I think this is a stupid Idea

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Damien

Wouldnt this mean campaining? which costs money? So the candidates may have to be funded which creates a problem.

Also they always have thier eye on re-election so they will always try to do public pleasing actions and the public are not experts in policing

but we are experts on suffering from crime...

Originally Posted by Xaccers

So instead of the police tackling what the community actually wants them to tackle, you'd prefer they continue ignoring troublesome areas simply because its too much hassle for them?

I suggest you read the above again: "rather than what actually does most to reduce crime".

Now imagine if one of these elected officials decided they were going to have an "initiative" to protect kids from paedophiles by putting Police patrols around parks and playgrounds and schools.

How can anyone argue against that? How could someone else get elected by saying they were going to take these Police *away* from these patrols when their opponent would shout from the rooftops that they were endangering children...???

Of course the fact that actually it would make virtually *no* difference and it *would* be taking Police away from where they are needed and could be much more useful would get lost in the rhetoric.

The "initiative" would be nothing more than a "political" tool to grab the voters attention and ensure re-election and not be of any actual use in reducing crime.

That is the sort of thing I am talking about.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Graham

I suggest you read the above again: "rather than what actually does most to reduce crime".

Now imagine if one of these elected officials decided they were going to have an "initiative" to protect kids from paedophiles by putting Police patrols around parks and playgrounds and schools.

How can anyone argue against that? How could someone else get elected by saying they were going to take these Police *away* from these patrols when their opponent would shout from the rooftops that they were endangering children...???

Of course the fact that actually it would make virtually *no* difference and it *would* be taking Police away from where they are needed and could be much more useful would get lost in the rhetoric.

The "initiative" would be nothing more than a "political" tool to grab the voters attention and ensure re-election and not be of any actual use in reducing crime.

That is the sort of thing I am talking about.

Then read the proposal again, the cheif constable will be able to say "no, that's not what we're going to do as it won't make any difference" the media is likely to be involved, if the commisioner is trying to get publicity for himself, giving both parties a chance to state their case, and the facts from the cheif constable are likely to win out.

However, lets say there are loads of kids in one street terrorising people, damaging property, stealing from local shops, bunking off school, joy riding, dealing drugs and generally being unsavoury.
The Cheif Constable would have a hard time justifying not targetting that if the commisioner suggests it.

The commisioner could also push for things such as speed cameras in accident blackspots where they are needed rather than places which will get the police the most revenue (when was the last time you saw an accident on the M275 slip road going out of Portsmouth? Or down on Cambridge road near St George Rd?)

Originally Posted by Xaccers

The commisioner could also push for things such as speed cameras in accident blackspots where they are needed rather than places which will get the police the most revenue (when was the last time you saw an accident on the M275 slip road going out of Portsmouth? Or down on Cambridge road near St George Rd?)

The public/media's obsession with the siting of speed cameras is an excellent example of why this proposal is indeed a non-starter.








(PS. If you don't speed why would speed cameras be an issue (beyond, perhaps, civil liberties concerns). The argument always thrown up is that cameras are not about safety but revenue. OK, stop speeding and cut off the revenue stream.)
__________________

Originally Posted by Incognitas

OF course I can't because he didn't.I'm just pointing out how ALL elections end up.You honestly think that if there was a system set up to have an election that it won't split into any political party divide with Labour,Conservative,Liberal and Other NOT standong for election.In my experience even Independants are seldom independant.

Shouldn't that be 'independent' teach? I dunno, standards today!

Originally Posted by Xaccers

the cheif constable will be able to say "no, that's not what we're going to do as it won't make any difference"

Err, so what you're saying, then, is that this elected official *won't* be able to change Police policy if the Police don't want it to change...???

the media is likely to be involved, if the commisioner is trying to get publicity for himself, giving both parties a chance to state their case, and the facts from the cheif constable are likely to win out.

I'm sorry? We're talking about Tabloid style media coverage here, since when did facts ever enter into it?!

However, lets say there are loads of kids in one street terrorising people, damaging property, stealing from local shops, bunking off school, joy riding, dealing drugs and generally being unsavoury.
The Cheif Constable would have a hard time justifying not targetting that if the commisioner suggests it.

I think a Chief Constable should have a hard time justifying that *anyway* without needing someone elected to tell him that!

Originally Posted by Graham

I'm sorry? We're talking about Tabloid style media coverage here, since when did facts ever enter into it?!

We're talking Cable Forum Current Affairs here, when did facts ever enter into it?!

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by andyl

The public/media's obsession with the siting of speed cameras is an excellent example of why this proposal is indeed a non-starter.

(PS. If you don't speed why would speed cameras be an issue (beyond, perhaps, civil liberties concerns). The argument always thrown up is that cameras are not about safety but revenue. OK, stop speeding and cut off the revenue stream.)

A gatso camera costs between £20,000 and £40,000 to install.
A PC starts on about £20,000 once training has been completed.
Which would be more effective at tackling total crime?
A £40,000 speed camera or 2 police constables?

The main objection people have with speeding being classed as a crime is that there is no victim.
If someone does 80 down the motorway, who's the victim?
Sure, you're going to say "but if they crash into someone because they can't stop in time then there's a victim" but speed didn't cause it, dangerous driving, by being too close for instance, caused the accident and no speed camera will ever catch someone driving dangerously under the speed limit.
A policeman in a patrol car however can.

Originally Posted by Graham

Err, so what you're saying, then, is that this elected official *won't* be able to change Police policy if the Police don't want it to change...???

I assumed you knew what the PA's powers were rather than just blindly commenting on something you're not well informed of, but for any others who don't know what PA's actually do:

Humberside Police Authority
Roles and Responsibilities

The Police Authority's key statutory duty is to secure the maintenance of an efficient and effective police force for the area of Humberside. To achieve this, it:-

monitors the performance of Humberside Police
approves the budget each year
determines local objectives and priorities
publishes a local Policing Plan every year
publishes an Annual Report every year assessing how well the Policing Plan was put into practice
consults the people in the Humberside Police Authority area about how they are policed
keeps itself informed about the way in which the Chief Constable deals with complaints from the public against the police officers
deals with complaints against the Chief Constable and his Assistant Chief Constables
deals with various appeals from traffic wardens, support staff and police officers.
arranges for volunteers from the community to monitor the welfare of people kept in police stations ( through the Custody Visiting Scheme)

appoints the Chief Constable and Chief Officers of Humberside Police
secures Best Value in the way services are provided having regard to economy, efficiency, effectiveness and quality.

The Chief Constable

The Chief Constable of Humberside Police is accountable to the Police Authority for the performance of the force, although the force itself is under his direction and control. He has 'operational independence', which means neither the Home Secretary nor the Police Authority can instruct him as to how he should carry out policing duties.

He must, however, 'have regard to' the Police Authority's local Policing Plan and carry out other duties required by legislation and/or the Home Secretary.

[Russ B]

Originally Posted by andyl

(PS. If you don't speed why would speed cameras be an issue (beyond, perhaps, civil liberties concerns). The argument always thrown up is that cameras are not about safety but revenue. OK, stop speeding and cut off the revenue stream.)

Rubbish. "If you don't speed then you've nothing to worry about" is NOT the answer. It's a human trait that concentration will waver from time to time. So why should I be penalised for temporarily displaying a factor which is built in to all humans?

Speed cameras do NOT save lives. They do NOT prevent accidents. They just take photographs. A policeman on the side of the road is going to prevent speeding. If I'm driving at 40 mph in a 30 zone then I'll get snapped and rightly so will be punished and the next time I'm in that area I'll be more careful. So how about measures which will prevent or discourage me from speeding the first time I go there?

Originally Posted by Russ D

Rubbish. "If you don't speed then you've nothing to worry about" is NOT the answer. It's a human trait that concentration will waver from time to time. So why should I be penalised for temporarily displaying a factor which is built in to all humans?

Speed cameras do NOT save lives. They do NOT prevent accidents. They just take photographs. A policeman on the side of the road is going to prevent speeding. If I'm driving at 40 mph in a 30 zone then I'll get snapped and rightly so will be punished and the next time I'm in that area I'll be more careful. So how about measures which will prevent or discourage me from speeding the first time I go there?

I agree that there should be better signing of speed limits. No argument. Speed limits are just that limits; the highest speed you can drive. If your concentration wavers that much.... and if your concentration wavers you are driving without due care and attention as well as speeding Speed cameras do not save lives? Not my understanding of the situation from the figures released last year. As I say this a populist cause; the sort of thing this proposal (notice how I got us back on thread there) would see being seized upon by the easy vote-grabbers.
__________________

Originally Posted by Xaccers

A gatso camera costs between £20,000 and £40,000 to install.
A PC starts on about £20,000 once training has been completed.
Which would be more effective at tackling total crime?
A £40,000 speed camera or 2 police constables?

Are you replacing cameras every year to balance that particular budget then?!!

But I don't agree that the reduction in traffic police is numb.


(notice how I got us back off topic there?! Sorry!)

[Russ B]

Originally Posted by andyl

Not my understanding of the situation from the figures released last year.

Do speed cameras automatically cause a car's engine to lower in RPM? Do they automatically apply the vehicle's braking system?

No, it's the thought that he/she will get caught which is what causes the driver to slow down.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by andyl

I agree that there should be better signing of speed limits. No argument. Speed limits are just that limits; the highest speed you can drive. If your concentration wavers that much.... and if your concentration wavers you are driving without due care and attention as well as speeding Speed cameras do not save lives? Not my understanding of the situation from the figures released last year. As I say this a populist cause; the sort of thing this proposal (notice how I got us back on thread there) would see being seized upon by the easy vote-grabbers.

If someone was running with the pledge that they would invest in bobbies instead of gatso's then they'd get my vote.
A policeman can do a far better job of improving road safety than a gatso, and they can be used in other areas to help tackle a variety of crimes.

[Russ B]

It doesn't happen often but here Xaccers posts something I can say makes perfect sense.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

If someone was running with the pledge that they would invest in bobbies instead of gatso's then they'd get my vote.
A policeman can do a far better job of improving road safety than a gatso, and they can be used in other areas to help tackle a variety of crimes.

So, returning to the thread.... isn't this precisely the point that some of us have been making as to why this proposal should not be implemented. Populist cause = vote=knee-jerk, ineffective policing.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ D

It doesn't happen often but here Xaccers posts something I can say makes perfect sense.

Oi you cheeky what not! :P
__________________

Originally Posted by andyl

So, returning to the thread.... isn't this precisely the point that some of us have been making as to why this proposal should not be implemented. Populist cause = vote=knee-jerk, ineffective policing.

Sorry? Having more police is ineffective policing?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Oi you cheeky what not! :P
__________________



Sorry? Having more police is ineffective policing?

Suggesting speed cameras are ineffective is a highly populist cause. Having more police is a separate issue; I'd like to see more police (and traffic police to catch all those middle lane hoggers, dozy bs and speeders where there are no cameras). But every politician is going to say they'll recruit more police. They do it all the time.

Off for the night now. G'dnight all. And let's be careful out there.