« A billion here, a billion there, soon you are talking real money | Main | I love the smell of money in the morning »

Beyond Policing

Middle class not entitled to 'universal service' say police - Telegraph

Chief Constable Patrick Shearer said manpower would be increasingly focused on crime hot spots, suggesting middle-class suburbs will have to deal themselves with ‘petty’ offences such as vandalism.
He admitted his remarks may appear “quite frightening” to the public but police need to target their resources on the areas where they are most needed and not those where their presence is most requested.

"Deal themselves with petty offences", "quite frightening" to the public offending scum around these 'ere parts, I think is what he meant.

Comments

In my youth (the 1960s) such things as antisocial behaviour were dealt with directly by good citizens (middle class or not); through this, I and my friends were encouraged to be (mostly) well-behaved even outside of the locality where we were known by sight. However, the police seemed to view this as an infringement against the 'closed shop' they wished to create, such that any such 'dealing with' has (for many years) been likely to deliver up hours in a police cell followed by prosecution for assault (and that just for stopping them running away and giving them a stern verbal warning).

And does he think that 'children throwing stones' before 10pm is more acceptable than after 10pm? I would have thought it mattered more: what they were thrown at (and who owned that), how big the stones were, and whether this was harmless play or otherwise.

As it is primarily the middle classes that pay for policing (overall and on a head by head basis), I find Chief Constable Patrick Shearer's comment as fitting him for a personally contributed government cutback.

Best regards

Chief Constable Patrick Shearer ... suggest[ed] middle-class suburbs will have to deal themselves with ‘petty’ offences such as vandalism.

What is 'petty' to one person may well be the last straw to another.

Surely he isn't really suggesting that middle class areas should develop a vigilante approach?
If not, how does he suggest people "deal" with 'petty' offenses in the real world?
Where does he want the middle classes to act on the spectrum of:

Do nothing to
a couple of neighbours out for a stroll to
having a dog with them to
having a LARGE dog with them to
having strong walking sticks to
...
...
Charles Bronson?

Seeing as PC Plod now wants to return responsibility for local/neighbourhood policing back to the public I guess he wont be needing all that council tax any longer.

Fine with me. For the amount we pay where I live I'm sure a few of us can get together and hire our own "defender of the Queen's peace" to make sure we dont have antisocial behaviour in this part of town.

Sounds like localism at its best.
Where do I sign up for this new way of doing things?

The problem is that the police may well not do anything about the crime (petty or not) but will be round like a shot to arrest and charge anyone who really does try and 'deal with it themselves'. Easy target for them.

Post a comment