Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

How daft does it have to get?

Recommended Posts

I'd rather the NHS give each drunken yob a free injection of a powerful anasthetic/knock-down drug so that they quit moaning, then quit being conscious, and are then turfed back out in the street after being given a few judicious clouts around the ear 'ole :)

 

The tattoo across the forehead saying "I'm a drunken pillock" could then be re-charged to them once they wake up :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really shouldn't matter where you are or what you?re doing, if there's trouble the police should deal with it without putting their hand out.

 

I can just about see the logic of charging for the policing of football matches where a company is making a profit but hospitals and public events? Surely these sort of things are just part of everyday life and as such should be part of their "normal" duty.

 

I like the tattoo idea. A bit drastic but perhaps something similar with a big thick permanent marker that'd take a week of scrubbing to get off might be a good deterrent! :)

 

[ 17.08.2006, 21:12: Message edited by: Bill ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think their either. They just have an impossible task to perform with rules they have to follow.

 

Bill :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They also have to write a report on every conversation they have with Joe Public.

Work for 4 hours and paper crunch for 4 hours.

 

Not what people join the police for. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ob, it would be easier for the police to use more straight forward technology like a digital memo-taker (with a 4GB capacity it could store hours of data) and then either record their conversation so it could be transcribed verbatim or subsequently typed up by a trained typist back at the office, or just verbally record their notes.

 

Unfortunately there is far too much red-tape preventing the Police from actually policing. In many instances it is simply not worth the officer's time intervening because of the sheer amount of paper work it will generate :x

 

It may be that it is not more officers that are needed, just more "back-room johnies" to support the officers we do have :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or just a lot less "red tape", problem is we would have to get the legal fraternity to agree. The more red tape there is, the easier it seems to be to get the guilty off on a technicality.

 

On the other hand there are those who will say, we need all the "red tape" to ensure there are less miscarriages of justice with innocent people being found guilty.

 

Mind you I always find guilty people getting off on a technicality a miscarriage of justice.

 

Being the simple fellow that I am, the accused either committed the crime or they didn't, technicalities don't come into it. Rather reminds me of a recent court case I read about where a person was stopped and found to be driving at over twice the drink drive limit, told to plead not guilty by his solicitor because the police had not asked him, had he vomitted prior to the breath test. When found guilty, the solicitor said that his client would have pleaded guilty but for the technicality of the vomitting question. Maybe the Magistrates should have sent both the accused and the solicitor to prison, one for committing perjury and the other for perverting the course of justice. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more probable that they would make the solicitor a Q.C. for his knowledge of how to exploit the system, and relegate the Magistrate for being a dunce :roll:

 

The problem seems to be that the "safeguards" on the system are biased toward the criminal rather than the victim. Intimidation of witnesses seems to be commonplace, but heaven-forbid a witness should try and browbeat a guilty defendant!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bold statement that Mick. Although it is a fact that sickness levels in the State sector are appreciably higher than those in the Private sector, guess its because you can't export many State type jobs to China/India. Mind you makes you think how many Polish police would like to come to work in the UK and for how much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it, that in some countries; like China, you can't move for coppers? :confused: As it seemed to be the case in the early 60s here? :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ob, you can't move for coppers in China because they are there to ruthlessly enforce a massively oppressive regime that needs to keep the majority in check. Are you saying you want the same here :x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes McB; I suppose you do need lots of coppers to oppress a quarter of the world's population! :roll: BUT most Countries appear to have more per head of population than we do; maybe all ours are in the office, or out hunting for clues to a plot?! :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ob, lack of prison space can only be a contributory factor to the lunacy that is frequently exhibited by the judiciary. The truth of the matter is that too many judges and Magistrates are wrapped up in trying to cosset the criminals rather than punish them :(

 

As for lack of prison space, it was easy to solve a few years ago because the Crown could just build a new prison on its land without the need for planning permission. Unfortunately most prisons should be constructed far away from existing population centres (i.e. out in the countryside somewhere) and, with the Crown now subject to the planning Acts, this just will not happen! People will be up in arms about "loss of Green Belt" whilst at the same time bemoaning the increase in community service sentencing :roll:

 

This issue needs some serious political thought - who's going to do that... John Reid?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps time off for good behaviour should be knocked on the head and then that might act as a deterrent.

More ways of killing a cat! :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...