You have my sympathies. We used to live in an area where this kind of thing happened at least once a fortnight. SWMBO's Fiesta Zetec-S was keyed three times, had both front fog lights kicked in, and the rear wiper twisted off in a few short months. The response from the local Police was "Your crime reference number is...." and "This seems to be happening quite frequently. We suggest you park the car off the road somewhere." No mate, I SUGGEST you get off your backsides and reallocate the officers regularly running speed traps at the end of the road to come down here and catch the little darlings.
It was enough to make us sell the car, and then move a few months later. The only problem we've had here is that one evening a bunch of kids decided to steal all the aerials off the cars and throw them in some nearby bushes. An officer came around the next day with a handful of aerials asking everyone to identify which one was theirs. They also caught the kids and as the officer delighted in explaining to us "Put the fear of God into them".
Postcode lotteries apply to more than just healthcare. It stinks!
Cheers
DP
|
Do you think they may have trodden on your car because of your perceived or actual sexual orientation?
If so, this is a hate/thought crime, and you're in with a very big chance.
|
I know this forum tends to be very 'pro-police' but my fairly limited experience of our local police is that they don't want to leave the security of the office. About a year ago I had a tyre slashed on one car during the night (not my car, was working on it for the owner). Called in at the police station and the officer behind the counter made the sage comment that, 'It looks as though someone doesn't like you'. Very useful.
For many years I lived next door to a policeman and I'm afraid I lost all respect for those in 'the job' after seeing the antics he and a few of his workmates got up to. Probably wasn't typical, I know.
We are supposed to have a 'beat bobby' in our area, but he's been on the sick for about the last 11 months - and I don't actually recall ever seeing him before then. Maybe he only came around at night.
|
I know this forum tends to be very 'pro-police' but my fairly limited experience of our local police is that they don't want to leave the security of the office. About a year ago I had a tyre slashed on one car during the night (not my car, was working on it for the owner). Called in at the police station and the officer behind the counter made the sage comment that, 'It looks as though someone doesn't like you'. Very useful. For many years I lived next door to a policeman and I'm afraid I lost all respect for those in 'the job' after seeing the antics he and a few of his workmates got up to. Probably wasn't typical, I know. We are supposed to have a 'beat bobby' in our area, but he's been on the sick for about the last 11 months - and I don't actually recall ever seeing him before then. Maybe he only came around at night.
Can only speak for my area but the above experience IS typical but for the following reasons........
It is not a question of wanting to stay behind the desk.........but the fact that vehicle crime like this IS NOT INVESTIGATED. You'll get a crime number and by the time you've driven home or made a cup of char your crime has been 'screened out'. The reason for this is that govt led priorities are important, other things are not, there's not enough staff to deal with everything so some things get dropped. Traffic matters and some vehicle crime gets ignored. That is the modern police 'service'..... If that galls you, you need to lobby your MP, write to the Chief Constable etc.......not complain about the poor sods at the coalface who have no influence on these things.
I have no idea about your neighbours antics, but they sound interesting.
The beat bobby on the 'sick' used to be a problem years ago, considerably less nowadays when the rules were changed.....so that there's now a limit to the time you can have off sick before you go onto half pay and then no pay. As ever, the selfish few have ruined it for the selfless majority, so being in a potentially dangerous job.....quite a few of us now have to have private medical insurance, so that we don't languish on an NHS waiting list and go on half pay etc for something you copped at work. The other issue is the bureaucratic nature of life in Blighty now....... if you are injured, before you are ALLOWED to come back to work you have to have an Occupational Health assessment etc.........which slows things right down. Some people do extract the urine, but they do that in all public service roles unfortunately and i agree it's wrong.........trouble is as a supervisor who gets intensely irritated at this, i cannot overrule someone in the medical profession....(and i'm not having a pop at doctors).
The bottom line is this.......there's been no change in the 25 years i've been doing this game........the vast majority of officers are extremely keen to lock up the oiks........the younger ones still take it very personally when they fail at this task..but the paperwork, general bureaucracy, interference by others, lethargy of officialdom, unnecessary criticism, misinformed comment.... will eventually wear you down, so in the end you think 'pink fluffy dice, i'll do my best and then clear off at the earliest opportunity'.
|
Unfortunately incidents like don't just result from a shortage of police resources/interest. It's a sign of the times. Moral standards generally are much lower than they used to be. So much petty crime (cycling on pavements, dropping litter etc) is now not even seen as being a crime by most people. If there was a nationwide policy of zero tolerance then people would know where to draw the line ~ but there isn't and they don't. Also, remember that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Think about it.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Also, remember that the apple doesn't fall farfrom the tree. Think about it. --
I am. That's a very profound remark.
But apples do get carried away from the proximity of the tree, and get eaten by man or beast. Sometimes bad ones are stored and start the others rotting too.
But I take your point - they are probably local, and somewhere must have parents who haven't done their job.
|
they are probably local, andsomewhere must have parents who haven't done their job.
It is a cycle that goes down and down - "acceptable behaviour today" would not have been tolerated in the past. You just need to see the attitude of school pupils to authority to know that matter will get worse and not better in the future.
|
I generally agree with these sentiments but I'm interested in where others think the 'apple tree' is rooted.
If we have 14 - 25 year olds responsible for anti-social behaviour because of poor/rubbish/non-existent parenting
that would put their parents in the minimum (ish) 30 - (possibly) 65 age group. There's certainly scope for two generations of scrotes within those limits - i.e. the 65 year olds had kids young who are now parents to 14-25s.
Are these 'parents' failing at parenting because their own parents were also not particularly great and their parents before them
It's often said - but a lot of responsibility lies with those who became parents in the 60s and 70s
I do find myself thinking that they weren't up to the job (is this because their own parents were absent due to war?) and they've jus passed on their lack of skills
Damn - if it ain't those baby boomers ag'in
Or, perhaps the majority British parents have always been rubbish at parenting but with a distinct fondness for rose-tinted spectacles?
Everyone remembers the 50s as some 'magical era' - allegedly - but you never read of people saying what a great time the early 1900s were to grow up in
people think the 50s were great for many reason - probably the general increase in personal wealth and the advent of mass consumerism had a lot to do with feeling chirpy
|
I generally agree with these sentiments but I'm interested in where others think the 'apple tree' is rooted.
unfortunately, that is likely to drag this thread in to politics against the rules of this forum.
i.m.o., it is all ties in with the "liberal" attitiude to schools; decline in repect for authority of any sort, the advent of human rights, the stripping of powers of the courts, and above all the fact that the police can spend hours diligently trying to bring the criminals to justice but only to find that the cps or the court decide either that the evidence is insufficient of that the punishment is trivial compared to the crime. there is no incentive for the offender nor become a repeat offender, and there is no incentive for the police to try to stop them.
zero tolerance is the answer but the jails are full, so how do you punish those who won't pay their fines.
|
True - but where did the 'liberal' attitude originate? There were fundamental changes in the politics and philosophy of education particularly in the late fifties and throughout the sixties.
Is it fair to play the kids though? What about the 'educational innovators'?
Actually, there are still oodles of teacher-trainers with 'liberal' ideas - but in general, I do think we are now more 'aware' of the importance of education.
I feel that the phrase 'child-centred' points to a shift in public policy which has led to a lot of difficulties
I can't think of an exclusively motoring connection to this - it's about everyone - isn't it?
|
Sorry
Is it fair to * blame * the kids/parents/kids/parents cycle though? What about the 'educational innovators'?
|
|
I generally agree with these sentiments but I'm interested in where others think the 'apple tree' is rooted.
If we have 14 - 25 year olds responsible for anti-social behaviour because of poor/rubbish/non-existent parenting
that would put their parents in the minimum (ish) 30 - (possibly) 65 age group. There's certainly scope for two generations of scrotes within those limits - i.e. the 65 year olds had kids young who are now parents to 14-25s.
Are these 'parents' failing at parenting because their own parents were also not particularly great and their parents before them
It's often said - but a lot of responsibility lies with those who became parents in the 60s and 70s
I do find myself thinking that they weren't up to the job (is this because their own parents were absent due to war?) and they've jus passed on their lack of skills
Damn - if it ain't those baby boomers ag'in
Or, perhaps the majority British parents have always been rubbish at parenting but with a distinct fondness for rose-tinted spectacles?
Everyone remembers the 50s as some 'magical era' - allegedly - but you never read of people saying what a great time the early 1900s were to grow up in
people think the 50s were great for many reasons - probably the general increase in personal wealth and the advent of mass consumerism had a lot to do with feeling chirpy
|
It's all down to the"do-gooders" and the current obsession for so-called "political correctness". A good clip round the ear and a rap on the knuckles with the edge of a wooden rule for school offenders is what is required ~ followed by 2 years National Service.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Had our kids late so now knocking on 50 with kids 10 & 12. We have good standards routed in a late 50s/early 60s childhood where the village bobby would sort out so much stuff without paperwork etc etc.
Even though we have passed on a polite and respectful upbringing to our kids they are bombarded on a daily basis with disrespectful behaviour from their friends and contacts.
I don't want to be too *old git* about it but see nothing positive in this current freedom without responsibility and you can't touch me attitude.
DW
|
While I agree that a lot of people are carp these days, I can't help remembering that they always were really. Vandalism isn't restricted to working-class inner-city ASBO hoodies.
Remember Belloc's doomed hero John Vavasseur de Quentin Jones: 'Like many of the upper class/He liked the sound of broken glass...' Having thrown a stone at the wrong moment, he lost the huge inheritance he had been promised and 'had to work to keep alive! / Yes, all day long from ten till four/ For half the year or even more / With but an hour or two to spend / At luncheon with a city friend... '
After some piece of drunken mayhem with which I disgraced myself at university, my grandparents were extremely disapproving and told me that had I been a working lad I would have got into much worse trouble... They were right of course.
People who damage property in fits of idiotic high spirits should be caught and made to pay for the damage.
|
People who damage property in fits of idiotic high spirits should be caught and made to pay for the damage.
I've been advocated a punishment regime along these lines for a while. When someone is convicted of a crime a(after pleading not guilty), the true financial cost of this crime should be calculated and the guilty party should be made to pay in full, either through a salary deduction if working, or through community service at the minimum wage (if unemployed). The costs should be calculated to include ALL costs, including police time, court time, reparations for any damage caused. Pleading guilty will result in a much lower cost. Failure to complete the community service, results in jail time with all the additional on costs for the incarceration.
A £2k cost/fine would take 10 weeks to pay off. Stops the offenders costing the tax payer money and being housed and fed at out expense and may actually teach them something.
Second offences dealt with by a 5 year conscription
I know it isn't perfect, but at least it may be a deterrent. I suppose some liberal would say its against their rights...
|
>> People who damage property in fits of idiotic high spirits should be caught and made to pay for the damage. >>
I agree completely with this sentiment. It would be straightforward to calculate, doesn't cut across political correctness/human rights issues and it would be the best possible deterrant.
So the 'fine' for stamping on a car roof wouldn't be the standard £80, it would be ~£1000 to repair the roof and ~£500 for wasted police time - paid either in cash or in hours spent picking up litter at the side of the A14 etc. Problem solved!
Too simple though, isn't it?
|
Deterrents don't work unless the culprit is captured, Robert Peel worked this out a few years ago. In some ways. it shouldn't be "our" problem, we pay the authorities a lot of money to run a civilised society and that is what we should receive. At the very least, I want to see uniformed police officers on the beat to deter crime, and I want these police officers to look like police officers, so no dwarfs or slobs please. And no mincing walks, manful striding is required. And take those thumbs out of your belt hooks, it looks slovenly and almost American, which will never do. And why does Plod feel the need to patrol as pairs? It leads to insularity, which will also never do.
Just where does our tax money go? I've worked as a contractor for various gubmint organisations, and none of them show much interest in efficiency. But for a contractor they are wonderful, when they eventually pay. There's a lesson there somewhere, but I hope it's not learnt until I retire ;-)
On a motoring link, are my eyes deceiving me or are there more traffic plod around in the south east now? Excluding VOSA and Highway thingies who should always be overtaken with gusto when the opportunity arises.
|
>but you never read of people saying what a great time the early 1900s were to grow up in
You do, actually. In the days before the Great War most people were better off than at any time in previous history, and there was no threat to England from anywhere in the world.
My grandfather said it was a wonderful time to grow up in. Of course that was before he did his national service in the trenches.
|
Whilst I agree with many of the sentiments on here (although it is beginning to sound like a middle-class dinner party, my personal idea of hell on earth), I have to ask why the phrase "the advent of human rights" was used in such a sneering way.
I think anyone with a scintilla of intelligence could work out that it is possible for people to behave in a civilised and community-spirited manner without having to do away with the concept of human rights!
There are many "liberal" areas of the world (Scandinavia for one) where horrid trendy ideas like libertarianism, freedom of ideas and speech etc. co-exist with a civilised society. I for one would say they help make a civilised society.
But, let's be typically British eh, and panic our pampered middle-class darlings into moving into gated accomodation and they and their offspring are then conditioned into thinking anyone who lives on a council estate is scum, and thus, the cycle of snobbery and misunderstanding self-perpetuates, each "side" hating the other.
|
Is it that the problem is particularly British? We know we have the highest rates of under-age pregnancies? Why?
I don't know whether we have more anti-social behaviour than other countries but contributors to this thread certainly perceive offending rates to be higher than they should be.
It's not about 'Human Rights' - we might not be discussing this at all - were it not for our 'human rights'.
Cliff - I think I've heard endless tales of the wonderful 50s but yours is the first of the wonderful 1900s (for me) - I'm sure there are people having a lovely time today too
Perhaps our modern 'pampered lives' allow us too much time for reflection and leisure - and this lack of worthwhile occupation lends itself to fault-finding and expressing our general dissatisfaction with everything
|
Jemima, I like the cut of your gib! : )
|
ha ha ha
I opened my fridge this morning and there were footprints in the butter
Naturally I immediately telephone the local constabulary
Who politely enquired if there was an elephant in the room
|
"We know we have the highest rates of under-age pregnancies? Why?"
To be fair though, you could reduce that figure by 80% by wiping Ashton-Uner-Lyne off the map.
|
To be fair though, you could reduce that figure by 80% by wiping Ashton-Uner-Lyne off the map.
Is Ashton-under-Lyne in Essex? ;-)
|
a middle-class dinner party, mypersonal idea of hell on earth
methinks the lady doth protest too much...
|
">and there was no threat to England from anywhere in the world.<"
Except for the Hun.
|
...for the Hun, in fact a threat that had been in place since 1870, South Africa had a pop at the British
as well, plenty of threats
|
|
Oh come now Pug, the Boers never threatened mainland UK, although their underhand tactics were the cause of some embarrassment to the British Army. Now if the Boers had a navy then things would have been different.
|
|
Ah - Economic Power worldwide made the country what it was. I was but surprised by the assertion that seemed to suggest that we never had it so good as just beofre WW1. We were a poverty ridden class driven soceity with no health care (to speak of) with poor democratic values and a big crime problem. Hang on it's the same now !
|
I think it's what Marx would have called - 'false consciousness' - the feelgood 1900s
It suited the wealthy to have the poor believe they were having a lovely time and what with the abscence of book learning and what have you, the poor were more than happy to agree
|
I'm sure crime was rife 100 years ago. But then we had less leisure time, and I think that increased affluence has been one of the drivers of crime in the last 50 years. Oh, and drugs. The need to get money to fuel an addiction is said to be a significant cause of petty crime.
Concerning the original posting, I question the police culture, but not the ordinary coppers, as it is the management that defines what they do. A colleague recently had someone trying to kick down the door of his flat, and several other flats. It was a drunken Polish worker (though the Polish aspect is most probably irrelevant). He called the police, and they gave the person a lift home. How thoughtful of them. Too much paperwork and pressure from above to ignore something that requires hard work is my guess. Whereas a 'crime' that incurs a fixed penalty notice is quick and easy to administer and pushes up the crime solving figures. It is odd though that someone can drop litter, or commit a speeding offence, and they get a fixed penalty notice. But be drunk and disorderly and cause a disturbance, and they don't. Maybe you have to be sober to be given a fixed penalty notice?
|
Concerning the original posting, I question the police culture, but not the ordinary coppers, as it is the management that defines what they do. A colleague recently had someone trying to kick down the door of his flat, and several other flats. It was a drunken Polish worker (though the Polish aspect is most probably irrelevant). He called the police, and they gave the person a lift home. How thoughtful of them. Too much paperwork and pressure from above to ignore something that requires hard work is my guess. Whereas a 'crime' that incurs a fixed penalty notice is quick and easy to administer and pushes up the crime solving figures. It is odd though that someone can drop litter, or commit a speeding offence, and they get a fixed penalty notice. But be drunk and disorderly and cause a disturbance, and they don't. Maybe you have to be sober to be given a fixed penalty notice?
there's another angle to this...i'll put money on it the scenario went like this....
Old Bill turn up and of course have witnessed nothing......ask someone to provide a statement and all decline for whatever reason. Without any evidence there's nowt you can do. OK being drunk is an offence, but a minor one and it needlessly fills the cells.So give him a lift home he'll go to bed and won't cause anyone else any trouble.
many people are under the misapprehension of 'well i've called the police, it's now down to them'....yes, all well and good but there's that simple problem of having the evidence for court, which they won't have will they, because they weren't there when it happened.
|
there's another angle to this...i'll put money on it the scenario went like this.... Old Bill turn up and of course have witnessed nothing......ask someone to provide a statement and all decline for whatever reason. Without any evidence there's nowt you can do. OK being drunk is an offence, but a minor one and it needlessly fills the cells.So give him a lift home he'll go to bed and won't cause anyone else any trouble.
How much money do you want to put on it?
What you say might be quite likely but not in this case as he wanted to act as a witness but was not given a chance. He recently threatened to sue British Airways for lost bags, got compensation, wrote to the local newspaper, and they did a story on him, and he appeared on the front page. They photographed him alongside his suit cases, looking more like a South American drug baron than an aggrieved traveller. He has written to the local papers about the recent incident.
|
"But be drunk and disorderly and cause a disturbance, and they don't"
They do around here, some have it the day afer following a visit form a beat Officer - much to their shock and awe.
|
I did notice that it was - "drunken moorons" that were the cause of the original bother
I know thay gave the Spanish some bother in their time but the Alhambra in Granada is some recompense at least
|
..I have to ask why the phrase "the advent of human rights" was used in such a sneering way. .. ...I think anyone with a scintilla of intelligence could work out
perhaps you will use your mass of intelligence to read just these two cases (out of many others, including the soham murders that i could dig up):
tinyurl.com/28alxv
and
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006...l
and this guidance to scottish police: ...A balance needs to be struck between exchanging useful, relevant information and individuals' rights under the European Convention for Human Rights ... but where no mention is made that the over-riding human rights should be those of victims to be protected from the criminals.
but then i do not have the scintilla of intelligence to understand these things.
|
"individuals' rights"
Too many rights, not enough responsibilities.
Everybody knows their rights these days, not enough know their responsibility to behave in a reasonable way to ensure the rights of others.
--
Phil
|
That statement is bang on the button, PhilW
We need a european statement of human responsibilities.
|
That statement is bang on the button, PhilW ..We need a european statement of human responsibilities.
careful now, mjm and phil.
stevied will think you do not have a scintilla of intelligence.
|
careful now, mjm and phil. stevied will think you do not have a scintilla of intelligence.
Of course he won't.
Still, he might be a bit suspicious of all these references to foreign criminals.
Don't people think we British can come up with a bit of crime for ourselves?
|
Of course he won't. Still, he might be a bit suspicious of all these references to foreign criminals. Don't people think we British can come up with a bit of crime for ourselves?
well, how about this:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=46...0
Advice on stopping boy racers please - stevied Thu 9 Nov 06 14:07
... What do I have to do to get a reaction from the local constabulary, who it has to be said, are dismal? Do I have to get killed by such a driver, or do I have to watch someone else get killed? Then, doubtless, there would be outcry in the papers and the police would say how sorry they were and that they have been offering driver training for young people etc. etc. to which I would say "Three times I reported someone who is an accident waiting to happen, and you lot did nothing".
I work in a customer-facing, performance-based role. If I transferred the apathy of the police to my job, then I wouldn't have one.
Before anyone says "Poor police have no resources, it's a a tough job.." insert cliché, then don't bother. ...
|
See? I get ranty all the time!! : )
BTW, I had good feedback on that "boy racer" issue. The police actually rang me to tell me they'd stopped said 106 driver who is now on a last warning, and his car will be impounded... nice to get a result!
Also BTW, I can be just as knee-jerk and reactionary as anyone else... wouldn't dream of claiming otherwise...
|
"stevied will think you do not have a scintilla of intelligence."
In my case, he may not be far off the mark.
--
Phil
|
|
There is nothing wrong with 'kids today' that can't be fixed with regular beatings! Never did me any harm (twitch....dribble)...:-)
|
|
I wasn't saying the 1900s were the best times ever. I was saying they were the best, for most people, up to that date. Obviously lots of things have improved since then, and lots have got worse. Those around in 1900 weren't to know that.
|
What does scintilla mean?
In my opinion rights and responsibilities are two sides of the same coin.
I have the "right" to go through the process of obtaining a driving license and a car. That automatically, in my book, means using the car responsibly.
|
: )
I am not claiming a gargantuan IQ myself...
|
Dalglish, I wasn't having a pop! And yes, of course I agree that the rights of victims shouldn't override those of criminals! What I am saying, and evidently I am not intelligent enough to describe it well enough : ) is that just because there are (as is the case in your examples) abuses of it doesn't mean that it should be got rid of.
In other words, refine and improve the way human rights are "administered" if you like, don't have the kneejerk reaction (and I mean all of us not a personal comment) of saying it's obviously a bunch of wet liberal nonsense.
There are a lot of comments on here about rights and responsibilities.... this to me is part of it. A lot of "yoof" harp on about their rights, and yes of course to a certain degree they are correct in the assumption of automatic rights.... but with rights come responsibilities. This is the bit I think we're struggling with in the UK and I think they don't struggle so much with in Scandinavia (the example I used). Individual and collective responsibilities are just as important. As an aside, was it Bill Hicks that said "I am sick of people going on about getting in touch with their inner child. How about getting in touch with their outer adult for a change?". Made me chuckle....
Hope that explains what I meant.
|
PS The above comments are in reply to Dalglish's comments higher up the page.
I am evidently too unintelligent to learn how to use the "reply to"...... : )
|
I am evidently too unintelligent to learn how to use the "reply to"...... : )
Temp change the view of this thread to "view threaded" and you'll see that you indeed replied to Dalglish's thread.
|
|
|
|
