

I am also strongly opposed to running the Police as a business. Protecting and serving the public is not meant to be a profit making exercise - "I'm sorry Sir, but we can't attend to a juvenile crossbow incident because we will not get a conviction against minors and therefore there is no business benefit to the Police Service..."

Robert Peel must be turning in his grave.

[Edited by Jerome - 7/19/2002 11:55:37 PM]