Non-motoring > Clarkson on the Police Computing Issues
Thread Author: No FM2R Replies: 69

 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
From The Times, obviously, but I found it somewhere free so feel calmer about reposting it.

It's tongue in cheek, or deliberately annoying, depending on your perspective, but I feel it is leaning on a salient point to which we should be paying more attention.

Today’s lily-livered cops can’t nick crooks, let alone crack skulls. Quick, dial the 1970s

Jeremy Clarkson

It was yet another dreadful week for the constabulary. Mainly, this was because an on-duty policeman woman was captured on film fist-bumping the sky and generally letting anti-Israel protesters in London know that she was very much on their side.

We’ve become used to this sort of thing at the Notting Hill carnival, where officers are urged to dispense with Dixon’s teachings from Dock Green and twerk the night away with revellers before settling down with a can of chilled Red Stripe and a nice spliff.

But it’s one thing to try to get on with a crowd of generally good-natured marijuana enthusiasts, and quite another to prance about at a political protest, in a full policeman suit, letting everyone know that you go to bed every night with a blow-up Yasser Arafat doll.

Meanwhile, in Lincolnshire, a former policeman support community officer — or traffic warden, as we used to call them — was facing jail because she’d been making improvised explosive devices out of shotgun cartridges. According to her bosses, her behaviour was “completely incompatible with what we stand for in Lincolnshire”. Really? So IEDs are all right in Humberside but not across the estuary?

On the very same day we read about another PCSO who had been sacked for gross misconduct after hitting the bottle and being convicted of a public order offence. And now she’s claiming that she’d been made to work with a constable who, she reckons, liked to chase colleagues around the woods with his penis hanging out. Which, she says, damaged her mental health.

This is the police we are talking about here. The guardians of law and order. And don’t think things will improve any time soon, because just hours after we heard about penis-man, a senior officer in Northamptonshire went public with the news that new recruits didn’t realise they had to work nights and weekends.

It gets worse. I watched a video on TikTok recently of two policemen women who’d apprehended a youth in London. And while they were talking to him, he scarpered. One of the officers did nothing at all, while the other deployed a style of running that Larry Grayson would call a bit effeminate, and set off in pursuit.

Even if she hadn’t been weighed down by a belt-ful of tools, she wouldn’t have had a chance of catching him. There was a time when police officers needed some kind of rudimentary fitness, but now half of them look like Frank Cannon.

Of course, I’m well aware that the police are still very good at solving some crimes. If you drive at 24mph in London, they’ll have you in a heartbeat, and round where I live, they raided every single lockdown party before the guests had even started their soup.

They’re also excellent at catching dead disc jockeys and politicians who they think might have been up to no good in 1972. But other stuff? No. That doesn’t seem to interest them. They tell us that budget cuts are the problem, but it seems to me that the main issue is how the thin blue line is now completely entangled with entitled millennials, socialism, mental health issues and penis enthusiasts.

I bet you any money that instead of getting fired, the policeman woman who supported the Palestinian cause in London last week will receive a “hey mate” email from Commissioner Dick that will have been fully spellchecked by the new Google Docs “woke” filter, which changes words such as manhole to personhole and deletes passive-aggressive expressions. It will also have been signed off with a thumbs-up emoji in a neutral skin tone. But despite these things, the policeman officer will instantly resign and then sue the Met for using the wrong pronoun.

What the police need to remember is that they exist not to keep a few thousand lefties happy on social media but to make millions of normal people feel safe. And we don’t care whether they call themselves a force or a service. We don’t care about semantics at all.

And, if we’re honest, most of us don’t care about stabbings either. The victim’s mother may go on the news to say he was a happy-go-lucky boy who wanted to be a doctor when he grew up, but most of us sort of suspect that he was a machete-wielding drug-dealer who got into a late-night fight, in a kebab shop, with a rival gang. So we are not that bothered about seeing his killers being brought to justice. Not really.

What we do care about is catching burglars. We want to think, when our telly’s been nicked, that Morse will lob some fingerprint powder into his bag and fire up the gunship. Obviously, Plod must maintain an elite division to deal with exotic crimes such as terrorism and murder, but the rank and file? They should be sitting in their squad cars, like Second World War fighter pilots, with their Tasers charged, waiting for the order to scramble.

And I don’t want to see footage of the crim being given a silver blanket and helped into the squad car so he doesn’t bang his head. I actually want him to bang his head, so often and so hard that for years afterwards he’ll be able to use the extremities of his ruined nose as ear plugs.

Let’s not forget that when we dial 999, it’s because there’s an emergency. And we need to think that the police will respond as firemen do — immediately, and with vigour — rather than waiting two days and then asking us to pop into the station for a pamphlet on “victim support” and a crime number for the insurer.

If this is impossible, then maybe the time has come for individual streets and villages to employ their own privatised police force, which has no time for social media niceties and will, if necessary, go fully Jack Regan on the local tea leaves.

I may start such a thing in Chipping Norton. We could call it the Sweeney.
 Clarkson on the Police - R.P.
Probably been caught doing something wrong again
 Clarkson on the Police - MD
An excellent post and it hits the nail squarely on the head.

I was chatting to one of the BIB recently. He is in his fifties, old school and very much on it and he stated that they are virtually unable to police and that 'work' seems to consist of management and emails about meetings and meetings about emails and so it goes on. He further stated that it is IMPOSSIBLE to be sacked for being lazy. Oh! and just to add insult to injury the 'managers' in the main have no experience of policing. So there it is.....Crap!
 Clarkson on the Police - smokie
Clarkson isn't unlike Farage in knowing his audience and delivering what they want to hear, but at least he can be amusing with it (I suppose, because I am on the edge of his potential audience...)
 Clarkson on the Police - Manatee
The police are now fairly useless IMO, or at least perception, as in ineffective for the the everyday function that people associate them with, keeping bad elements in order and preventing/pursuing petty crime.

Before I say any more, this can only be a failure of policy from policymakers, and/or mismanagement. Probably resulting in the kind of management that thinks you can measure everything without undermining what people are doing in such a complex task as policing. A trained and motivated police officer almost certainly knows what the right thing to do is in a given situation but for some reason frequently doesn't do it.

A female friend who lives alone has trouble with a seemingly misogynist neighbour who has anger management issues. He frequently invents reasons to threaten her and has made her life a misery for years. He has been heard urging his young child to damage the car of the "horrible lady next door". Recently my friend asked the neighbour's wife if she would mind moving their car so she could go out. The car had unnecessarily been parked so as to obstruct my friend's, presumably deliberately for the purpose of causing trouble or provoking an argument. Some time later the neighbour got out of his car in the street, went right up to my friend - within inches of her face - and said "If you ever speak to my wife like that again, I promise I will end you". This was not a one-off.

The police have been involved, and while evidence is clearly a problem, the officer concerned has treated my friend as if he just doesn't believe her, and has been heard and seen joking and sympathising with Mr. Nasty who is plausible and charming - as nasty people can often be. Imagine the effect this has had on the victim.

The police have become very removed from ordinary people. I was surprised when I attempted to visit Hemel Hempstead (i.e. large town and the nearest one with a counter) police station a few years ago at 6.30 one evening to find it closed. Now you need an appointment even when it's open. The police here treat car theft almost as a civil offence, they don't turn out to look for evidence or witnesses but merely issue a crime number. Same with cycle theft, and when another friend actually found his stolen bike on FB marketplace they wouldn't follow that up either.

My own experience of police in recent years has been limited to being issued with a fine in Lincoln for an illegal right turn that I didn't make (some here disagreed but they are wrong as well). On a rational level I want to help the police, and I will, but I suspect many won't.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sun 30 May 21 at 14:02
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>The police are now fairly useless IMO, or at least perception, as in ineffective for the the everyday function that people associate them with, keeping bad elements in order and preventing/pursuing petty crime.

We want our police to be politically correct angels who never make mistakes, who behave perfectly and never fail to cope with the obnoxious pile of crap which is society.

We expect them to rigidly adhere to the rules in every situation even though the rules don't fit every situation. We expect them to tolerate abuse and to adhere to a set of rules that everybody else uses against them.

We insist our police cope with people whose only goal is to create an incident that the hyenas from the media can photograph and plaster on the front page.

It is our assumption that anybody complaining against unfair treatment from the police is correct.

And we expect them to do it all at the beck and call of ridiculous civil servants and self interested politicians who care only how it all looks for their career on paper.

We expect them to deal with the lack of respect, even the lack of pride they feel in their own profession, we have no respect for the ordinary copper and insist that they cope with it day in and day out.

And then we expect them to do it to a budget.

What could possibly go wrong?

We're lucky that we still have something left.
 Clarkson on the Police - Manatee
>>We're lucky that we still have something left.

I agree - as I said I think it's a political/management failure. I do try to have faith where individuals are concerned, unless and until they prove me wrong.

I also feel guilty for getting too carried away - I was very upset by my friend's latest encounter with her tormentor and the attitude of the officer dealing with her. And I did qualify it as being in relation to everyday expectations. They have to deal with some horrible stuff in other contexts.

I couldn't do it, even without the carp they have to deal with from above.
 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
Replying to Mark above.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Mon 31 May 21 at 10:46
 Clarkson on the Police - Kevin
My interactions with plod have been very infrequent but on those occassions where I have had dealings with them they have been sadly lacking.

1) 3am one morning I was pulled for having "One rear light not as bright as the other". Breathalyzed, given a producer and had to provide a test from an MOT station that it met regs (the tester couldn't tell which one he was supposed to test and they were both fine). Desk plod said "Not another!" when I took the docs in. Apparently she'd stopped quite a few vehicles that evening for spurious reasons.

2) Stopped on my way to work for having the tax disc in the wrong place. It was on the upper LHS not the lower LHS even though the rake on the Chevy windscreen meant it was more visible at the top.

3) Parents came down on train to visit us for a week or two. On the return journey the train stopped at Leicester where plod herded dozens of drunken Sheffield United football fans onto the train complete with their packs of booze. For the remainder of the journey the other passengers were forced to put up with fans urinating in the corridors, foul language and verbal abuse. Just so Leicestershire plod could get rid of the problem as quickly as possible.
My dad didn't want to make a fuss so I made an official complaint.

4) 4 weeks ago a bunch of "Travellers" (sic) gathered near Micheldever and started horse and trap racing on the A33. What did Hampshire plod do?
They closed the A33 to regular traffic for two days and let the £$^&ers carry on!
When they'd exhausted their horses they descended on the Crowne Plaza hotel, drank the place dry and abused the staff there. When plod were called they "gave the manager advice."
Plod have already said that they might not be able to prevent a repeat of the racing planned for later this month.

Forgive me for not being a big fan.
Last edited by: Kevin on Sun 30 May 21 at 21:10
 Clarkson on the Police - bathtub tom
I handed in a wallet/purse with £15 quid or so in it. There were no identifying details in it. Told it would be mine after a few weeks.

Left it a while and then went and asked what was happening. Told the money was mine, but it wasn't where I handed it in, but at a closed location where the public had no admittance!

Went back after a few weeks and was told it was now at a site several miles away!

Went back after a few weeks and was told it was now at a site even more miles away!

Went back after a few weeks and was given another 'cock n bull story' and asked about complaints escalation procedure, as I thought I was being given 'the run around'. Received a phone call within a few hours to tell me the the cash was available for collection.

Received the cash, but not the wallet/purse, or the small change.

I've very little confidence in the integrity of local 'plod'.

I could quote another example, but I won't.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
There are crooks in all walks of life, including the police.

I was out for my Sunday coffee with a mate and found a brand new iPhone.

Handed it to a policeman who was sitting in a car nearby and asked that it went to lost property, gave my details in case it wasn't claimed. The phone never got to lost property - I checked several times.

The police service is poorly resourced - there are too many single crewed officers, I know one who had to deal with an youth armed with a machete with nothing but PAVA spray and an anti stab vest. Another sent to a murder scene alone - again only spray (neighbour reported screaming, shouting, quiet and person covered in blood.

They spend huge amounts of time on "right think" - google Harry Millar.

The skills in de-escalating situations seem to have gone and replaced by escalating situations - looking for trouble to get a result as it were. They also don't know the law, evidenced by examples of police being successfully sued.

I also believe that in many instances the Peelian principles have been forgotten, to the extent that many police officers can commit crimes and are not prosecuted for it in the same way as we would be and therefore get away with it including one who went equipped with crowbar and other house breaking equipment - found outside his Ex's place! or another who beat a driver up and when the CPS refused to prosecute him, a private prosecution had to be undertaken.

The police have set themselves apart, they are not the police of Dixon of Dock Green's time (if there ever was such a thing). They abuse laws to the extent that Section 44 of the Terrorist Act had to be repealed and they still abuse S43 despite being told not to by The National Police Chiefs' Council.

I truly believe that most police officers are good, but are (for want of an original sentiment), led by donkeys. Often they are put in no-win situations and sometimes, they bring it upon themselves.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R


>> I truly believe that most police officers are good

The rest of your language would tend to suggest that is not the case......

>>The police have set themselves apart
>>They abuse laws
>> they still abuse

etc. etc.
 Clarkson on the Police - Duncan
>>
>> They spend huge amounts of time on "right think" - google Harry Millar.
>>


tinyurl.com/cndh8pbn
 Clarkson on the Police - sooty123
Only time I found a wallet I handed it in to the staff and they gave it back to the chap that had lost it. I wouldn't want to bother the police with it.
 Clarkson on the Police - legacylad
I’ve found a few phones, always when out walking.
The owners always ring them within a short space of time, and when possible I put my battery pack on to keep them charged...the last one was late last year on a remote path in Spain. An iPhone 11. Young Spanish couple had dropped it whilst out running. Boy were they grateful I’d picked it up...but I think most modern phones can be traced.

True story. An acquaintance left his phone on a hotel restaurant table one evening. He continually rang it from a friends phone. No answer. Early next morning he traced it to a fellow guests car in the hotel car park. He was Dutch.
 Clarkson on the Police - smokie
I know the police are often seen to "get it wrong" but when you watch those reality police shows and see how quickly a situation can escalate because of a jumpy drug runner who's been pulled, or often someone for something less serious, I'm not entirely surprised that they sometimes come on a bit heavy early doors, at least until they know the person is not likely to explode in anger and cause harm and destruction.

I don't think "many" police officers commit crime, and i expect even less get away with it.

I do wonder if to attract the numbers they have had to lower the recruitment bar, because it wouldn't be an attractive job to many.

Next door's lad and his wife are both police officers on the street in S London, and another mate's daughter and her husband are firearms officers, and I've not heard of grumbles from them. The stories I have heard from them indicate it really isn't a job for snowflakes (as I doubt any job dealing with the great entitled British public is, even working on a checkout in a supermarket).
 Clarkson on the Police - Fursty Ferret
I'm quite proud to be "woke", and see it as standing for the opposite of bigoted, backward, and racist.
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> I'm quite proud to be "woke", and see it as standing for the opposite of
>> bigoted, backward, and racist.

Spot on FF. Woke just seems to be to be alongside the handmaidens 'politically correct' and 'virtue signalling' as signing a view that equality has gone too far and needs to be wound back.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>> Spot on FF. Woke just seems to be to be alongside the handmaidens 'politically correct'
>> and 'virtue signalling' as signing a view that equality has gone too far and needs
>> to be wound back.
>>

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

I disagree with Harry Millar's views but I certainly think it was a huge waste of resources and legal costs for something that wasn't even a crime!

 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>Woke just seems to be to be alongside the handmaidens 'politically correct' and 'virtue signalling' as signing a view that equality has gone too far and needs to be wound back.

I don't understand the reference to "handmaidens". As usual, apologies if I'm being dense.

As with all these things though, motivation matters a lot. Flagging an injustice because you see an injustice and think it wrong is admirable.

Political correctness can be valuable, certainly it was, but it can also be harmful.

Flagging what one represents as an injustice because one wants to be seen to do so, but without particularly caring about the injustice is, typically, virtue signalling and I think is appalling and devalues the important message.

As for "woke" I'm not quite sure of the exact meaning. I realise it's used in a sneering fashion quite often, but on the other hand it also seems like a good thing to be.

So I resort to judging the motivations again. Which is actually the most important thing anyway, I think.

 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
The handmaiden bit was probably misused; I meant two things that go hand in hand rather than any allusion to domestic servants.

One of our diversity training packages at work made the point that nobody is in favour of Political Correctness; its only use is pejorative. One can argue that some practices based on diversity are or have been harmful, though I cannot think of one off hand.

If people genuinely flag an injustice without believing then I see your point but it's difficult to find a proven example. It's use is primarily pejorative by folks who don't like the virtue they see as being signalled.

Somebody on here used the term in reference to Marcus Rashford, I cannot think of a less likely example than that of a man remembering his own childhood issues.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>The handmaiden bit was probably misused; I meant two things that go hand in hand rather than any allusion to domestic servants.

Ah, that's clearer.

>>If people genuinely flag an injustice without believing then I see your point

I think they do. I think virtue signalling is very much a thing. Though I do agree that sometimes an accusation of virtue signalling is used as a defence mechanism or deflector.

>> One can argue that some practices based on diversity are or have been harmful, though I cannot think of one off hand.

I tend to agree. I think most things, everything from health and safety, diversity, BLM & racism, and the rest all tend to get abuse, Mostly because it is difficult/impossible to criticise the ideal and thus the method or approach is picked on.

But that makes it even more important that the ridiculous side is contained as much as possible. Though I do know that in the case of political correctness most of it was simply made up, so no doubt it is much the same for the rest.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
p.s. agreed on Rashford.
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> I think they do. I think virtue signalling is very much a thing. Though I
>> do agree that sometimes an accusation of virtue signalling is used as a defence mechanism
>> or deflector.

I'm still struggling to find an example of a public figure who's advocacy of a particular cause was evidently virtue signalling. It's existence for real and use as a deflector are not mutually exclusive; both can be true at once.

I remain convinced though that it's use is, for very much the majority of cases pejorative.
 Clarkson on the Police - sooty123
I remain convinced though that it's use is, for very much the majority of cases
>> pejorative.
>>

Surely that judgement is very subjective?
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> Surely that judgement is very subjective?

Perhaps so but since judging something 'virtue signalling' is not objective it risks becoming a circular argument.
 Clarkson on the Police - sooty123
>> >> Surely that judgement is very subjective?
>>
>> Perhaps so but since judging something 'virtue signalling' is not objective it risks becoming a
>> circular argument.
>>

Risks? It is now.

 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>> >> Surely that judgement is very subjective?
>>
>> Perhaps so but since judging something 'virtue signalling' is not objective it risks becoming a
>> circular argument.

I don't follow that at all.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>I remain convinced though that it's use is, for very much the majority of cases pejorative.

Do you mean the term "virtue signalling" is pejorative? If so, I entirely agree. That's the only way I would ever use it.

Pointing at someone who cares about being seen to object far more than sincerely objecting is pointing out a failing.

>>I'm still struggling to find an example of a public figure who's advocacy of a particular cause was evidently virtue signalling.

I think many, perhaps most, politicians are shallow and driven by the appearance/perceptio0n of their actions/stance far more than the actual issue. Every time they call a photo opportunity or interview and grandstand a stance they've not previously held is potentially one - Johnson on female equality, muslim dress and diversity appreciation for example.

Next time I see one, I'll point it out.

 Clarkson on the Police - Kevin
>I'm still struggling to find an example of a public figure who's advocacy of a
>particular cause was evidently virtue signalling.

How would you describe Keir Starmer posing for a photograph of him and Rayner taking the knee?
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> How would you describe Keir Starmer posing for a photograph of him and Rayner taking
>> the knee?

You illustrate my point perfectly. Why do you think they're not committed to the concept (as opposed to the far left outliers hi-jack of the words) of BLM?
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>> How would you describe Keir Starmer posing for a photograph of him and Rayner taking
>> the knee?

I guess I'd ask, or wonder, what he'd have done if nobody had been looking.
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> I guess I'd ask, or wonder, what he'd have done if nobody had been looking.

Would you do it on your own?

Is that really the point?
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>Would you do it on your own?

Yes. And especially if I was with someone it mattered to, on a subject which I also thought was important..

I'd refer you to RBL/Remembrance moments of silence which I always adhere to. Up mountains, in deserts, on boats, sometimes quite alone.

>>Is that really the point?

I think so. Isn't it? Kneeling to impress a camera or kneeling because you think it is important? Surely that is pretty much *the* point?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 1 Jun 21 at 22:02
 Clarkson on the Police - Kevin
You haven't answered my question Bromp.

How would you describe Keir Starmer posing for a photograph of him and Rayner taking
the knee?
 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
Zippy
You say they spend ‘huge’ amounts of time. Can you quantify that in actual hours so that we can make an informed decision as to the percentage in relation to the amount of time they spend speaking to unhinged characters hanging round police stations and other potentially sensitive establishments with cameras looking for a bite from the police and then being totally abusive in their quest for ‘likes’ on YouTube. Appealing to their seemingly unhinged followers. Seeings as you mentioned S43.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>> Zippy
>> You say they spend ‘huge’ amounts of time. Can you quantify that in actual hours
>> so that we can make an informed decision as to the percentage in relation to
>> the amount of time they spend speaking to unhinged characters hanging round police stations and
>> other potentially sensitive establishments with cameras looking for a bite from the police and then
>> being totally abusive in their quest for ‘likes’ on YouTube. Appealing to their seemingly unhinged
>> followers. Seeings as you mentioned S43.
>>

Again I refer you to HM, re the waste of resources including court case etc. There are other cases, where police investigate people for comments that may be crude but certainly not illegal - there is a real danger of being investigated for posting a joke about an Englishman, Scotsman and Irishman in case it offends another persons sensibilities - well freedom of thought and expression goes both ways.

Re S43. I think the idiots that go around police stations videoing are a waste of space but again they are doing nothing illegal. It is clear that they are not terrorists - they are filming in the open - for the very purpose of egging on the police - and if the building is that sensitive then it ought to be behind a big wall. The police need reasonable suspicion of the person is being a terrorist. How many do they really think are - or are they using the powers to humiliate the photo / videographer - I suspect the latter, especially as the The National Police Chiefs' Council has told the police to leave them to get on with it.

BTW - I don't see them arresting / searching Google or the local council who have street and satellite photos and detailed plans of police stations.

The other-one was photos of the MI5/6 building on the Thames - ridiculous to stop people photographing it - it's seen all around the world on hi-def-4k James Bond films.

It's a total waste of resources and an exercise in trying to humiliate the people taking the photos. Again, I don't see Google being investigated for actually showing the way in to the building...
tinyurl.com/ttjhycjv

 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
"....Re S43. I think the idiots that go around police stations videoing are a waste of space but again they are doing nothing illegal. It is clear that they are not terrorists - they are filming in the open - for the very purpose of egging on the police - and if the building is that sensitive then it ought to be behind a big wall. The police need reasonable suspicion of the person is being a terrorist. How many do they really think are - or are they using the powers to humiliate the photo / videographer - I suspect the latter, especially as the The National Police Chiefs' Council has told the police to leave them to get on with it....."

I've been away from a keyboard for a week so a delay in responding.

Its established that what they are doing is not illegal per se. They like to say its a 'legal' activity. There is a subtle difference between a legal activity and not illegal. A legal activity is prescribed in law. Not illegal means there are no laws (yet) preventing it. So its not legal nor is it illegal. Bit like 'recreational' drugs at one stage.

How is it clear they are not terrorists? Because they say so? That works well!

What you have to remember is that not everyone is aware of these unhinged individuals or what their MO is. So someone spending an awful amount of time hanging around Police a station and pointing their cameras through windows and gates is going to attract attention. It may come as a surprise but its actually the Police's job to investigate and deal what they believe to be engaged in suspicious behaviour. That involves speaking to these people.

Its also fair that they try and protect the anonymity of individuals who attend the Police stations and are often filmed in the background.

Most normal people would engage in a conversation - remember 'Policing by Consent' it's a 2 way process. Its at this point that they've hooked the bait for their equally unhinged followers and begin this rather childish refusal to engage. Is that not going to heighten anyones suspicion? Reasonable suspicion? Authors of their own destiny.
They have zero credibility because it always starts with the declaration that they are journalists doing a story on such and such which is a compete lie. They are only trying to get a bite for Youtube.

Google, Satellite and the Council do not go sticking individuals pictures on social media for the purpose of entertaining the great unwashed. You know that despite the protestations of these idiots that its a lawfully activity they know full well that people don't like it that's why when its not all going in their favour they immediately resort to, "Its all going on Youtube" as a means of retribution.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 6 Jun 21 at 16:31
 Clarkson on the Police - sooty123
What activities are prescribed as legal?

I'd probably agree with zippy, I can't see anything other than a cursory chat being a good use of anyone's time. As soon as you leave them alone they'll soon get bored and wonder off.
 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
And if their intentions were more sinister? Its an unknown. Its not until you engage with someone do you form your suspicions, dig deeper or decide that this is just another muppet baiting with a camera.
 Clarkson on the Police - sooty123
I didn't say don't talk to them, I said don't waste time. I'm sure we've all seen the videos with police falling in the trap set for them.
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> I didn't say don't talk to them, I said don't waste time. I'm sure we've
>> all seen the videos with police falling in the trap set for them.

There are plenty of examples out there of them being downright obstructive and claiming filming to be against the law, even of demanding pictures be wiped.

Not as bad as Security Guards but not a good image for Warranted Officers.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>> And if their intentions were more sinister? Its an unknown. Its not until you engage
>> with someone do you form your suspicions, dig deeper or decide that this is just
>> another muppet baiting with a camera.
>>
>>

Well then stop everyone everywhere with a camera then. Not just police stations but beaches too, or the park or the prom, who knows, it could be a terrorist planning to blow the beach up or someone taking pictures at a holiday camp, who knows, those caravans are a tasty target too!
 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
You've put your silly head on Zippy. Don't talk daft. You're starting to sound like one of those unhinged auditors.

Oh and if they were showing an unhealthy interest in taking pictures of your young daughters (if you have any) you might take a different view.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 6 Jun 21 at 19:51
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
The police who stop photographers think they are more important the other potential targets otherwise they would stop all photographers.

The police claim the police station is sensitive etc. they invariably ask: do you know the current threat level or similar. Things that don't apply to taking photos of kids down the park, which would be a legitimate complaint as opposed to taking photos of a nick, which isn't and is confirmed as such by the NPCC (National Police Chiefs' Council). Oh and "wont you think of the children" is often the cry of those that want to introduce some new prohibition to something that was previously legal but just gets on their goat.

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/722938/response/1721570/attach/5/AuditorsSocial%20Media%20Bloggers%20Guidelines%20v3.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
You are demonstrating that ingrained single cause obsession and paranoia that's been highlighted before almost to the extent of 4.3 in your attached GUIDANCE.

Why do they think that they think they are 'more important'. You have a real issue with authority. That's quite a childish statement.

No one claims the station is 'sensitive' unless its somewhere like Paddington Green. What they claim is that it is a potential target not necessarily in itself as a structure but also for information as to the comings and goings of staff numbers, times and so on. Types and numbers of resources available to respond from that location. Its a bigger issue than you try to make out.

This isn't the Women's Guild meeting hall. This is a group of people who have some responsibility for the safety of the public under a multitude of circumstances. Police Officers have been the targets of criminality. So forgive anyone for suggesting than they might be that bit more suspicious of excessive attention.

There's a whole world of difference between a hobby or even professional photographer who wishes to take images of the architecture of a Police station, street scenes etc to someone who is entirely focused on trying to provoke a reaction. Unsurprisingly many seem to be ex jail birds with an axe to grind.

 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>> You have a real issue with authority

You think? And not just police, it seems. Bailiffs, Sales Directors, etc. etc. etc.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
Actually, a large number of police officers in the videos state that the police station is a sensitive place or use similar words.

If the didn't think they were "important" they would ignore most of the people that do the videoing and get on with their day job. They often complain about personal cars being videoed. All our cars are videoed. If they don't like it get the law changed. It's not illegal.

The police abused real photographers, including a reporter taking a photo of a sunset and an architect photographing a church under S44 which were events that contributed to the repeal of that section.

And this bloke for grabbing some video of his town, which he does yearly...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dzM56Rkq28

Quite simply, if the police stop getting over interested in these people then the numbers of people videoing would drop away. Simple really.
 Clarkson on the Police - sooty123
This isn't the Women's Guild meeting hall. This is a group of people who have
>> some responsibility for the safety of the public under a multitude of circumstances. Police Officers
>> have been the targets of criminality. So forgive anyone for suggesting than they might be
>> that bit more suspicious of excessive attention.
>>
>

They may well be such people looking to target the police, I don't think though they would look to gather information by attracting attention and seeking confrontation as these freeman of the land/police auditors do.
Plenty of ways to be discreet.
 Clarkson on the Police - Bromptonaut
>> Oh and if they were showing an unhealthy interest in taking pictures of your young
>> daughters (if you have any) you might take a different view.

If their interest in Zippy's kids is genuinely 'unhealthy' then I'm sure there are proper laws rather than invented ones that can be applied.
 Clarkson on the Police - Zero

>> Handed it to a policeman who was sitting in a car nearby and asked that
>> it went to lost property, gave my details in case it wasn't claimed. The phone
>> never got to lost property - I checked several times.

You have absolutely no idea that happened. Consider this, the person who lost the phone rang it while the copper had it, and they agreed a place to meet and after checking ownership he handed it back.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>>
>> You have absolutely no idea that happened. Consider this, the person who lost the phone
>> rang it while the copper had it, and they agreed a place to meet and
>> after checking ownership he handed it back.
>>

I do know the phone was off and had no charge, so that would not have been practicable and there should have been a record and there was none, save for an email from a sergeant at the police station confirming no phone had been received.
 Clarkson on the Police - Terry
In this country we police largely by consent.

So the police appear to stand idly by when riots happen, statues get torn down, crowds mass against covid rules etc. They have been so diminished in numbers, and so constrained by the risk of official complaint or media scrutiny that they feel unable to act.

In fairness their judgement may sometimes be infuenced by broader considerations - intervene now and the fallout may create more problems downstream.

A lack of numbers also means that more minor crime is no longer effectively pursued - this can be dispiriting - the only reason to report it is to make sure the right processes are gone through to support an insurance claim.

In a local town known for its alternative culture last week, a police car was parked in the high street. 20m away a busker - hat on ground to collect coins - sign up "please contribute generously, need a fix" . Perhaps the police were right in this case - earning money by entertaining people is a worthy way to feed a habit.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>In this country we police largely by consent.

That somewhat well worn phrase originally meant that the community or society had consented. These days each individual seems to think they get to make their own decision as it applies to them at that moment.

Which they do not.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>I do know the phone was off and had no charge

FFS. No possibility it was plugged in and charged up? No chance someone walked along? Or any one of a thousand other possibilities.

You want to be blind to everything except the way you want the situation to be.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>> You want to be blind to everything except the way you want the situation to be.

Not at all. If this were the case, why wasn't it explained to me as such. There should at least be a note in the policeman's note book to that effect.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 Jun 21 at 11:41
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
Maybe he didn't know he reported to you. Maybe he had something else to worry about. Maybe he realised that you would have simply invented another scenario in order to maintain your perspective.

I can believe that someone has a bad experience with the police, they are only people after all. I've had the odd one myself, though in my case that's less surprising considering the bad time I gave them for years.

But your never ending litany of conspiracy, accusation, bullying, theft, victimisation and all the rest of it is simply not believable.
 Clarkson on the Police - Fullchat
Back in the day we lived by the 3 Ps for things that could get you into the most trouble.
Pocket books, Property and Police women. :S
We had small pocket receipt books and any property received a receipt was given and then a copy attached in the property register. A good audit trail.
 Clarkson on the Police - bathtub tom
I'm told our police no longer accept or store lost property. Is this a local policy or national?
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>> But your never ending litany of conspiracy, accusation, bullying, theft, victimisation and >> all the rest of it is simply not believable.


You have a tendency to resort to personal insults when the situation doesn't suit. The actions and behaviours of a bully IMHO.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 Jun 21 at 11:41
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
Where was the insult or the bullying?

I never even mentioned you, though I did mention the things you were saying.

Crying of bullying is, I believe, a standard tactic on Social media these days, and too often in general, as a way of deflecting issues. It is most obviously an approach you favour.

Perhaps this imagination and sensitivity is at the root of your 'problems' with officialdom?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 31 May 21 at 14:45
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
>>of it is simply not believable.

Accusations of lying.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
I said that I didn't find what you were saying as believable. If you wish to extrapolate that to accusations of lying then that is your problem, not mine.

"it is simply not believable"
"you are lying"

Can you see the difference?

As I just said, perhaps we're narrowing in on the fundamental issue you have with the police.

 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
If someone says that what you are saying is not believable then how is that different from implying that that person is lying?

In my book it is not.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>>n how is that different from implying that that person is lying?

The person could be mentally unstable.
The person could be deluded.
The person may simply be wrong.

There's many possibilities.

>>In my book it is not.

I repeat, perhaps your tendency to apply your own definition and understanding to other people is the source of your issue with officialdom. Perhaps you should get a new book.

To be clear, just in case you are confused, I do not find what you are saying to be believable. I do not believe it is accurate.

I have no idea, or much interest, as to whether you are deluded, lying or simply wrong and I make no statement on those points.
 Clarkson on the Police - zippy
I suppose if you don't like what I post, the simple solution is not to read them.
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
>> I suppose if you don't like what I post, the simple solution is not to read them.

Right back at ya....

But I shall continue to reply, some things should not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

You're welcome.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 31 May 21 at 15:11
 Clarkson on the Police - No FM2R
Do you remember similar outrage when you keenly reported seeing a woman arrested on a park bench for sitting on a park bench?

Your words were "I saw a middle aged woman on Bournemouth seafront go for a walk. Get tired and sit on a bench. Cuffed and arrested"

Do you remember calling me obnoxious when I said "That seems rather unlikely"?

Do you remember then revising the tale to "I read it in a newspaper" rather than "I saw..."?

Do you remember it turning out to be a deliberate and staged managed event?

Can you see a pattern?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 31 May 21 at 15:12
 Clarkson on the Police - Bobby
I record the Traffic Cops and Interceptors programs. I enjoy "the car chases" etc.

However, in all seriousness

1. I wouldn't last more than 2 mins as a copper.
2. "Strategic" plans to target certain crimes never seem to equate to the court result ie rap on the knuckles
3. If they legalised cannabis the police could then focus on something else
4. In Traffic terms, the police in these programs seem to be willing to cause thousands of pounds of damage to their police cars in exchange for stopping an old banger worth a couple of hundred pounds. I accept that they don't know if the guy is failing to stop as he has a million quid of coke in the car, or he has panicked as his MOT is expired a day. But equate the response to a fail to stop compared with a house burglary, an assault etc.
5. Police nowadays seem to police by CCTV, either bodyworn, CCTV or dashcams. Have heard from various folk, including 2 ex coppers who are now colleagues, that old fashioned policing skills have gone to the wall. Neighbour 5 doors up was burgled, police never even bothered chapping my door to see if I had seen anything.

But, I repeat, I couldn't do the job. As mentioned further up, there is an element of society who seem to be intent in antagonising the police, filming them and trying to stir up trouble.

Oh, and why do we not have water cannons?
 Clarkson on the Police - Zero

>> Oh, and why do we not have water cannons?

they handle really badly, and so slow any scroat in any banger would lose them
Latest Forum Posts