British Police Cherry Pick Arrests - if it gets them Money if Not - They Don't - Want Proof, Ask t

On Sky today we were told of the NHS's trouble of having to deal with drunks every weekend and holidays the abuse to their staff, the time it takes to deal with them and the waste of resources it takes away from other patients such as crash victims etc.

Dr Cliff Mann wants the police to do their job and take a zero tolerance approach to drunks, but they are refusing because it takes up court time and stretches their limited offences. Boo Hoo! But is that the real reason - we all know how the polie just love to make arrests - we even hear on tv programmes when they go out on shift "Who can we arrest today?" said with disgusting glee! Never whoi can we help today!

However, according to British Law, Drunk and Disorderly is a criminal offence and one should be arrested for it, sent to court etc. But it isn't happening and despite what the NHS tells us about the huge increase in drunkenness, the arrest numbers are down. Why?

Why simply because the police don't make money from the proceeds of crime act through drunks. Probably there is no legal aid either for the solicitors and courts. So they have been directed to ignore this public nuisance.

There has to be a reason and IMHP its simply it doesn't pay. It looks as though the police have been directed not to clogg the courts, with crimes that don't collect hidden revenue? Many families would love them to do their job as when the drunk male comes home booze is often a reason for abusing the family and I doubt the figures for this are down by much.

There is an argument about not presuming that drink is the cause for personal injury, were one to have a couple and then slip off the curb etc but most people can distinguish between the passed out drunk who gets taken to hospital and the one who has had a couple of drinks and then has an accident - but is not drunk.

(I am glad I am passed the boozing when I was younger although I had friends that took me home after and I reciprocated for them etc but things have changed and the cost of booze is cheaper than in the past.

Are we happy with a cherry-picking police force. Most people think they are a government force, but they are a private company with accounts the same as any other company - should they be allowed to cherry pick or do we deserve a better deal from them?

Policing in the UK has long been an enterprise, rather than a public service. We are a resource. Animals seen as below the line of importance. The Police - Public relationship is one of revenue generation, nothing more.

a reply to: SlowNail

It has subtely changed though as we have got more educated and its now very mjuch about security for the establishment and a grab of revenue from the - dare I use the word plebs - which I feel is appropriate here.

I did work for the police in the 1970's and even then you could see a change in the type of recruit they were taking on and a gulf ,which normally exists between departments in businesses becoming ever apparent within the different forces. Today it has become openly alligned with mi5 and the use of plain clothes officers for small political rallies, such as one I went to and witnessed the plain clothes man initiating the trouble. But it takes recourses away from normal policing and keeping the public safe - which is the role I want my taxes to go to.

Problem is the more dirtier and self interested the elite get, the more security they expect from the police that is behind their cherry picking policies but, its tyo whom they give their loyalty to that I think needs to be questioned by the public today. The government has a choice stop wasting our taxes on elite policies and spend it on the policies the public pay for!

originally posted by: Shiloh7
Why simply because the police don't make money from the proceeds of crime act through drunks. Probably there is no legal aid either for the solicitors and courts. So they have been directed to ignore this public nuisance.

There has to be a reason and IMHP its simply it doesn't pay. It looks as though the police have been directed not to clogg the courts, with crimes that don't collect hidden revenue? Many families would love them to do their job as when the drunk male comes home booze is often a reason for abusing the family and I doubt the figures for this are down by much.

The amount of offences that involve seizures under POCA are probably a tiny proportion of offences. If the police were ordered to ignore offences that had no realisitic POCA outcome, they would spend most of their time sitting on their arses twiddling their thumbs.

It is true that the courts get backlogged at times, especially around Christmas. Some crimes, such as Drunk and Disorderly, can often be managed without prosecuting the offender. Being drunk in itself isn't an offence, nor should it be, and I would rather see the police exercise some discretion over which situations can be resolved by sending someone home, or which are serious enough to warrant further action.

Also, if you're potentially subject to legal proceedings in certain areas (crime, mental health, etc), legal aid will cover a solicitor. The judges and court staff get paid whatever happens. That has no bearing on anything, really.

And just to wrap it all up... targets and spin. Despite the promises of Theresa May, the target culture is still alive and vibrant in the UK police. What often happens is that the senior management teams will send down an instruction to charge offence "x" as offence "y" where possible. For example, some scenarios could result in either a D&D offence or a Public Order offence. By directing officers to go with PO where possible, it allows them to later claim that "targeted campaigns over the Christmas period have successfully reduced incidents of Drunk and Disorderly conduct, while a proactive approach has lead to a rise in successful Public Order prosecutions". Same amount of crime, same behaviour happening, but a much more positive spin for the reports.

Edit to add: Ah, I see from the replies already that this isn't a serious thread, it's just a "let's bash the evil police, grrrr at the establishment" thread. No worries, I'll bow out.

a reply to: EvillerBob

I never claimed the Police were evil, but thanks for the poor attempt to twist my words. I intended to highlight the fact that the police are no longer USED for the benefit of the public, but instead to make money from the populace. This is rife and I'm not the only one to notice. We've heard it before from officers themselves. They're not particularly happy that they're being turned into tax officers either. Whether it clashes with your whiter than white views is irrelevant. It's happening. You can go quiet every time someone mentions it, if you wish. Won't make it any less real.

originally posted by: Shiloh7
Dr Cliff Mann wants the police to do their job and take a zero tolerance approach to drunks, but they are refusing because it takes up court time and stretches their limited offences. Boo Hoo!

The problem of drunkards ending up in A&E and disrupting clinicians trying to help people in real need is long-standing. Personally, I think the police do a difficult job trying not to arrest people. Arresting people who are drunk is not really appropriate in some cases and the police know this, when the person can be dealt with differently without resulting in them getting a criminal record.

The issue here is preventative and for hospitals to take measures to separate drunks, rather than to expect the police to intervene and dag them away.

PS I work in a hospital.

Regards

It's about time the binge drinking masses took a little more responsibility for themselves at the weekends without expecting over worked nhs staff to peel them off the streets and stitch them back together because they've drunk too much booze. Then expecting police officers to act like a taxi service to return them home safely once they can no longer walk or talk coherently. It's become a national embarrassment.

Simple solution without all the fuss of police and criminal records......

If you end up in hospital drunk you pay for your own treatment!

a reply to: crazyewok

And if you end up being a victim of said drunk, you likely also get to pay your own fine for protecting yourself. The courts don't care who pays. Just as long as someone does.

a reply to: Shiloh7
This happened in Orange County.

The sheriff was taking 5000$ cash in order to drop charges. He was also getting payed for hits and other criminal activity within the jails because Orange County sheriff runs the jails.

Was a really big deal out there.

Most people I know who get raided for grow ops, detectives usualy come in with a squad of dummies, take a few details, strip all the lights and equipment and leave the plants and explain theyll get a letter through the door at some point. They can make money from confiscating all that equipment and cant do nout with the plants.

Another trick I see them pull is liftin folk for pissin in the streets, haul them in charge them with anything they can including resisting arrest an assaulting an officer. That is all nonsense of course but what happens the victim has to then spend several hundred pounds on a lawyer to make it all go away in court. The police must go to the same lodge meetings as the lawyers operating at that court.

Another example might be stop a driver for a motoring offence and in exchange for allowing the driver to keep their licence, they may 'offer the opportunity' to pay £150 to watch a safety video, kindly keeping that motorist on the road and as an added bonus, getting the option to catch that criminal once more.

a reply to: SlowNail

The use of "re-education" training is a well established approach and a way to (a) re-educate a driver and (b) stop the driver getting points on their license. It works too, as re-offending is reduced.

The law is not always punitive.

Regards

a reply to: paraphi

No, it doesn't. The training is pretty much coffee and biscuits.

Regards

That is the model for everyone. Greed is the driver. Speed traps are not fiction. I know places the police don't go. It's easier to make money on the moral than the evil that really plagues our world. Tell your kids not to sell lemonade.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
It's about time the binge drinking masses took a little more responsibility for themselves at the weekends without expecting over worked nhs staff to peel them off the streets and stitch them back together because they've drunk too much booze. Then expecting police officers to act like a taxi service to return them home safely once they can no longer walk or talk coherently. It's become a national embarrassment.

They were encouraged to do so by New Labour who encouraged 24-hour opening of pubs because the loons thought it would end the street violence associated with closing hours. Or maybe they were paid bungs by the brewery companies because they thought they would make more money. Now the consequences are that everyone else has to put up with screaming and shouting in the early hours of the morning along with pillocks trying to kick in your door because they have the wrong apartment floor.

I personally like the idea of billing the drunks for wasting A&E time, but the hard part is trying to get them to give up the cash, a credit card or even ID. We can't use cash because that would make A&E units a target for thieves. Then somebody could just claim they don't have a credit card, left it at home, were mugged and don't have any money or ID with them.
That's the problem with being drunk, it leads people into a state of helplessness and reduced responsibility that the law has to make allowances for.

Maybe each A&E unit could have an online web system to let people know how busy they are and what the expected waiting time is, how many people are waiting and basic injury (eg. #1 broken arm/DIY, #2 broken leg/drunk, #3 laceration/pub argument).

England has become a country of little consequence in the real world....What goes on there is hardly anything the rest of us care about....
The mess the british government has made of their oil boom is a prime example....the enormous revenue wasted on pretentious bull# on the world stage......
Now nearly broke and reeling from the cost of military adventurism, they seek to pick the pockets of the populace.

a reply to: EvillerBob

Its actually a very serious thread because we are seeing our police disregard certain types of crime and target crimes that make money that goes back to them. They also remove property which they then sell and profit from. Not something that a police force should be doing if they are threre to progtect the public who pay their taxes to have a fair law and order force in this country.

Were the police and the government interested in the welfare of the drunks or people who languish in our jails, they would have good rehabilitation and education programmes being runb throughout the british jail service. They don't. Its only if you are a child criminal or sensational criminal that you seem to get the chance at any decent education. A friend whose a prison visitor told us that some of our jails for women have things like hair dressing salons - except they are empty as the government won't fund training so when women get out of jail, they have a skill and won't re-offend. One reason is that it makes the police arrest numbers look good because many of those arrested are re-offenders. Without being givenb a chance to lift themselves out of crime by being trained whilst in jail, they don't have a chance. That is something I would like my taxes to go to.

In the UK the government sure wants people to own their own homes because if they commit a crime there is a tangible asset from which to claim against.

But the point raised is should our police cherry pick what they wish to prosecute or abide by the law they are supposed to uphold?

My son is also a nurse as are many of his friends and one thing they all agree on is the abuse they get from drunks and friends. If a head doctor wants change in this area, surely we should be listening to himn and wondering why the police don't do their job.

a reply to: stirling

Bearing in mind the size of England, it should be a country of little notice except for its history. One reason I had so wished the Scots would have chosen independence as our government and queen, minus the scots tax contribution they make to her living standard, would have wound their necks in on the world stage and concentrated on getting this country back to the country it was when we funded the services the people pay into the tax system for.

Today though our police force is set purely on government the public during protests and collectging revenue. Crimes like burglary are pretty much on the bottom of the list of crimes investigated - the same as Theresa May's investigation into child abused. How, with all the people living on this island can she be seriously having difficulty finding some decent person to chair this investigation - its a pity the police have been silenced on this and are obviously going slow on this investigation as we have a general election next year. Were one to ask the public what you would like investigated, I suspect the thinbgs in this paragraph would be on the top of their list.

a reply to: Shiloh7

but things have changed and the cost of booze is cheaper than in the past.

I was paying 45p a pint back in the 80's...not sure where you were drinking that was more expensive than it is today mate.

Personally, i don't go out to bars and pubs because of the absolute rip off prices, although years ago i was out on the sauce almost every night.

SOME police, like any one of us can be absolute arses in one respect or another, but i've had times where coppers i've had reason to deal with were first class people.

I'll never forget one occasion, when i was more than the worse for wear drink wise, things were getting ready to kick off outside the pub. Coppers turned up in force and began dispersing the large groups of us from the pub who were milling about...i refused to leave the public street, explaining to the coppers, through slurred speech and swaying about like a weeble, i knew my rights!

The two coppers took me and my then girlfriend, now my wife, to their car and told us to get in...i thought they were taking us to the station, so demanded to know where they were taking us...the copper said.."well, that depends on where you live mate..we're taking you home!"

Which they did, and i've never forgotten it...they're not all bad, it's just when the bad ones are bad..they're very bad and we get to hear more about it than we do the things like the above kindness i was shown.