Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Meanwhile In England


royal white

Recommended Posts

  • Site Supporter
2 hours ago, royal white said:

If they do their job properly they will have no issues. Jobs like the police and  military have rules of engagement, if they stand by them they should be fine. If you’re going to do a job that is to protect the public then refuse to use the tools issued to you because of fear of investigation from the IPCC then you shouldn’t be in that job as far as I’m concerned

Sorry, that's absolute rubbish, and not what I said. They're fearful of unfair application and interpretation or rules to their actions, not specifically the immediate referral to the IPCC every time such an action is undertaken.

The whole issue is that officers are doing what they believe is correct. Then along come an independent body, perhaps also riddled with progressive ideology like senior police officers themselves and end up twisting things. 

There is a good reason why a good number of officers handed in their "ticket" when this latest officer was charged. Not worth the risk.

Just like some of the vexatious claims against servicemen.

Of course there are rules of engagement, but we all know that such things are very difficult to apply perfectly in every individual circumstance, and those not there aren't truly in a position to judge.

Yet too often they're being put through the wringer, with seemingly little protection, especially from those above.

It cannot be dehumanised and made a simple case of you do it or no job. There'll be even more pressure on recruitment.

Iirc the police have a higher level of governance and scrutiny than the military, who themselves are heavily scrutinised. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
3 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Sorry, that's absolute rubbish, and not what I said. They're fearful of unfair application and interpretation or rules to their actions, not specifically the immediate referral to the IPCC every time such an action is undertaken.

The whole issue is that officers are doing what they believe is correct. Then along come an independent body, perhaps also riddled with progressive ideology like senior police officers themselves and end up twisting things. 

There is a good reason why a good number of officers handed in their "ticket" when this latest officer was charged. Not worth the risk.

Just like some of the vexatious claims against servicemen.

Of course there are rules of engagement, but we all know that such things are very difficult to apply perfectly in every individual circumstance, and those not there aren't truly in a position to judge.

Yet too often they're being put through the wringer, with seemingly little protection, especially from those above.

It cannot be dehumanised and made a simple case of you do it or no job. There'll be even more pressure on recruitment.

Iirc the police have a higher level of governance and scrutiny than the military, who themselves are heavily scrutinised. 

What's your issue with 'progressive ideology'? Do you prefer 'regressive ideology'? How far do you want Society to regress?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Sorry, that's absolute rubbish, and not what I said. They're fearful of unfair application and interpretation or rules to their actions, not specifically the immediate referral to the IPCC every time such an action is undertaken.

The whole issue is that officers are doing what they believe is correct. Then along come an independent body, perhaps also riddled with progressive ideology like senior police officers themselves and end up twisting things. 

There is a good reason why a good number of officers handed in their "ticket" when this latest officer was charged. Not worth the risk.

Just like some of the vexatious claims against servicemen.

Of course there are rules of engagement, but we all know that such things are very difficult to apply perfectly in every individual circumstance, and those not there aren't truly in a position to judge.

Yet too often they're being put through the wringer, with seemingly little protection, especially from those above.

It cannot be dehumanised and made a simple case of you do it or no job. There'll be even more pressure on recruitment.

Iirc the police have a higher level of governance and scrutiny than the military, who themselves are heavily scrutinised. 

Is it bollocks absolute rubbish. These people are signing up for a job to protect  the public. They can’t do that to the best of their ability if they’re refusing the very tools offered to them because of fear of the IPCC. I bet every country in Europe will have a similar set of rules for their officers. Imagine starting your job, getting issued your kit then saying I don’t want to have a taser it may get me into trouble. How’s about get behind a desk then. 
 

Its good to see the head of the Met is now pushing for more tasers for all front line police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
12 hours ago, kent_white said:

To be fair, in the US, the perpetrator would likely have had an automatic rifle and not a sword.

Yes, highly likely. Not really my point though. More that a murderous cunt with evil intent with whatever weapon would have been taken out with a clear shot like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
11 hours ago, royal white said:

Is it bollocks absolute rubbish. These people are signing up for a job to protect  the public. They can’t do that to the best of their ability if they’re refusing the very tools offered to them because of fear of the IPCC. I bet every country in Europe will have a similar set of rules for their officers. Imagine starting your job, getting issued your kit then saying I don’t want to have a taser it may get me into trouble. How’s about get behind a desk then. 
 

Its good to see the head of the Met is now pushing for more tasers for all front line police.

Again, not willing to read and understand the reasons behind their concerns.

Bog all about any discharges being automatically referred to an independent body.

It's about those bodies not necessarily appreciating the situation, and looking to hang officers out to dry.

You know no more than I do about how foreign countries manage their firearms officers and the laws.

I suspect they look after their own far better. 

Additionally, you keep saying that they don't want the equipment. They, largely, do want it. They also want adequate protections for when they do.

It really isn't a difficult point to understand. 

Maybe your experience in the forces have left you with a slightly skewed view, but suffice to say the police have a different set of rules, and arguably they put the officer in a more difficult position.

These are the repeated concerns of a number of former firearms officers that I've heard talk about their careers and the problems they now have. The recruitment numbers speak for themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
8 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Yes, highly likely. Not really my point though. More that a murderous cunt with evil intent with whatever weapon would have been taken out with a clear shot like that.

Sadly mate, therein is the issue. Just imagine the money ridden scummy lawyers, lapping up legal aid in pursuing the officer for doing his job.

We're in a terrible situation at the moment with numerous groups with an over inflated sense of entitlement taking legal action against authorities, often for political reasons, and the courts swamped with long, expensive processes.

It must be awful for an officer having to put all his training to use, doing his job and protecting the public, knowing full well that pulling the trigger may be the start of the end of his career.

I'm no great fan of the quality of a lot of policing, but I do feel for those who are tasked with doing this on our behalf, because of what may happen to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
19 hours ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I agree, though apparently not all of them want to have them.

 

14 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Additionally, you keep saying that they don't want the equipment. They, largely, do want it. They also want adequate protections for when they do.

You were the one that made that claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Again, not willing to read and understand the reasons behind their concerns.

Bog all about any discharges being automatically referred to an independent body.

It's about those bodies not necessarily appreciating the situation, and looking to hang officers out to dry.

You know no more than I do about how foreign countries manage their firearms officers and the laws.

I suspect they look after their own far better. 

Additionally, you keep saying that they don't want the equipment. They, largely, do want it. They also want adequate protections for when they do.

It really isn't a difficult point to understand. 

Maybe your experience in the forces have left you with a slightly skewed view, but suffice to say the police have a different set of rules, and arguably they put the officer in a more difficult position.

These are the repeated concerns of a number of former firearms officers that I've heard talk about their careers and the problems they now have. The recruitment numbers speak for themselves. 

What are the different set of rules between the police and the military when the Military are in a role similar to Northern Ireland? 
 

You're confusing yourself as cheese has pointed out. 

 

Im fully understanding everything you’re saying and I’m saying it’s a shit point. They’re the first line of defence between the bad guys and the public. It’s you who’s refusing to understand my point. 
 

I’ll make it easier for you…. what use is a front line copper, armed with only a baton and pepper spray, to a member of the public who is being attacked with a samurai? 

 

Edited by royal white
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Sadly mate, therein is the issue. Just imagine the money ridden scummy lawyers, lapping up legal aid in pursuing the officer for doing his job.

We're in a terrible situation at the moment with numerous groups with an over inflated sense of entitlement taking legal action against authorities, often for political reasons, and the courts swamped with long, expensive processes.

It must be awful for an officer having to put all his training to use, doing his job and protecting the public, knowing full well that pulling the trigger may be the start of the end of his career.

I'm no great fan of the quality of a lot of policing, but I do feel for those who are tasked with doing this on our behalf, because of what may happen to them.

Not as awful as knowing you could have probably saved someone’s life but didn’t get the chance to because you feared of what might have happened after 

Edited by royal white
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
9 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

It's not quite pick of the pops is it, Boby Fluff Brno?

Worth posting again (I didn’t post it the first time) We were 6th before Gordon Brown sold half our gold when gold was at its lowest price for years. Comments?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BobyBrno said:

Worth posting again (I didn’t post it the first time) We were 6th before Gordon Brown sold half our gold when gold was at its lowest price for years. Comments?

 

I think you are miss the top slot off that list

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Lass was a front, she can't challenge the mafia like ring leaders back in the homeland, just do your time. 25 mill laundered into some new cannabis farms and small property developments... all she got were some shoes and an Audi... plus a few years in the Holloway Spa Resort

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
11 minutes ago, gonzo said:

EDL March in London today.

Still not entirely sure what it is they are marching about 

Stephen Yaxley Lennon, sorry Tommy Robinson, is in town 

Says a lot when you have to change your name to a Luton football hooligan in an attempt to be taken seriously 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.