• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Camera Vans

before a "known criminal" gets entered into the system as known or wanted perhaps the Police could go around and actually knock on their door and see if they can arrest them rather than sitting at the side of the road waiting for them to drive past.

However, this doesn't happen that often, I've no idea how many people are currently on a "wanted" list but it must be a huge number. Every now and again the Police have a bit of a purge and make a few much publicised early morning calls to get these people off the streets. They should be doing them every day until ALL outstanding warrants have been cleared up.

I'd like to see the Police actually doing some of the Policing rather than relying on third party data, call centres to filter calls and public sector camera operators.

Targetting real criminals through proper Police intelligence would be a really good way of getting the public back on side.

Appearing to care or even give a damn would be another.

Example, we live on a quiet road with very little pedestrian activity as we are quite a way out of the town centre. Last Saturday, three lads went up the street at 11.30 pm and kicked the wing mirrors off twelve cars before being disturbed by someone taking their dog out for a walk. The Police were called (999) and the caller (my neighbour) was told this was not a matter that justified a 999 call and that he should phone the non emergency number. This number was called and he was told that unless he was a victim he couldn't report the crime so until someone who was affected directly dialled in there was nothing that could be done. So, one of the victims calls and they are told that "someone will be along to investigate shortly". 45 minutes later, the Police arrive, take everyone's name and address, drive around the block and say they can't see anything or anybody suspicious - Of course they can't. The kids that did it are at home, feet up and watching the TV!!!. That was it, the total investigation lasted about 15 minutes and achieved nothing. Because there was no real likelihood of picking up any DNA they weren't interested. What more could they have done? well, they could have turned up a bit earlier, they could have asked to look at the CCTV recordings from the houses with cameras (except they can't because that isn't allowed). They could have gone to the house of the main suspect who was named by the original "witness" but apparently as there was no proof of his involvement they couldn't do that either. Twelve "crimes", twelve "victims" yet no crime numbers because for those involved it wasn't worth pursuing, No insurance claims because it's just too expensive to claim for damage like that and No real action from the Police - clueless, hopeless, innefective and useless.

Earning the respect of the community would be another way to get some co-operation. For the most part this used to be the job of the "beat" copper. he would wander around and everyone would know who he was and how approachable he was. People could confide in him (or her) and tell them stuff which could be acted on quickly. Crimes could be reported quickly and easily (see above) and therefore more criminals could be arrested.

Databases for the most part make terrible Police forces. They are seldom 100% accurate even though the people relying on them tend to treat them as gospel.

I see both sides but I must say that this hi tech Policing is doing nothing for real crime detection and just as the speed cameras are a tax on people too daft to stick to speed limits the ANPR cameras just seem to be catching people who are too stupid to buy a tax disk or insure their car.

Andy
 
glojo said:
Hi Nick,
There is no sense pursuing this your simply not answering any questions and are just making very bland, meaningless statements.

What an unbelievable thing to say! Where on earth do you get these rediculous 'facts' from?

As far as I can see a large slice of crime is committed by youths, who later go on to be career criminals.

glojo said:
Are you suggesting that all crimes are committed by neighbours?

Well people from the same neighbourhood.

I read somewhere that a house that had been burgled is often targetted again by the same crooks.

glojo said:
What is a fact is that over 70% of burglars caught in Torquay actually come from Liverpool. That is an embarrassing fact that got the local Detective Inspector in very hot water. They had to supply these figures to the local court. Your statement reflects your beliefs which cannot be reasonably debated. You still have not answered my questions and I don'r expect you to.

But most seaside towns seem to attact longterm benefit addicts who become residents, I find it had to believe that vast numbers of burglers are driving half way accross the country to steal people's videos and then trailing back to Liverpool...

glojo said:
1. Your house is burgled

2. How to deploy the resources I set

Is this radio going to be used to receive information? Surely this will be a breach of your principals? You have SIX bobbies, where is this one going to be deployed and how will he get there? (The town centre is a 30 minute walk from the station)

I would hope that they would have cars, local policeing does not have to be exclusivly made up of beat officers.

I'm not anti the police having the full use of modern technology, I just don't think that ANPR is worth the lack of privacy to law adibing citizens that it will bring.

glojo said:
Do these targets have huge signs on their backs?

Clearly Torquay is a bit rough!

glojo said:
It is the easiest thing in the world to criticise (as you have just proved)

I congratulate our Police on doing a very difficult job which is clearly always open to criticism.

In a way I feel sorry for those that whine about 'Big Brother' simply because they are usually the first in the queue to cry if the Police do not respond immediately to their own complaints.?

I just don't see that a nationwide system of surveillence cameras which record and store the details of *everyones* journeys is going to have much effect on crime.

glojo said:
You and your like continually complain about 'Big Brother' and I have this image of someone somewhere reading my posts, listening to my telephone calls, monitoring my movements etc etc :D :D :D

How sad

Calm down dear, it's only a debate...
 
Geoff2 said:
Nick,
I think you are on a dodgy wicket or playing the devils advocate:devil: , not sure:rolleyes: If you have something to hide, the big brother state is not for you, if you are, and you probably are, a law abiding citizen who pays his various taxes and dues, then surely there is nothing to fear. If the criminal is allowed to use modern technology, a radio listening in on police frequencies:) or a whistle a la Norman Wisdom:D the poor old bobby would be running around and dissappearing up his own trungeon:D without having modern technology himself.

I'm gona go for Devils Advocate

I'm not playing devils advocate neither do I have anything to hide, I just don't like the idea of a system of cameras recording the movements of every driver, and details of those movements being kept in a database for 5 years.

This just seems to me to be the sort of thing the Stasi would introduce...
 
nick mercedes said:
I'm not playing devils advocate neither do I have anything to hide, I just don't like the idea of a system of cameras recording the movements of every driver, and details of those movements being kept in a database for 5 years.

This just seems to me to be the sort of thing the Stasi would introduce...
I think you make a key point that needs to be addressed.
Yes we all want to see something done about the apparent impunity of many of today's criminals but the potential negatives could impact everybody severely.
For example, when Ken L. originally took over London, it was effectively, a coup.
In the last French election Le Pen was not too far off from making a first round victory. That caught everybody by surprise and nobody is sure what the outcome might be.
 
DITTRICH said:
What started as a rather innocent thread to warn people of a van sitting along Millbank has somehow escalated into heated debate. As the author of this thread, my 2c is as follows:-
Hi Les,
Hopefully your original question was answered :) :) and the thread then continued :)

There should always be a place for technology, be it ANPR, radio, video, DNA, or fingerprints. No system is perfect, we can all cite examples of where things went wrong, or something could be improved. Like I keep saying, it is easy to criticise :mad: :mad:

We hear about good old fashioned policing, and of course there is a place for it, but in the 'old days' there was no political correctness. No silly form filling, no multiple offices solely built to collate statistics. The Devon and Cornwall Police has increased in size from 2400 to over 3500, but bobbies on the beat are extremely scarce. There are now departments that deal with complaints against ethnic minorities, another department that deal with homophobic allegations, the list is endless, but each department then has to compile statistics. This to me is far more objectionable than these silly complaints over information being put into the Police National Computer. Thanks to CCTV the murderers of the woman constable who attended the robbery at a travel agents was quickly caught. ANPR is merely an extension of the PNC.

If you remember months ago I suggested what a good idea it would be if officers actually used a helmet video camera, connected to a tape machine to cut down on paper work? A certain Police Officer on this forum went ballistic at my comments, now the Metropolitan Police are testing this technology.

ANPR is today's technology, but I envisage every officer eventually having access to this technology simply by the video camera they will wear. Face recognition software will flag up a wanted person, their communication equipment might have digital finger print recognition and who knows, maybe even DNA recognition capabilities. We can keep our heads in the sand and cry about big brother, or adapt to the latest technology.

I have thrown these controversial ideas into the pot, but please note the only alternative suggestions are 'a radio and common sense'!! No cars, no technology, no computers, no storing valuable intelligence. :D

Hopefully we do not get too excited, and I would love to hear what serving officers think about my controversial observations.

Regards
John the excited
 
I think there is an assumed connection here between the monitoring of a population and excessive - and perhaps innapropriate - government interference in people's lives.

Whilst the two naturally do accompany each other (authoritarian states always start by imposing strict controls and checks on their population), you don't need technology to have an authoritarian state. Similarly, you can have monitoring without government interference. Monitoring does not lead to authoritarianism.

Hitler is a good example. He was democratically elected to power. He then did a bit of alliance-making with other political parties. And then he abolished the democratic process and came down visciously on the entire German population (long before he decided to pursue a course of genocide). He didn't need monitoring and surveilance systems; he used what every good dictator has always used to keep control - fear.

So, the danger is not in being monitored but instead in the victory of a non democratic / authoritarian - nasty - government. I don't want to get into politics here (and get the thread closed), but the fastest way to get a dictatorship rising out of democracy is to have a society that is disallusioned with the current political mechanism. Tragically, I cannot remember a time in my life when there were more reasons than there are now to feel that the current method of goverment is letting us down. You can tell this feeling is around us from the (frightening) rise in popularity of the BNP and similar political organisations throughout Europe. Whilst I wouldn't turn to such an organisation as a route out of our current problems, many peple would (and did in Germany in the 1920's).

So, if monitoring and surveilance systems keep our streets safe, keep drug dealers under control, prevent terrorists carrying out their despicable acts and keep a lid on all the other things that help to make us feel unsafe and unhappy with our society, then it could be argued that the existance of the surveilance systems is actually preventing the move towards an authoritarian state. People only change their style of government when they see it failing to run the country properly.

(Typed in a hurry - hope that made sense - even if you don't agree with it).

Philip
 
I believe that while the public like to see Bobbies on the beat because of the sense of security it provides, the police themselves will argue that police in cars are far more effective.
It would seem that cameras could eaily be worn by officers in the street both to record information and give info back to the station. A GPS locator for Bobbie's on their own would also be a useful item.
Don't underestimate the basic PC though. He has a good sense of to whom he is talking and will either recognise somebody or be highyl suspicious, correctyl so in most cases. His (or her) sixth sense is an important piece of the overall technology.
 
Prprandall51
I am not an historian but I believe Mr. H carried out surveillance by appointing local street committees, works committees, armed forces committees, in fact committees everywhere to monitor the population. The same principals were taken up by Walter Ulbricht when setting up the Communist regiime in East Germany.
 
prprandall51 said:
So, if monitoring and surveilance systems keep our streets safe, keep drug dealers under control, prevent terrorists carrying out their despicable acts and keep a lid on all the other things that help to make us feel unsafe and unhappy with our society, then it could be argued that the existance of the surveilance systems is actually preventing the move towards an authoritarian state. People only change their style of government when they see it failing to run the country properly.

(Typed in a hurry - hope that made sense - even if you don't agree with it).

Philip

I can see what you mean, but it seems to me that "it will stop terrorists" and "catch criminals" is being used a little too much as a excuse for ever more intrusive surveillance on the general public going about their everyday business.

It's like the "money laundering" excuse that's used to put off people using cash...
 
BonzoDog said:
A GPS locator for Bobbie's on their own would also be a useful item.
:) Already here. When we had a constable come to our house to take a statement they explained their movements were tracked via their radio. Quite an amazing piece of technology. Mobile phone, a radio, button technology to avoid the need for talking. (They just typed in different codes).


BonzoDog said:
Don't underestimate the basic PC though. He has a good sense of to whom he is talking and will either recognise somebody or be highyl suspicious, correctyl so in most cases. His (or her) sixth sense is an important piece of the overall technology.
A good point but in areas where there is a high input of temporary residents then it becomes more difficult.

This takes me into another pet moan. Andy_K and myself live in a seaside area. Policing is based on the number of residents on the electorial register and as you can imagine, in the summer season the population can increase ten-fold. The annoying thing is that sometimes this increase is comprised of young people with a few bob in their pocket and wanting a good time. Police numbers are not increased to deals with this influx, but surprise, surprise, the Metropolitan Force is partly funded by the government (Home Office) their budget is completely different from any other Constabulary. The number of officers is far in access of less fortunate locations, but that is a separate issue :D :D

Regards,
John the rambler
 
Same old Sh!te

Guys you just simply ain't got a ****** clue have you ? Leave it to those that do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Monday morning is speed camera day - most places and especially along albert embankment.
 
timmy said:
Guys you just simply ain't got a fookin clue have you ? Leave it to those that do.

Nice to see that once again Timmy has managed to get all his brain cells in a straight line and contributed a post of the calibre we have come to expect from him :D
 
I saw plod today checking tax by the side of the road (A308 near junction with A316 ....

Two double decker transporters filled with the usual sort of untaxed crap that you would expect , except for as I drove past they were just loading a nice black new shape 5 series :eek:

Was at least 10 of them standing there flagging cars down ....
 
glojo said:
What is a fact is that over 70% of burglars caught in Torquay actually come from Liverpool. That is an embarrassing fact that got the local Detective Inspector in very hot water. They had to supply these figures to the local court.
Hi John

This caught my eye. Seems an astounding statistic. Can you give any more information on it? I've done some googling on the subject but can't find anything about it (Devon and Cornwall Police, thisissouthdevon.co.uk, etc.).

Cheers
Andrew
 
I think Nick makes some important points.

The truth is, ANPR is a tool that assists the Bobby, not one that replaces them. It still requires the Cop to look at the full set of circumstances and make a decision (which might be right, might be wrong...).

ANPR results in early arrests - the "go knock on their door" option is something of a red herring as this is about denying criminals the use of the roads - If the information is that NaughtyNick drives without insurance, waking him up at 11am from his deep sleep isn't going to worry him quite as much as getting stopped by an ANPR team and having his car seized. And prosecuted.

The Police have a number of sources of information and they can use some, all or none to come to a conclusion, ANPR is one that indicates which vehicles are worth stopping due to their involvement in crime (so actually making the stops smarter - avoiding "harassment" of regular Joes like you or me.

Nick is right to be suspicious of anything that offers such a huge improvement in the effectiveness of the Cops - everything else the govts have done for the last 20+ years seems to have taken them in the other direction!

Finally, don't mix the Speed Camera (road safety) and ANPR (crime) debates. They are quite different animals.

I've seen ANPR in action and think it is the muts nuts (I don't commit crime, I have insurance).

:D
 
Flyer said:
Hi John

This caught my eye. Seems an astounding statistic. Can you give any more information on it? I've done some googling on the subject but can't find anything about it (Devon and Cornwall Police, thisissouthdevon.co.uk, etc.).

Cheers
Andrew
I'll pm you some more information. As you can imagine it made front page news in the local paper (Herald Express) plus the Chief Constable at the time was from Liverpool (He was not a happy bunny) :)

Regards,
John
 
Swiss Toni said:
The truth is, ANPR is a tool that assists the Bobby, not one that replaces them. It still requires the Cop to look at the full set of circumstances and make a decision (which might be right, might be wrong...).

ANPR results in early arrests - the "go knock on their door" option is something of a red herring as this is about denying criminals the use of the roads -
Hi Swiss Toni,
You've now got me worried :o :o I hope NO ONE thinks I am suggesting that ANPR is a substitute for the bobby on the beat :o :o :o Never in a month of Sundays. ANPR in my opinion is a brilliant aid. Full stop. It will never be perfect, not like the armchair critic that will never make a mistake. It was not so long ago the in the 'Good old days' the local bobby would have to get the keys to the local vehicle registration office, search through the files to see if Fred Bloggs owned a Ford Cortina, or was Fred telling porkies! This one enquiry would quite literally take hours. This is why I laugh when I read about folks wanting to go back to the old days of having bobbies on the beat. Their tinted glasses simply see what they want them to see. Progress and big brother now allow this enquiry to be carried out in perhaps seconds?

Regards
John
 
I'm surprised one of those reality-Cop-shows hasn't done a big thing on ANPR Teams (or have they?!) - it might get a bit boring, all those seized cars and arresting all those criminals...!

Nice to see Timmy back on form too. :D
 
Swiss Toni said:
I'm surprised one of those reality-Cop-shows hasn't done a big thing on ANPR Teams (or have they?!) - it might get a bit boring, all those seized cars and arresting all those criminals...!

Ridding the roads of untaxed and uninsured cars is one thing, but why the need to keep the data of everyones movements for 5 years?

And quite possibly for many living in crime ridden areas people driving around in untaxed cars may be less of a concern than gangs of chavs and lawless elements making their lives a misery...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom