|
It is reported today that the Met is "screening out" almost half of its crimes after deciding they are "too hard" to solve. In particular they have stopped investigating 76% of motor thefts, 40% of burglaries and 23% of robberies. In all 45% of over 770,000 crimes were screened out.
|
On top of that, lots of people now don't bother reporting crimes to police as they are sort of useless lately.
No wonder speeding motorists are their easy targets.
|
Yes it may be annoying if no ones interested or you only ever see a civilian or plastic bobby, but playing into their hands only helps the problem get worse.
If we don't report crime, 'crime is down' the politicians crow.
|
Didn't even turn out when my neighbour had his £10,000 Land Rover stolen from outside his house.
For whatever reason, the police can no longer be relied on to do "the right thing". They are the enemy as far as many are concerned, parked up in vans with darkened windows in a shady layby, to catch us doing 36mph in a 30 limit on a deserted road, becuase some nimby or target chaser demands it.
Perhaps if we want to get the unsolved stats down we should bin the "too trivial" instead of "too hard" ones - starting by ignoring all the berks who complain about harassment on Facebook, and zero tolerance of the binge drinkers that soak up virtually all police resources every Friday and Saturday night throughout the land.
Must see if my Telegraph has been ironed yet.
|
>> It is reported today that the Met is "screening out" almost half of its crimes
>> after deciding they are "too hard" to solve. In particular they have stopped investigating 76%
>> of motor thefts, 40% of burglaries and 23% of robberies. In all 45% of over
>> 770,000 crimes were screened out.
The mets clear up rate is 22%. Now is that 22% of all reported crime or 22% of that not screened out?
|
|
Well I think if it is screened out then it isn't being investigated. by definition. so the clear up is 22% of the reported crime.
|
|
Or maybe not! Maybe I have had a few too many cooling bevvies to get it right?
|
So called "petty" crime in "backwater" boroughs is not important to the Met in the slightest. They are totally ineffective to the point of irrelevance.
My experience a few years ago of the Met, as an average Joe in Hillingdon who'd had his car nicked, was completely hopeless to the extent I probably wouldn't bother again. I reported the theft within minutes of the car being stolen (we'd only left it for 5!) and all they were interested in then was trying to sell me a recovery service! I would go so far as to say that all I got out of the entire interaction with them that had any value was the crime reference number for my insurance claim which frankly I could have got from an automated system.
Thankfully, the police aren't the same nationwide.
|
Is there perhaps an opportunity for a new private enterprise police agency?
I'm thinking that there used to be private fire brigades - people paid a subscription, and then if they had a fire, and were paid up to date, the engine would turn out and put it out for you.
A bit like motor breakdown - they would guarantee response within a certain time. There could be different levels of service at different premiums, perhaps combined with legal assistance insurance.
Their staff would well-trained, up on the law of arrest, etc, with lawyers as back-up.
A good service would command high premiums I'd have thought - quick turnout, guaranteed investigation and legal follow-up, victim support, one-to-one consultation, etc. Everything you'd expect from the real police.
What premium would you be willing to pay - £1000 pa perhaps?
When you think of all the other call-out and instant services people subscribe to, why not police too?
|
Problem with such services is that crooks/thieves/robbers/murderers/burglars etc. will know that most people won't be able to afford the service and that will give rise to huge number of crimes and which will soon turn into an anarchy.
Anyway, this is slowly the state the society is moving to.
Last edited by: movilogo on Tue 16 Jul 13 at 14:21
|
>> A good service would command high premiums I'd have thought - quick turnout, guaranteed investigation
Doesn't this already apply with the present police service depending on your importance/social standing/masons/status/wealth/who you know.
Just thinking of the hue and cry when someone important becomes a victim, compared say to some retired working class pensioner from Middlesborough who might be a victim in their own humble home or in the nearby streets.
Ironically enough of course the rich/privelidged are far less likely to become genuine non self inflicted victims in the first place for a variety of reasons.
|
>>Just thinking of the hue and cry when someone important becomes a victim
Good film that! - my ole mum appeared in it as an extra: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJxbaymZ7K0
|
Of course, it might accelerate the trend towards a two-tier society for police services as with everything else. But the hope would be that politicians and the police would be shamed into improving the ordinary service too.
And creaming off a chunk of police work to private subscription would at least free up some resources.
|
Lack of respect for the police is not helped by the judicial system which appears to enjoy prosecuting the victims for retaliation rather than the original miscreants.
|
>> Lack of respect for the police is not helped by the judicial system which appears
>> to enjoy prosecuting the victims for retaliation rather than the original miscreants.
I 100% agree with that sentiment...but...the public gets what it deserves.
They've voted in people who over the years have enforced a mentality of stricter and stricter control of the police and introduced the IPCC (Independent Police Complaints Commission) and now PCCs (Police and Crime Commissioners) and had previously demanded most robust complaints systems and then introduced various controls inc targets....so ended up with a police service that is too damned frightened to make any decisions on their own..and constantly cover their backsides rather than make the common sense decisions.
That is why Mr or Mrs Average gets prosecuted in the circumstance you describe, NOT because the individual officer wishes it. Discretion is virtually gone.
|
>> Lack of respect for the police is not helped by the judicial system which appears
>> to enjoy prosecuting the victims for retaliation rather than the original miscreants.
>>
What examples do you have, and the quantity of such to prove its the norm?
|
>>
>> What examples do you have, and the quantity of such to prove its the norm?
>>
The impression is that every time a farmer, jeweller, shopkeeper, pedestrian etc attempts to exercise his legal right to use proportionate force to resist his attackers, he is immediately arrested when the police do turn up, apparently because they have to arrest someone and the victim is usually the only person there, the attackers and and witnesses having run off.
The practice of arresting victims for "investigation" has been defended on this forum, virtually as a standard practice.
|
>>
>> Examples?
>>
>> Current Law
>>
>> www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/192945/self-defence-circular.pdf
which seems to say its legal to use proportionate force to defend yourself and property. However I dont think anyone would suggest, or want to make retaliation legal or the norm. Thats how the Crays operated.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 16 Jul 13 at 19:17
|
>> The practice of arresting victims for "investigation" has been defended on this forum, virtually as
>> a standard practice.
That is a different argument. We were talking about prosecution.
|
>> It is reported today that the Met is "screening out" almost half of its crimes
>> after deciding they are "too hard" to solve. In particular they have stopped investigating 76%
>> of motor thefts, 40% of burglaries and 23% of robberies. In all 45% of over
>> 770,000 crimes were screened out.
>>
They've been doing that for donkey's years, at least 20.
I'm not an apologist for it as I think it is wrong..but..it is an inevitable consequence of not enough resources versus demand..so you prioritise and only go for what you think you can achieve.
Where they've gone wrong is by fudging the issue...they should have been open and honest 20 years ago.
|
Somebody in here, or perhaps the other place, once said that society gets the police force it deserves.
I've always thought that an extremely accurate and concise explanation of pretty much everything the police are.
We always want them to spend less, we always want them to bring good/optimistic news, we want them to do their jobs according to political metrics and we want the organisation structure designed by politicians.
|
When I was in Arizona, my sister was telling me about "Sheriff Joe". He apparently rules Arizona crime and , if you pardon the pun, doesnt take any prisoners.
The jail is out in the desert and consists of tents. When they had the record temperatures of 49 degrees, they showed him walking through the tented jail with an ice lolly, talking to the inmates and saying things like, if you can't stand this heat, make sure you don't come back!!
Seems to have a huge following and lots of stories about him, not sure how much are folklore but certainly seems to have a different approach to us!
|
|
He makes our fat cat Police commissioners look like political placements.
|
Top Way to Clear Up/Reduce Crime - movilogo
