Local Scrotes Break Into My 211

[Scott_F]

So you report it, it is included in the crime stats, and it will still not be investigated due to lack of resources. Then what? You gain nothing, and the funding source (HM Govt) from which the lack of resources stems takes no notice. Irritating, but that's the way it is. Don't blame the police for a situation which is not of their making and which they cannot change.

People who commit this sort of crime are serial offenders.

If the police bothered to attend then they could investigate; if they bothered to investigate they might catch the culprits; if they caught the culprits then the number of crimes and victims would fall sharply.

The police often demonstrate what they can do when they feel like it so crying "lack of resources" all the time doesn't wash.

 

[Smart320]

Even if they found the culprits the courts would slap their wrists, fine them £100 , which they would never pay , or community service which they could do before going off to commit further offences

 

[E55BOF]

People who commit this sort of crime are serial offenders.

If the police bothered to attend then they could investigate; if they bothered to investigate they might catch the culprits; if they caught the culprits then the number of crimes and victims would fall sharply.

The police often demonstrate what they can do when they feel like it so crying "lack of resources" all the time doesn't wash.

If they had the resources they could "bother to attend" every crime; they haven't, so they can''t. If something is high-priority, for whatever reason, then more resources will be devoted to it, but their resources are finite; if everything becomes high-priority, then in fact nothing is high-priority. They have to prioritise, so they do.

Do you wonder how many times Hampshire Police have been unable to "bother to attend" to deal with other crime reports because of lack of resources during the Novichok investigation?

 

[Scott_F]

If they had the resources they could "bother to attend" every crime; they haven't, so they can''t. If something is high-priority, for whatever reason, then more resources will be devoted to it, but their resources are finite; if everything becomes high-priority, then in fact nothing is high-priority. They have to prioritise, so they do.

Do you wonder how many times Hampshire Police have been unable to "bother to attend" to deal with other crime reports because of lack of resources during the Novichok investigation?

Had the OP been a member of the local constabulary do you think the police would have turned up ?? And they always have the resources to buy and equip speed camera vans and staff them with a couple of fat civvies to catch drivers doing 36mph in a 30mph zone. But of course, that's a nice earner.

As I have said, if the police targeted a small number of serial offenders they could clear up a lot of offences and prevent a great many more from happening. And as they often prove, when they do decide to act it's amazing how much effort they can muster:

Company director jailed after fitting laser jammer to Range Rover and giving speed cameras the finge

You are correct when you say that the police have to prioritise and unfortunately their priorities have long been skewed by self-interest and the desire to raise easy money.

And the Novichok incidents took place in Wiltshire.

 

[saff]

My sympathy Toolman and a shared sense ( I'm sure by all on this forum ) of outrage! Perhaps its for the best you didn't catch them for your own benefit.

 

[E55BOF]

And the Novichok incidents took place in Wiltshire.

So they did. Do you wonder how many times Wiltshire Police have been unable to "bother to attend" to deal with other crime reports because of lack of resources during the Novichok investigation?

 

[GLK]

Sorry to hear about this, terrible experience!
And you're absolutely right - the town has become a dump, can't wait to move away from here ...

 

[AMGeed]

Sorry to hear Steve. I will admit I'd feel the same about wanting retribution, but that can bring its problems.
Just hope the scum get caught one day and get their reward.

 

[E55BOF]

Had the OP been a member of the local constabulary do you think the police would have turned up ?? And they always have the resources to buy and equip speed camera vans and staff them with a couple of fat civvies to catch drivers doing 36mph in a 30mph zone. But of course, that's a nice earner.

Would you like to see speed camera vans disappear, then? In one way I would, purely for selfish motives, but if there was less enforcement of speed limits, I rather think there would be less observance of those limits, more serious accidents, and a need for more police attendance at those accidents.

It may be a nice earner, but as I'm sure you are aware, not for the police; the money goes to central government funds.

As I have said, if the police targeted a small number of serial offenders they could clear up a lot of offences and prevent a great many more from happening. And as they often prove, when they do decide to act it's amazing how much effort they can muster:

Company director jailed after fitting laser jammer to Range Rover and giving speed cameras the finge

If the police turned up for every reported offence, how many more would they have to attend, only to find they were unconnected with that 'small number of serial offenders'? So far as the idiot in the Range Rover is concerned, law enforcement agencies do make every effort to catch and deal with people who c0ck a snook at them. If they did not, as with speed control measures, I think many other such idiots would be encouraged to flout the law.[/QUOTE]

You are correct when you say that the police have to prioritise and unfortunately their priorities have long been skewed by self-interest and the desire to raise easy money.

Your definition of self-interest may be what I would define as self-protection, and protection of respect for the law. As for the 'easy money', that income does not go to the police.

I suggest you would do better to direct your fire at the politicians who control the purse-strings and set national objectives and overall priorities; the police have little control over those, any more than the armed forces do over theirs. It is no longer a case of "How much cloth do you need to make the coat?"; it is now "There's all the cloth you're getting, now get on with it. Get a quart out of a pint pot, and if you don't, when it goes wrong we'll do our damnedest to make you carry the can".

And the Novichok incidents took place in Wiltshire.

You're right about that, at least.

 

[Scott_F]

Would you like to see speed camera vans disappear, then? In one way I would, purely for selfish motives, but if there was less enforcement of speed limits, I rather think there would be less observance of those limits, more serious accidents, and a need for more police attendance at those accidents.

It may be a nice earner, but as I'm sure you are aware, not for the police; the money goes to central government funds.

Yeah but it doesn't though:

Police to net an extra £12 million from speed awareness courses

If the police turned up for every reported offence, how many more would they have to attend, only to find they were unconnected with that 'small number of serial offenders'? So far as the idiot in the Range Rover is concerned, law enforcement agencies do make every effort to catch and deal with people who c0ck a snook at them. If they did not, as with speed control measures, I think many other such idiots would be encouraged to flout the law.

I would suggest that you re-read the opening post. In recent weeks, the OP has had another vehicle broken into and his neighbour his suffered the same. Meanwhile, the police have been knocking on doors warning about drug dealing in the area. I'm not sure what they hoped to achieve by using their scares resources in such a way (perhaps they'll be around again this week warning everyone that it's very hot at the moment) but there is obviously a direct link between this epidemic of low-level acquisitive crime and the drugs trade that is blighting the area.

So if they prioritised and investigated accordingly they could tackle not one but two issues head-on. Or they could continue to prioritise investigating people who make rude gestures at them.

 

[GeeJayW]

This sort of thing is rife. My daughter lives just north of Leeds. There have been numerous car break-ins and thefts recently in her area including a BMW stolen from three-doors away.

 

[ioweddie]

This country has gone to the Dogs. we'll all be buying guns soon to ad to already poor situation, its getting like the Bronx

 

[MancMike]

I know how you feel Steve.

I had a disagreement with someone a couple years ago. So 7 days (to the minute almost) later, an off-road bike with two ****s with bats and axes smashed up both our cars, nearly every panel, almost every window.

Police turned up eventually and I pointed them at some lovely looking finger prints I could see on the car as I'd only washed them a few hours earlier. It was wet though so the CSI woman who turned up said they wouldn't be able to lift the prints... Surely we could just blow dry the area, then dust the print, but nope... "They're insured at the end of the day" and that was that.

We had the windows fixed for the £60 each autoglass insurance excess, but still live with the dents as we already pay thousands for insurance because it's a rough area, lol

 

[E55BOF]

Yeah but it doesn't though:

Police to net an extra £12 million from speed awareness courses.

So with an annual budget of £7.5 billion, the police may, assuming the newspaper report is correct, receive an extra £12million. I make that an additional 0.0016 per cent. Gosh!! How duplicitous can they get!!

Have you any other factoids to support your argument? I do hope so, because that one won't wash.


QUOTE="Scott_F, post: 2635760, member: 32550"] I would suggest that you re-read the opening post. In recent weeks, the OP has had another vehicle broken into and his neighbour his suffered the same. Meanwhile, the police have been knocking on doors warning about drug dealing in the area. I'm not sure what they hoped to achieve by using their scares resources in such a way (perhaps they'll be around again this week warning everyone that it's very hot at the moment) but there is obviously a direct link between this epidemic of low-level acquisitive crime and the drugs trade that is blighting the area.

So if they prioritised and investigated accordingly they could tackle not one but two issues head-on. Or they could continue to prioritise investigating people who make rude gestures at them.[/QUOTE]

Do you seriously believe that, to any significant degree, the police choose not to investigate reported offences for any other reason than lack of resources? If you do, then all I can say is to quote the Duke of Wellington: "If you believe that you will believe anything."

 

[Scott_F]

So with an annual budget of £7.5 billion, the police may, assuming the newspaper report is correct, receive an extra £12million. I make that an additional 0.0016 per cent. Gosh!! How duplicitous can they get!!

Have you any other factoids to support your argument? I do hope so, because that one won't wash.

Nobody (apart from you, of course) has mentioned duplicity and my "factoids" should wash since they are at least accurate, unlike:

It may be a nice earner, but as I'm sure you are aware, not for the police; the money goes to central government funds.

Do you seriously believe that, to any significant degree, the police choose not to investigate reported offences for any other reason than lack of resources? If you do, then all I can say is to quote the Duke of Wellington: "If you believe that you will believe anything."

Like everyone else, I have to pay taxes including monthly council tax, a chunk of which goes directly to fund policing. My resources are limited, but like everyone else I can't simply say "I'm a bit short this month so I'll just pay some of it". So constantly crying "lack of resources" quickly starts to look to most people like "we can't be bothered" when viewed in the wider context of what police actually choose to do with the resources available to them since too many of those choices are questionable, to say the very least.

And I also know that there are millions of victims of crime in this country who have been, and continue to be, let down by a failing police and criminal justice system.

 

[E55BOF]

We can agree on your last sentence, at least; where we differ is in our interpretation of the main cause of that failing system. The comparison of your limited resources to those of the police is spurious, but consider this: if you genuinely cannot afford to pay your taxes due to limited resources, consequences will nevertheless follow. In the case of the police, the consequence of their limited resouces is the need to prioritise.

So fas as I can see you have adduced no meaningful evidence whatsoever to support your attack on the police, so let us just agree to disagree.

 

[Scott_F]

We can agree on your last sentence, at least; where we differ is in our interpretation of the main cause of that failing system. The comparison of your limited resources to those of the police is spurious, but consider this: if you genuinely cannot afford to pay your taxes due to limited resources, consequences will nevertheless follow. In the case of the police, the consequence of their limited resouces is the need to prioritise.

So fas as I can see you have adduced no meaningful evidence whatsoever to support your attack on the police, so let us just agree to disagree.

Legitimate and justified criticism isn't an attack and nor does a shortage of resources provide carte blanche for failing to do the basics of your job time and again.

I don't know how much more evidence you need, but I've already pointed out that the police make millions from speeding fines despite you insisting otherwise. And if you feel that showing great zeal in attempting to catch motorists driving 5mph or 10mph over the speed limit whilst not even bothering to attend burglaries, car break-ins and a host of other crimes that blight certain areas and make peoples' lives miserable is the correct prioritisation of resources then we will indeed have to disagree.

 

[clk320x]

I've already pointed out that the police make millions from speeding fines despite you insisting otherwise. And if you feel that showing great zeal in attempting to catch motorists driving 5mph or 10mph over the speed limit whilst not even bothering to attend burglaries, car break-ins and a host of other crimes that blight certain areas and make peoples' lives miserable is the correct prioritisation of resources then we will indeed have to disagree.

THIS!!!!!

 

[oldguy57]

Never ending argument isn't it? My experience of the Police has been poor to say the least. The response from my half a dozen requests over the years for assistance from the Police (all for other people ) has been a joke and actually laughable if it wasn't so serious. One matter in particular was so serious that senior Police officers told me they were very concerned about what action I was going to take against them. This resource thing is in my view a total red herring. Certainly in my area the Police have been able to deploy officers every day for months and months (including at one time a firearms squad) to protect Cuadrilla from the very dangerous pensioners who were turning up to protest at a local site. Cost is apparently £25k per day on average. Lack of resources - nah sorry don't believe it. Used as an excuse for poor organisational abilities. (and I have known many Police officers over the years and we have a brand new one living with us) . Obviously my opinion, but shared by many who have the same experiences as me. Rant over

 

[Gollom]

I know how you feel Steve.
I had a disagreement with someone a couple years ago. So 7 days (to the minute almost) later, an off-road bike with two ****s with bats and axes smashed up both our cars, nearly every panel, almost every window.
..... because it's a rough area, lol

Akin to this, I have a habit of politely asking people to pick up rubbish I observe them throwing on the floor. Latest two were yesterday - one an older gentleman at Asda (probably mid sixties) who collected a trolley and threw the bits of paper from it on the floor right next to the rubbish bin! I asked him if he would mind picking them up and putting it in the bin - he did so with good grace but said he had not seen the bin! So it's acceptable to throw in on the floor then? Second was a young lad of about 12 or 13 who stamped on his drinks can right in front of my house and when I asked him politely to pick it up he did so, declined my offer of using my bin to get rid of it but threw it back on the ground when he thought I wasn't looking! The younger girl with him thought this was impressive so now has learnt that throwing rubbish is cool?

My wife thinks I should never say anything as I may get hit or our cars/house may get vandalised by the kids. I see her point, but surely we have to stand up and be counted? Hell, we are likely to end up ankle deep in litter and that is not a world I want my grandkids to inherit!!

What do others think? I am 63 BTW which I'm sure is relevant..... LOL