Re: Soaring gun use by police.

Uno-Hoo! wrote:

Unfortunately, nothing will happen except the public will have
forked out a fortune in a resulting fine.

True - but how else do you punish a public organisation?

By making examples of the people in charge, who have the
responsibilities that cannot be delegated. Under H&S laws, the managing
director is responsible for ALL deviations whether known by him or not.


Unlike people with
experience of police corruption, stitchups and lies, you have
never >>> had to remove your rose coloured specs. The majority of
people who >>> have had dodgy dealings with police, or know of people
they trust >>> having had them, it strikes me, that more people are
distrustful of >>> the police, than trust them.

Clearly, anyone who has had personal experience of police
corruption or dishonesty will have good reason to feel aggrieved
- but even that is no reason to believe that the UK police
service in general is corrupt or dishonest - because it very
clearly isn't.

I did not say it was.

I'm pleased to hear it - but my overwhelming impression from many of
the posts made by the usual suspects is that that is what they
believe.

Then it is you who are mistaken (IMO) if you know one peron out of a
thousand RAC callout guys will shoot you for disturbing them, would you
call RAC for a breakdown? The principle is easy to apply to anyone. If
other postings came to light about any high profile jobs, the same
principles apply.

Polls tend to suggest that the majority of the public still
support and trust the UK police. In fact, if you look at the
stats here:

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/qualityoflife/eurlife/index.p
hp?t emplate=3&radioindic=125&idDomain=10

you will see that trust in the UK police in 2005 was running at
72% - a level that has remained fairly consistent for quite some
years.

A survey of 1000 specially picked people who are daft enough to stop
and answer questionaires on a street corner. Sorry, but I do not
believe they are typical of the publics trust.

Well, the questionaire was not just in relation to the police was it?

No, but the above principle applies still.


I served 30 years in two different police forces and I simply do
not recognise the police service that you and the rest of the
'usual suspects' believe exist.

Yet you freely admit, the police force as a whole is going downhill.

Yes I do - in terms of the service it provides - although I believe
that corruption and deliberate wrong-doing is probably lower now than
it has ever been.

If we talk about the last 25 year, then I disagree. If we are talking
very recently, then from personal experience, I do not know. Every time
I have ever been stopped by police, for any reason, I am a
condescending fawning fuckwit who marvels at the policemans powers of
observation and higher than God intelligence.
It has worked fine for me. I have not been abused by the police for
over 25 years.


I have never stated the police force is corrupt, merely that I have
seen police acting illegally and abusing their powers. And because
of this, would not trust the police at all. Even though, I might
add, it is a minority of police, but they spoil the barrel

In that case, Joe, there must be very few organisations that you do
trust - because there are plenty of examples of wrong-doing from
employees in all walks of life!

I trust my local garage, I do not trust Kwikfit, although a money
penalty is the only outcome. If you consider the organisations that can
cause me harm without warning to prepare, or can kill me without me
knowing why, or being able to put up an argument, then no I would not
trust them to "get it right". If I had to go into hospital, I will have
the chance of treatment or not, along with the ability to manouvre the
treatment to the best of my ability using external advice if needed.

Tell me Kev, do you trust any organisation enough to automatically
accept their findings and be happy with that?


--

.