pcso battered by 13 yobs for skunk plants the AA grumpy column

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:08 pm

spot;1376463 wrote: Would that be a crime? Welcome to the joys of competitive policing. To one corrupt outfit it's a way of life, to their competitor it's profit nailing the bastards and getting them into court. If most prosecution ends up being the bringing to book of corrupt policemen I'll feel my idea's worked wonderfully. As I said, "the biggest bounty would be for detecting and investigating and prosecuting police corruption and malfeasance". No Spot, It's called 'You have an issue with the police that you need therapy for'.

The more you write, the more absurd your rant at the police becomes. It's almost an obsessive hatred with you that litters threads throughout this forum.

I am all for debate but I can not debate with a fantasist and such hatred.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:10 pm

For an apparently intelligent man Spot shows all the signs of an inveterate idealist dreamer, the sort of guy that enjoys arguing about perpetual motion and other fanciful notions.

Should I ever wander into any thread where Police are mentioned......somebody shoot me.......rather than listen to his fatuous nebulous ideas, it would be less painful.

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:11 pm

oscar;1376464 wrote: I am all for debate but I can not debate with a fantasist and such hatred.
Thank you God - my most fervent prayers are answered.

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:12 pm

Bruv;1376465 wrote: For an apparently intelligent man Spot shows all the signs of an inveterate idealist dreamer, the sort of guy that enjoys arguing about perpetual motion and other fanciful notions.I'm a systems analyst, that's all. It's what we do, it's how we do it.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:15 pm

Is that a geek joke ?

Not as funny as some of your better thought out ideas.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:33 pm

spot;1376467 wrote: I'm a systems analyst, that's all. It's what we do, it's how we do it. No... You THINK It's how you do It.

the grumps · Post by **the grumps** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:51 pm

well for once spot me old mucker you,ve silenced the grumps

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:55 pm

oscar;1376472 wrote: No... You THINK It's how you do It.

What I'm doing here is how we do systems analysis. Take the problem apart and then put it back together coherently.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:06 pm

Umm.... yes, yes, no, no and I'm unfamiliar with them. The Stepford Wives, not the anarchists.

What I claim is that the detection and investigation processes are inept at the moment, that increased routine background surveillance would allow practically immediate and full detection and investigation, and that crime rates would plummet in response allowing even tighter focus on what little is left. It's all dependent on recording so as to backtrack, identify, arrest and charge. Without the recording it's back to current arbitrary policing.

It's the selectivity of who ends up charged that I want to stamp out too. If it's a crime then it has to go to court with no choice on the part of anyone in policing, nor their current DPP masters.

I think what you'd do is give all the Daily Mail readers the chance to live out their fantasies about how everyone should live, and the power to enforce it. At the very least we'd need a radical overhaul of the Law (all of it) before such a thing could be even considered.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:13 pm

spot;1376478 wrote: What I'm doing here is how we do systems analysis. Take the problem apart and then put it back together coherently. There's a simple answer really.

If all systems analysist's could prove your theory to a Government, It would be In place wouldn't It ? Being a systems analysis has nothing to do with living In a fantasy world as you are.

You may have your system In some dictatorship Junta so why don't you try living In one and see how long you last? I'd give even money that you wouldn't last 5 minutes,

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:18 pm

Clodhopper;1376480 wrote: At the very least we'd need a radical overhaul of the Law (all of it) before such a thing could be even considered.Undoubtedly we would. If as a society we don't want a given law enforcing every time it's broken then it has to be repealed. If we keep it on the books then it has to be consistently enforced. I foresee a consequent reduction in the range of criminal laws.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:19 pm

oscar;1376481 wrote: There's a simple answer really.

If all systems analysist's could prove your theory to a Government, It would be In place wouldn't It ? Being a systems analysis has nothing to do with living In a fantasy world as you are.

You may have your system In some dictatorship Junta so why don't you try living In one and see how long you last? I'd give even money that you wouldn't last 5 minutes,

Careful now, you don't want to hurt his feelings.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:22 pm

Undoubtedly we would. If as a society we don't want a given law enforcing every time it's broken then it has to be repealed. If we keep it on the books then it has to be consistently enforced. I foresee a consequent reduction in the range of criminal laws.

Then let's do the Law reform/reduction first (I think we need to anyway) and see how things look. I suspect if we did we wouldn't need to give every nosy busybody the ability to makes his or her community's life a misery.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:33 pm

In any event John Spot dreamer.... Private police are already In operation In this country only It seems you are not aware of this.

It is fraught with difficulties ad legal Issue's already,

Alarm at private police operating beyond the law - Home News - UK - The Independent

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:41 pm

oscar;1376488 wrote: In any event John Spot dreamer.... Private police are already In operation In this country only It seems you are not aware of this.

What I advocated was for companies, open to anyone with a clean record to own and operate, to take on the functions currently reserved to the police at the moment. The companies you mention have no such privilege. A stack of information services and procedures are legally permitted to the police but not to the companies. That's what I suggest needs to be opened up. The tabloids can call those companies "private police", that doesn't make it true. And, of course, the companies I'm suggesting wouldn't be operating "beyond the law", would they.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 5:45 pm

spot;1376491 wrote: What I advocated was for companies, open to anyone with a clean record to own and operate, to take on the functions currently reserved to the police at the moment. The companies you mention have no such privilege. A stack of information services and procedures are legally permitted to the police but not to the companies. That's what I suggest needs to be opened up. The tabloids can call those companies "private police", that doesn't make it true. And, of course, the companies I'm suggesting wouldn't be operating "beyond the law", would they. Didn't Hitler have the same Ideology ?

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:26 pm

oscar;1376492 wrote: Didn't Hitler have the same Ideology ?

Did he? Really? Perhaps you'd like to give an example.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:34 pm

spot;1376500 wrote: Did he? Really? Perhaps you'd like to give an example.

If I thought It would make a difference and bring you back to the real world, I might be bothered to look.

Here's a wacky Idea. How about we:

Increase the police pay so It's attractive to all walks of life.

Raise the standard of entry exams to ensure that brain dead numpties don't get In.

Increase the time spent on probation to 5 years.

Put more police on the streets so a police presence cuts the crime figures and reassures the public.

Carry out psychological profiling on all entrants so those open to lying, corruption and Ineptness are refused entry.

Post by **spot** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:41 pm

oscar;1376504 wrote: If I thought It would make a difference and bring you back to the real world, I might be bothered to look.
That was a "no I was being a prat as usual" then, I take it.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:06 pm

spot;1376505 wrote: That was a "no I was being a prat as usual" then, I take it.

It is a No but not for being a prat. More that no-one Is going to waste their time when your Idea's are not based on anything useful and sensible but a never ending stream of abuse for our police. Over time It becomes tedious and repetitive. Bruv, Clod, gmc and Andy seem to have just lost the will to live when It comes to trying to debate with you.

The biggest problem with our police Is that they are controlled by Whitehall. Take away the government text book targets and you will actually be left with police who genuinely wish to serve and protect the public. The targets are the cause as to why so many officers buck the system because promotion depends on those targets and not hard work as It used to be.

Also, take away the absurd amount of paper work that restricts our officers to a desk ticking boxes and get them on the streets. Only then will be see a decline In violent crime.

There Is also an unsavoury aspect to your Idea's. If you replace the police with commercial tender and bounties, It Is Immoral for anyone to make money out of the misery of victims of crime. Police Officers receive a wage but upon joining the Force, they take the oath to serve and protect the public. When you have companies and bounties, you have people making money out of victims of rape, assault etc. That does not sit well with most people.

Post by **spot** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:00 am

oscar;1376510 wrote: More that no-one Is going to waste their time when your Idea's are not based on anything useful and sensible but a never ending stream of abuse for our police. Then why scrawl something as fatuous as "Didn't Hitler have the same Ideology" into the thread? It's untalented graffiti. It's unsustainable. It's not true. It's pointless.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 3:14 am

spot;1376491 wrote: What I advocated was for companies, open to anyone with a clean record to own and operate, to take on the functions currently reserved to the police at the moment. The companies you mention have no such privilege. A stack of information services and procedures are legally permitted to the police but not to the companies. That's what I suggest needs to be opened up. The tabloids can call those companies "private police", that doesn't make it true. And, of course, the companies I'm suggesting wouldn't be operating "beyond the law", would they.

You want to privatise the police? The police serve the public, must obey the law themselves and are held to account by them. That is the basic principle. What you suggest is private police who serve their shareholders, no doubt still paid for by the taxpayer who are held accountable by whom? Presumably the public in some way which is what we have now except now it's a not for profit organisation. Who gets the proceeds from any fines imposed. What would you do with the prisons privatise them? Look what happened in America when they did that you had judges selling prisoners to the prison companies and people being jailed for the most innocuous of crimes.

You seem to want to live in some kind of Orwellian nightmare except a privately owned one rather than a state owned one. Right now wrongful arrest and imprisonment can and does happen, our police are are occasionally incompetent and sometimes corrupt. What in earth makes you think privatising them would be an improvement?

Tell me would you make it a criminal offence for anyone to object to such a system, or would they be found to be mentally incompetent and sent away for retraining in one of your private, but well run, institutions?

Post by **spot** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:56 am

What I've been posting about Leman Street demonstrates by example that the police in England are beyond legal constraint and that the current system makes it impossible to sentence rogue officers or penalize inept practise.

I maintain that this immunity is a consequence of the state monopoly enjoyed by the organization. Competition is the only way I've come up with to break that and make the officers accountable, and to give all such companies an incentive to effectively police each other.

If you can think of how to fix the institutional monopoly to achieve the same essential ends then put it forward, I'd love to see it.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:27 am

spot;1376478 wrote: What I'm doing here is how we do systems analysis. Take the problem apart and then put it back together coherently.

Ah Ha !!! that is your problem then, you are focusing on systems and laws, and such like.

Without taking the human element in to the equation you may as well not bother.

As a systems analyst, would you, just for me, analyse any political or social system.

Analyse, for instance, the British Parliamentary Democracy or the American system or the Israeli Kibbutz as a blue print for your Utopian dream world.

I suggest without hindsight and analysing them in isolation, any system would be better, on paper, than what evolves from such systems when human frailty is thrown into the mix.

Get yer analysing teeth around that idea

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:33 am

spot;1376520 wrote: Then why scrawl something as fatuous as "Didn't Hitler have the same Ideology" into the thread? It's untalented graffiti. It's unsustainable. It's not true. It's pointless.

Because you are talking cobblers old boy,

I'll humour you as I've got an hour to spare today....

In 1936, the Gestapo Law meant that the activities of the Gestapo were free from any review by courts of law. This law effectively meant that the Gestapo became a law unto themselves. This non-uniformed branch of the SS became justifiably feared just as the visible presence of the black uniformed SS men did Himmler's view on the SS was simple. He said In 1943:

"We have always selected the highest and abandoned the lowest. As long as we maintain this principle, the Order (the SS) will remain healthy. After the war, we shall really build up our Order......it will provide Germany with an elite. This elite will provide leaders to industry, agriculture and politics and the activities of the mind."

And that Spotty Is exactly where your commercial policing will lead.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:05 am

spot;1376528 wrote: What I've been posting about Leman Street demonstrates by example that the police in England are beyond legal constraint and that the current system makes it impossible to sentence rogue officers or penalize inept practise.

I maintain that this immunity is a consequence of the state monopoly enjoyed by the organization. Competition is the only way I've come up with to break that and make the officers accountable, and to give all such companies an incentive to effectively police each other.

If you can think of how to fix the institutional monopoly to achieve the same essential ends then put it forward, I'd love to see it.

The althing court of the danes was the best system but that's totally impractical in a modern society. Parliament is the supreme authority in this country for all it's flaws it's still a better solution than the one you are proposing. Our electoral system is flawed but still the basic principle that they answer to the people and the people have the final say is one that always triumphs in the end, those who think the people get it wrong or need guidance are the ones you really need to watch out for. Hitler started out with good intentions doing god's work cheered on by the establishment both corporate and religious and fooled the people as well. He ticked all the boxes, for law and order, respect get rid of the riff raff and the first people he went for were all the wishy washy liberal deputies who didn't think you should lock people up without a trial.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? It's always the question that has to be answered, sooner or later you come back to having criminals, courts and some kind of force to go after them. As well as your private police you would need police to investigate them.

What I've been posting about Leman Street demonstrates by example that the police in England are beyond legal constraint and that the current system makes it impossible to sentence rogue officers or penalize inept practise.

I maintain that this immunity is a consequence of the state monopoly enjoyed by the organization. Competition is the only way I've come up with to break that and make the officers accountable, and to give all such companies an incentive to effectively police each other.

They are not immune, even those who are currently above the law will get their comeuppance it's not a perfect system but such a thing does not exist. The alternative when faced with injustice is ton take a weapon and kill those responsible yourself, we've tried that it leads to anarchy and terror.

Competition is the only way I've come up with to break that and make the officers accountable, and to give all such companies an incentive to effectively police each other.

What you suggest is such a stupid idea on so many levels it's really hard to understand why anyone would think it a good idea. It's like trying to persuade someone not to jump off a cliff to their death because it would solve all his problems. You have to agree he's right death would solve his problems but it's still a stupid idea.