On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 01:12:27 +0100, Pyromancer wrote:

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Neil
Williams gently breathed:
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 20:03:47 +0100, "MB" wrote:

There is an example in the Motoring Telegraph of a driver booked by a RLC
camera

Is that like a "PIN number" or an "ATM machine"?

LOL! That battle appears to be well and truly lost - I've seen "PIN
Number" displayed on the screen of an ATM (RBS ...

ITYM "RBS bank"



--
WZR

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, Tony Polson wrote:

Jeremy Double wrote:

Tony Polson wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Mizter T wrote:

Whatever, the police really need to get their act in order.

Oh, you noticed that?

The government is well aware of the problem. A couple of years ago
it
tried to bounce police forces into merging into a much smaller number
of much larger forces. Unfortunately for the government, the police
rebelled, and so did the local councils whose ineffectual police
authorities may well be at the root of the problem.

I don't pretend to know whether bigger would be better, but the Home
Office seemed to be convinced that it was.

However, it's interesting that most of the complaints come from the
Metropolitan Police area, the same police force that shot an innocent
man on a tube train, and incidentally the biggest police force in the
UK.

True. It's also the force that leads nationally on anti-terror
operations. Worrying, isn't it?

I think the Bob Quick debacle, and the confusion over his accountability,
may be the final push that leads the government to set up a separate
police force to handle terrorism and so on. The foundation for it is
already there in the shape of the Serious Organised Crime Agency, and it
wouldn't be too hard to transfer over the Met's national
counter-terrorism, diplomatic protection, etc units. And then it could
absorb the MoD police, the security-related activities of the BTP, the
Civil Nuclear Constabulary, etc. And then hey presto, we have a British
FBI. Optimists would say that this would put these important operations
under the control of a more professional and specialised leadership,
where
they can be properly run and supervised, but pessimists would say the
exact opposite - we'd have a runaway national police force which would
inevitably not have proper scrutiny.


I think a British FBI is essential. I would strongly prefer to have the
national anti-terrorism effort centralised and subject to the control of
parliament than scattered around many police forces and subject to the
control of thousands of amateurish local councillors.

But faced with the choice of competence and strength, and a disordered
muddle, Britain seems always to plump for the latter.





There are "task forces" (or something similar) that are joint efforts
between several police forces in an region though often some of the members
are from other parts of the country. So you already have some of the
advantages of one national organisation.

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
"MB" wrote:

I am sure the official reason will be that it so they are not heard by
the
criminals at the scene they are going to but we all know that they misuse
it all the time. Like the excuse for parking on double-yellow lines is
always that they are investigating a crime when we all know they are
regularly seen leaving the "scene of the crime" with takeaways, burgers,
chips etc presumably all very important evidence?


Some or all of which are obtained at a "police discount". There's an
insidious practice of police asking business for, and being given, a
"police discount". There is no legal basis for this, and businesses
give it "voluntarily" for fear of what might happen (or not happen) if
they do not.




Nothing new about that, it has happened for many years and perhaps as long
as the police has existed.

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:18:06 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Mizter T wrote:

Whatever, the police really need to get their act in order.

Oh, you noticed that?

I am really utterly perplexed by how the police maange to get away
with being a bunch of incompetent thugs. Not that there aren't good
individual policemen, but there are certainly some very bad ones,
and the organisation as a whole is a disaster. It just seems that
nobody with the power to do anything about it gives a toss. Or has
it just not occurred to people that things could be any better?

The problem is that policemen who joined because they wish to uphold
the law feel outnumbered by policemen who joined because they wish
to get away with breaking the law - so outnumbered that they can't
even enjoy mixing in the staff canteen any more, and end up quitting
the force.

I could well believe it, but do you have any specific reason to think
that?

The silences and facial expressions on ex-coppers faces when they tell
you
they are ex-coppers.

In years gone by in the Met. there seemed to be a tendency for
[allegedly] good or bad police to clump in different stations
resulting in various tales about "that lot over at X".



And of course there were the "Away Days", I don't think they would get away
with that now (unless it is an Urban Legend).

In message , at 18:30:29 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
They do not expect that a police car can give instructions to a motorist
to do the various things previously listed.

I don't expect any kind of vehicle, let alone a police car, to issue any
instructions to anyone to do anything.

Good, you are catching on at last

The only instructions [to ignore a red light] can be by a policeman in
uniform, not a car hooting and/or flashing at you.
--
Roland Perry

"MB" wrote:


"Tony Polson" wrote:

I think a British FBI is essential. I would strongly prefer to have the
national anti-terrorism effort centralised and subject to the control of
parliament than scattered around many police forces and subject to the
control of thousands of amateurish local councillors.

But faced with the choice of competence and strength, and a disordered
muddle, Britain seems always to plump for the latter.

There are "task forces" (or something similar) that are joint efforts
between several police forces in an region though often some of the members
are from other parts of the country. So you already have some of the
advantages of one national organisation.



Indeed, that has gone on for some years now. But joint task forces blur
the lines of accountability. If a joint operation goes wrong, to whom
are the task force accountable?

"MB" wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
.. .
"MB" wrote:

I am sure the official reason will be that it so they are not heard by
the
criminals at the scene they are going to but we all know that they misuse
it all the time. Like the excuse for parking on double-yellow lines is
always that they are investigating a crime when we all know they are
regularly seen leaving the "scene of the crime" with takeaways, burgers,
chips etc presumably all very important evidence?


Some or all of which are obtained at a "police discount". There's an
insidious practice of police asking business for, and being given, a
"police discount". There is no legal basis for this, and businesses
give it "voluntarily" for fear of what might happen (or not happen) if
they do not.




Nothing new about that, it has happened for many years and perhaps as long
as the police has existed.


Nothing new? I know. But there is nothing right about it either.

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 18:30:29 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
They do not expect that a police car can give instructions to a motorist
to do the various things previously listed.

I don't expect any kind of vehicle, let alone a police car, to issue any
instructions to anyone to do anything.

Good, you are catching on at last

No, just correcting your mistakes. You have this strange idea that cars can
give signals, I never said that.


The only instructions [to ignore a red light] can be by a policeman in
uniform, not a car hooting and/or flashing at you.

Where does it say that the police driver cannot sound his siren to alert me
to his presence and then motion me out of his way when I look in the mirror?

The whole point of blues and twos is to alert other drivers to the presence
of an emergency vehicle in order to get them to move out of the way.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

In message , at 20:31:08 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
Where does it say that the police driver cannot sound his siren to alert me
to his presence and then motion me out of his way when I look in the mirror?

As long as you are sure you can see his uniform.

The whole point of blues and twos is to alert other drivers to the presence
of an emergency vehicle in order to get them to move out of the way.

And what you are expected (sic) to do [and not expected to] is
documented in their advice.
--
Roland Perry

rail wrote:
In message
"John Rowland"
wrote:

rail wrote:
In message
"John Rowland"
wrote:

rail wrote:
In message
"John Rowland"
wrote:

rail wrote:
[snip]
Are you aware why they switch the sirens off once they have
crossed the junction?

It could be that the emergency has been cancelled, but if you
have an explanation for why this started happening after the
Menezes incident, I'd like to hear it.

It didn't start after the Menezes incident, it is to reduce the
amount of noise polution, which has the advantage of making the
siren more noticeable when it is used. If you here a siren going
continuously for a while you tend to blank it out. Fire engines
and ambulances do the same thing.

You're talking about when they put the siren off and leave the
lights flashing. I said "I have frequently seen police vehicles
pull up at a red light, wait for ten seconds, get bored, put on
the flashing lights, drive through the junction and then put the
lights off again"

I dispute that you have seen it frequently.

About the Greenwich incident I should have said "Once a police car
even pulled up behind me in Greenwich town centre and put the
lights and sirens on (at 3am!) causing me to drive through the red
light out of their way, and then they drove through the lights
and put the lights and sirens off."



But you didn't say that. Looks like you are changing the story to
fit your prejudices.

Is your nickname "Brick Wall?"

Ha bloody ha, never heard that one before.

So that's a yes then.