Police officers need basic English literacy and basic numeracy in order to be effective in their work.
It should be the case that he police force is an 'investors in people' organisation, that new officers do not get on the basic pay grade until they are qualified (literate and numerate), until which time, they should be obliged to take day release classes in English language reading, comprehension, and writing, alongside classes in basic mathematics. Probably someone else will add some form of training in reasoning and mediation.
During this time they would be paid a reduced wage. These are fundamental and basic skills that should equip every school leaver to be gainfully employed, but in the police they are essential skills for an officer to be fully productive no matter how well an officer can hold and use a riot shield, most officers need written English skills daily.
One could add that police officers passing basic spoken language skills in foreign languages – let the exam boards decide this – could receive a one-off bonus payment to aid in policing our many foreign visitors and immigrant communities. Such payments would be higher for unusual languages, such as Russian, less for langugages of nations who generally speak English, such as German or Swedish, and nominal (perhaps to certify the officers skill) for languages that officers already speak as their second language but which are nonetheless useful in their police work.
Why is this idea important?
Police officers need basic English literacy and basic numeracy in order to be effective in their work.
It should be the case that he police force is an 'investors in people' organisation, that new officers do not get on the basic pay grade until they are qualified (literate and numerate), until which time, they should be obliged to take day release classes in English language reading, comprehension, and writing, alongside classes in basic mathematics. Probably someone else will add some form of training in reasoning and mediation.
During this time they would be paid a reduced wage. These are fundamental and basic skills that should equip every school leaver to be gainfully employed, but in the police they are essential skills for an officer to be fully productive no matter how well an officer can hold and use a riot shield, most officers need written English skills daily.
One could add that police officers passing basic spoken language skills in foreign languages – let the exam boards decide this – could receive a one-off bonus payment to aid in policing our many foreign visitors and immigrant communities. Such payments would be higher for unusual languages, such as Russian, less for langugages of nations who generally speak English, such as German or Swedish, and nominal (perhaps to certify the officers skill) for languages that officers already speak as their second language but which are nonetheless useful in their police work.
freedom to hold a festival of fun and unity on common land without the forced expense of police to oversee every move. the expense is set at such a rate that the cost of policing the event makes it IMPOSSIBLE to hold, the local authorities have the easy no go can do if you cant afford the police. volunteers to be stewards with crowd control training would be invaluable as would volunteers with security or door training to oversee such events. litter picking is another of the L/A bug bares, if we leave the place cleaner than when we started that always go down well. recycling properly all rubbish left and no cross contamination is also another plus. the greener the festival the better i.e oil instead of diesel run gennies, solar and wind powered lighting and all electrical needs. organisation is the key to be able to run this sucessfully. show we are responsible and polite citizens and we do have common law rights. freedom is not a gift its a way of life until we live in a dictators black shadow . keeping the faith in sites like this is also key.
Why is this idea important?
freedom to hold a festival of fun and unity on common land without the forced expense of police to oversee every move. the expense is set at such a rate that the cost of policing the event makes it IMPOSSIBLE to hold, the local authorities have the easy no go can do if you cant afford the police. volunteers to be stewards with crowd control training would be invaluable as would volunteers with security or door training to oversee such events. litter picking is another of the L/A bug bares, if we leave the place cleaner than when we started that always go down well. recycling properly all rubbish left and no cross contamination is also another plus. the greener the festival the better i.e oil instead of diesel run gennies, solar and wind powered lighting and all electrical needs. organisation is the key to be able to run this sucessfully. show we are responsible and polite citizens and we do have common law rights. freedom is not a gift its a way of life until we live in a dictators black shadow . keeping the faith in sites like this is also key.
I was on the bus from Walton (Liverpool) when it stopped at a designated stop.Two ticket inspectors got on the bus to check passenger tickets.Okay, nothing unusual in that.Except in front of the bus was a police van with its doors open to receive anyone who did not have a ticket.Anyone wanting to lave the bus had his or her way blocked by a fully kitted out police officer.
Again, on the train a few days later two community police persons were patrolling the length of the train reinforcing the train company’s regulations.
Whilst passengers can accept the occasional ticket inspector, who is an employee of the company who operate the services, it is a bit much that the police should back them up and that they (the operator’s employees) have their job done by community police.
There can be no excuse for this other than to intimidate people by accusing all people of fare dodging until it has been proved otherwise.The police have no presence in the local communities and when they do come into the areas it is in heavy armour and always with lights flashing and sirens screeching.Local attitudes toward police are not favourable and are hardly going to be changed by having police acting like uniformed bouncers on public transport.
Why is this idea important?
I was on the bus from Walton (Liverpool) when it stopped at a designated stop.Two ticket inspectors got on the bus to check passenger tickets.Okay, nothing unusual in that.Except in front of the bus was a police van with its doors open to receive anyone who did not have a ticket.Anyone wanting to lave the bus had his or her way blocked by a fully kitted out police officer.
Again, on the train a few days later two community police persons were patrolling the length of the train reinforcing the train company’s regulations.
Whilst passengers can accept the occasional ticket inspector, who is an employee of the company who operate the services, it is a bit much that the police should back them up and that they (the operator’s employees) have their job done by community police.
There can be no excuse for this other than to intimidate people by accusing all people of fare dodging until it has been proved otherwise.The police have no presence in the local communities and when they do come into the areas it is in heavy armour and always with lights flashing and sirens screeching.Local attitudes toward police are not favourable and are hardly going to be changed by having police acting like uniformed bouncers on public transport.
The issue of Cannabis needs to be addressed. There are many discussions on here about legalisation, the benefits of the drug and all sorts. If this were to become a reality then I see certain criteria that would have to be met. The main problems with Cannabis as viewed by the governement and some members of the public are:
1. The crime involved, drug dealing, supplying, violent crime etc etc.
2. The apparent health side effects (psychosis etc).
By taking a sensible approach to the problem then these can be circumvented. the options for legalisation are:
1. Complete legalisation – buy, smoke, grow, sell openly and freely (some licences may be required).
2. Controlled legalisation.
I see the only workable answer as controlled legalisation. If you follow the Dutch method they allow certain licenced coffee shops where you can take and buy cannabis – no alcohol is permitted in these venues. Also in Holland one huosehold can grow up to 5 plants (previously a per person ruling but this was subject to abuse). These plants can be grown on your premises but it is illegal to use artificial lighting to boost growth.
I feel that this method would work. We could go one step further and issue permits to grow – like a shotgun licence. It could be based on a quick medical and the knowledge that the governing body has the right at any time of day to check that you are not using artificial lighting (as with a shotgun licence they can check yours are locked away safely). You could even charge for this licecne to cover the costs.
If you went for complete legalisation then you could have controlled, licenced "coffee" shops. These would provide a sizeable, taxable income to the government which would help with the deicit. It could also boost tourism, however the view may be that it can only be sold to UK citizens.
Why is this idea important?
The issue of Cannabis needs to be addressed. There are many discussions on here about legalisation, the benefits of the drug and all sorts. If this were to become a reality then I see certain criteria that would have to be met. The main problems with Cannabis as viewed by the governement and some members of the public are:
1. The crime involved, drug dealing, supplying, violent crime etc etc.
2. The apparent health side effects (psychosis etc).
By taking a sensible approach to the problem then these can be circumvented. the options for legalisation are:
1. Complete legalisation – buy, smoke, grow, sell openly and freely (some licences may be required).
2. Controlled legalisation.
I see the only workable answer as controlled legalisation. If you follow the Dutch method they allow certain licenced coffee shops where you can take and buy cannabis – no alcohol is permitted in these venues. Also in Holland one huosehold can grow up to 5 plants (previously a per person ruling but this was subject to abuse). These plants can be grown on your premises but it is illegal to use artificial lighting to boost growth.
I feel that this method would work. We could go one step further and issue permits to grow – like a shotgun licence. It could be based on a quick medical and the knowledge that the governing body has the right at any time of day to check that you are not using artificial lighting (as with a shotgun licence they can check yours are locked away safely). You could even charge for this licecne to cover the costs.
If you went for complete legalisation then you could have controlled, licenced "coffee" shops. These would provide a sizeable, taxable income to the government which would help with the deicit. It could also boost tourism, however the view may be that it can only be sold to UK citizens.
Ordinary, law abiding people have become petty criminals, as defined by the Police, simply by having in their possession a Pen-Knife. I refer to the recent case of a 61year old man being arrested and charged for keeping a Swiss Army pen-knife in the glove compartment of his car. Apparently for occasional use with his family pic-nic.
I have carried a pen-knife for 50 years, for various, non-criminal activities. Am I and others like me criminals? Apparently so!
Stop criminalizing the general public with these petty, stupid and unnecessary laws.
Why is this idea important?
Ordinary, law abiding people have become petty criminals, as defined by the Police, simply by having in their possession a Pen-Knife. I refer to the recent case of a 61year old man being arrested and charged for keeping a Swiss Army pen-knife in the glove compartment of his car. Apparently for occasional use with his family pic-nic.
I have carried a pen-knife for 50 years, for various, non-criminal activities. Am I and others like me criminals? Apparently so!
Stop criminalizing the general public with these petty, stupid and unnecessary laws.
It appears, at present, that there is no law against police attackign people. Certainly, to the best of my knowledge, and all my searching through you tube, NO police officer has EVER been succesfully prosecuted to for harming acivilian.
The public are aware of the Freemasonic saying "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil", which means that no judge will ever be able to understand or comprehend any evidence given against a police officer – even if he's filmed killing someone.
We are aware, that no lawyer will be able to see anything wrong in any policeman's actions (not to the extent where he would do anything about it). We are aware that news programmes have never got time to mention things about bad police behaviour, because it all goes "fuzzy", and you may as well be speaking Greek, as criticise a mason or police officer (the same thing).
And so there is a feeling of depression, amongst what us not hundreds of thousands of peopel (maybe millions), who KNOW they are ALWAYS going to be attacked by the police, and treated as victims. There comes a point where it feels "vampirical", as the realisation settles in, that the local copper has bad mouthed you to all your neighbours, by rumour mongering, and will speak to you however he likes, whenever he likes.
The choice, at some point, for many people becomes "Do I tollerate this, like a dog, or fight, liek a man" ?
It has been on the news recently (and will increase), that many peopel are choosing to die fighting the police, rather than submitting. Its the same either way – you are their victim, constantly, whether alive or dead.
Now, you middle classes, who cant understand what ive said, or dont agree – stop reading the guardian, or financial times, and put your self through soem "victimisation" training. Watch Spartacus – ANYTHING to make you realise, that the man of this country will nto constantly submit to lies form police.
Why is this idea important?
It appears, at present, that there is no law against police attackign people. Certainly, to the best of my knowledge, and all my searching through you tube, NO police officer has EVER been succesfully prosecuted to for harming acivilian.
The public are aware of the Freemasonic saying "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil", which means that no judge will ever be able to understand or comprehend any evidence given against a police officer – even if he's filmed killing someone.
We are aware, that no lawyer will be able to see anything wrong in any policeman's actions (not to the extent where he would do anything about it). We are aware that news programmes have never got time to mention things about bad police behaviour, because it all goes "fuzzy", and you may as well be speaking Greek, as criticise a mason or police officer (the same thing).
And so there is a feeling of depression, amongst what us not hundreds of thousands of peopel (maybe millions), who KNOW they are ALWAYS going to be attacked by the police, and treated as victims. There comes a point where it feels "vampirical", as the realisation settles in, that the local copper has bad mouthed you to all your neighbours, by rumour mongering, and will speak to you however he likes, whenever he likes.
The choice, at some point, for many people becomes "Do I tollerate this, like a dog, or fight, liek a man" ?
It has been on the news recently (and will increase), that many peopel are choosing to die fighting the police, rather than submitting. Its the same either way – you are their victim, constantly, whether alive or dead.
Now, you middle classes, who cant understand what ive said, or dont agree – stop reading the guardian, or financial times, and put your self through soem "victimisation" training. Watch Spartacus – ANYTHING to make you realise, that the man of this country will nto constantly submit to lies form police.
It has been very rare in the past that persons other than the police be required to enforce the criminal law, other than in war time. The Smoking Ban requires publicans to enforce the law by 'not allowing' smoking to take place in their private premises. The only way that they can do that is by using threats.
Why is this idea important?
It has been very rare in the past that persons other than the police be required to enforce the criminal law, other than in war time. The Smoking Ban requires publicans to enforce the law by 'not allowing' smoking to take place in their private premises. The only way that they can do that is by using threats.
I am not sure what category this falls into – children, equality, civil liberaties, police, red tape…
The Catholic Church is wealthy and, like Blair, should pay its own way. The Pope is anti-gay, anti-women, anti-abortion and covers up pedofilia among the priesthood. Why should the British public pay for this? We are not even a Catholic country. The Pope is out of date, has no clear understanding of what the ramification of his edicts are causing upon the world with overpopulation, child rape and keeping women in a traditional role. The catholic church keeps people drugged with its dogma.
Why is this idea important?
I am not sure what category this falls into – children, equality, civil liberaties, police, red tape…
The Catholic Church is wealthy and, like Blair, should pay its own way. The Pope is anti-gay, anti-women, anti-abortion and covers up pedofilia among the priesthood. Why should the British public pay for this? We are not even a Catholic country. The Pope is out of date, has no clear understanding of what the ramification of his edicts are causing upon the world with overpopulation, child rape and keeping women in a traditional role. The catholic church keeps people drugged with its dogma.
My idea is to curb the Law which allows the Police to take innocent people into the cells in order to meet their targets (which came into being under the Labour Government) and by doing so collect extra bonuses for themselves at the year end if they met those targets of profiling innocent peoples DNA DATA AND FINGER PRINTING.
All innocent people who have had this happen to them should have that data removed (just like Damien Green had his removed ) IMMEDIATELY and be informed of this by the POLICE and not only that but restitution should be made by way of including an APOLOGY by the CHIEF OF THAT POLICE AUTHORITY to that innocent individual who has been released without any charges made against them.
The Police should have no Authority to abuse their Powers in such a way.
Why is this idea important?
My idea is to curb the Law which allows the Police to take innocent people into the cells in order to meet their targets (which came into being under the Labour Government) and by doing so collect extra bonuses for themselves at the year end if they met those targets of profiling innocent peoples DNA DATA AND FINGER PRINTING.
All innocent people who have had this happen to them should have that data removed (just like Damien Green had his removed ) IMMEDIATELY and be informed of this by the POLICE and not only that but restitution should be made by way of including an APOLOGY by the CHIEF OF THAT POLICE AUTHORITY to that innocent individual who has been released without any charges made against them.
The Police should have no Authority to abuse their Powers in such a way.
After being asked to renew my license at a cost of £20 pounds, I can't help but think that you could and should use this as the new ID and Passport.
I for one am sick of having to carry so many bits of information with me to prove who i'am!.
And i can't help but think the only people who can object to DNA profiling is criminals themsefts. I should know this as i was at one time a criminal i would have hated the idea of my DNA anywhere.
Why is this idea important?
After being asked to renew my license at a cost of £20 pounds, I can't help but think that you could and should use this as the new ID and Passport.
I for one am sick of having to carry so many bits of information with me to prove who i'am!.
And i can't help but think the only people who can object to DNA profiling is criminals themsefts. I should know this as i was at one time a criminal i would have hated the idea of my DNA anywhere.
Repeal the provisions of SOCA that make all offences arrestable. Return to the idea that some offences are serious enough to warrant your arrest but others are minor enough for you to be issued with a summons to appear at a Court/Police Station at a later date.
Why is this idea important?
Repeal the provisions of SOCA that make all offences arrestable. Return to the idea that some offences are serious enough to warrant your arrest but others are minor enough for you to be issued with a summons to appear at a Court/Police Station at a later date.
All visits by religious leaders of any faith should be funded in their entirety by their own supporters. This includes paying in full for their own security (policing).
Why is this idea important?
All visits by religious leaders of any faith should be funded in their entirety by their own supporters. This includes paying in full for their own security (policing).
Well, simply as the title says. Confession evidence alone in criminal cases should not be enough for a prosecution, and should always need to be backed up with other evidence.
Why is this idea important?
Well, simply as the title says. Confession evidence alone in criminal cases should not be enough for a prosecution, and should always need to be backed up with other evidence.
Currently someone who is merely suspected of a crime, without any evidence or complaint and occupiers of adjacent named properties in the same building can have their homes searched and the police can seize every item single of value and every document. This includes, passports, driver licences, family photographs, legal documents , jewellery, watches, money from purses and wallets, vehicle registrations certificates, MOT certificates, medical details, personal letters, business letters, all keys, cheque books, credit cards, mobile phones, computers, computer equipment, data sticks, medication, empty files, antiques, in fact everything except clothes (legally they must not take excluded material or material subject to legal privilege but this rule is generally ignored) Warrants under the Proceeds of Crime Act can be issued to ‘the Occupant’.
To illustrate please imagine everything you have in your home. Now imagine returning home and finding everything of value and every document has been seized and all you have left is a Warrant issued under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 left on your kitchen table. . How would you feel?
Then you discover that your neighbour in the flat upstairs is ‘suspected’ of being involved in a crime. This means that if you want your property back you must pay for a solicitor to pursue your claim but with little prospect of getting your valuables returned until the investigation of your neighbour is completed. How would you feel?
The police already have enough power to search and seize property relating to a crime they do not need the wide ranging powers given by the search and seizure warrant under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to seize everything in the property of the suspect and the occupants of adjacent properties .
Why is this idea important?
Currently someone who is merely suspected of a crime, without any evidence or complaint and occupiers of adjacent named properties in the same building can have their homes searched and the police can seize every item single of value and every document. This includes, passports, driver licences, family photographs, legal documents , jewellery, watches, money from purses and wallets, vehicle registrations certificates, MOT certificates, medical details, personal letters, business letters, all keys, cheque books, credit cards, mobile phones, computers, computer equipment, data sticks, medication, empty files, antiques, in fact everything except clothes (legally they must not take excluded material or material subject to legal privilege but this rule is generally ignored) Warrants under the Proceeds of Crime Act can be issued to ‘the Occupant’.
To illustrate please imagine everything you have in your home. Now imagine returning home and finding everything of value and every document has been seized and all you have left is a Warrant issued under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 left on your kitchen table. . How would you feel?
Then you discover that your neighbour in the flat upstairs is ‘suspected’ of being involved in a crime. This means that if you want your property back you must pay for a solicitor to pursue your claim but with little prospect of getting your valuables returned until the investigation of your neighbour is completed. How would you feel?
The police already have enough power to search and seize property relating to a crime they do not need the wide ranging powers given by the search and seizure warrant under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to seize everything in the property of the suspect and the occupants of adjacent properties .
I was shocked this weekend to find that the police would do nothing about anti social noise.
I live close to the bank of the River Avon in Tewkesbury. On the other side of the bank there is a large white house. On Friday night they hosted a disco that went on until the early hours of Saturday morning. The music and PA system where so loud, that I could here it in my house at a level equal to normal conversation preventing my family from sleeping. As it was a very hot summer night only I had my windows open, even when I shut the windows the noise was to great to sleep and the heat was even more uncomfortable.
I did not do anything as I thought it might be a one off, and everyone is a loud a party now and again.
Unfortunately on the Saturday night, the same resident had yet another disco this time even louder.
I decided to call the police on there NON emergency number. I was told noise was not a police matter but was a council mater and to call them on Monday. If I wanted the noise to stop I would have to go and deal with the noise myself. I am not sure, but one person turning up at an event where people have been drinking could potently be very dangerous plus who would look after my 18 month old daughter while I was out. Surely a uniformed police officer should be doing this?
I can help think this is ridiculous.
If I walked down a high street making noise I would be arrested for anti social behaviour, so why is it okay for a private land owner to act antisocially? Could you please have a member of your team look into why the police will not tackle antisocial noise?
Why is this idea important?
I was shocked this weekend to find that the police would do nothing about anti social noise.
I live close to the bank of the River Avon in Tewkesbury. On the other side of the bank there is a large white house. On Friday night they hosted a disco that went on until the early hours of Saturday morning. The music and PA system where so loud, that I could here it in my house at a level equal to normal conversation preventing my family from sleeping. As it was a very hot summer night only I had my windows open, even when I shut the windows the noise was to great to sleep and the heat was even more uncomfortable.
I did not do anything as I thought it might be a one off, and everyone is a loud a party now and again.
Unfortunately on the Saturday night, the same resident had yet another disco this time even louder.
I decided to call the police on there NON emergency number. I was told noise was not a police matter but was a council mater and to call them on Monday. If I wanted the noise to stop I would have to go and deal with the noise myself. I am not sure, but one person turning up at an event where people have been drinking could potently be very dangerous plus who would look after my 18 month old daughter while I was out. Surely a uniformed police officer should be doing this?
I can help think this is ridiculous.
If I walked down a high street making noise I would be arrested for anti social behaviour, so why is it okay for a private land owner to act antisocially? Could you please have a member of your team look into why the police will not tackle antisocial noise?
The civil police are being used as political police to protect people in positions of power and promote political ideology.
From the more trivial such as hate crimes and the thought police to the more serious such as in the murder of Dr David Kelly and Andrea Davison. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6206730-new-evidence-showing-dr-kelly-was-murdered-by-the-labour-government-air-froce-officer-pederson The police should investigate the murder of Dr Kelly and should not be permitted to seize thousands of documents from Ms Davison on arms to Iraq.
Why is this idea important?
The civil police are being used as political police to protect people in positions of power and promote political ideology.
From the more trivial such as hate crimes and the thought police to the more serious such as in the murder of Dr David Kelly and Andrea Davison. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6206730-new-evidence-showing-dr-kelly-was-murdered-by-the-labour-government-air-froce-officer-pederson The police should investigate the murder of Dr Kelly and should not be permitted to seize thousands of documents from Ms Davison on arms to Iraq.
Instruct the police to abandon their policy of "kettling" demonstrators, whereby they restrict them to a limited area and prevent them leaving the demonstration even if they want to use the toilet or simply go home. The policy of kettling has already been criticised by a House of Commons committee. It amounts to a way of discouraging people from attending demonstrations by making it an unpleasant experience for them. If demonstrators are committing public order offences they should be arrested, leaving the majority of law abiding demonstrators to continue with their demonstration in peace.
Why is this idea important?
Instruct the police to abandon their policy of "kettling" demonstrators, whereby they restrict them to a limited area and prevent them leaving the demonstration even if they want to use the toilet or simply go home. The policy of kettling has already been criticised by a House of Commons committee. It amounts to a way of discouraging people from attending demonstrations by making it an unpleasant experience for them. If demonstrators are committing public order offences they should be arrested, leaving the majority of law abiding demonstrators to continue with their demonstration in peace.
There are certain sections within this act that are so harsh they have to surely be Repealed.
Since this act was introduced in 2000 it gave the Police powers to sieze anyones vehicles even if they were only a suspect in a crime the car is not released until the officer making enquiries says the poor suspect can have it back "it's wrong" and should be repealed where's the innocent till prooven guilty here? Then they use a private recovery firm to sieze the vehicle at a cost of £150 to the suspect to get their vehicle returned. No charges are ever brought so in essence a person has already received punishment from the Police with the humiliation the inconvenience caused and a hit in the wallet area and that's Justice?? Without being convicted of ever any wrong doing.
They use these kind of methods in N Korea where the state rules all are we going down that route too i ask you?
If an individual is suspected of wrong doing then arrest them i agree there but to seize peoples vehicles is a whole abuse of our civil rights and human too and is a worrying what comes after this mindset.
Another part of this disturbing Act is that if a defendant is convicted of say of theft the court dealing withthe issue has the powers to Ban the person from driving now i ask you Coalition Goverment what the bloody hell does a theft have to do with driving?????
Driving punishments are for driving offences this bit of the Act beggers belief it's like saying a person gets a parking ticket and a Ban too neither have any connection with each other or relevance so this should be repealed ASAP.
Why is this idea important?
There are certain sections within this act that are so harsh they have to surely be Repealed.
Since this act was introduced in 2000 it gave the Police powers to sieze anyones vehicles even if they were only a suspect in a crime the car is not released until the officer making enquiries says the poor suspect can have it back "it's wrong" and should be repealed where's the innocent till prooven guilty here? Then they use a private recovery firm to sieze the vehicle at a cost of £150 to the suspect to get their vehicle returned. No charges are ever brought so in essence a person has already received punishment from the Police with the humiliation the inconvenience caused and a hit in the wallet area and that's Justice?? Without being convicted of ever any wrong doing.
They use these kind of methods in N Korea where the state rules all are we going down that route too i ask you?
If an individual is suspected of wrong doing then arrest them i agree there but to seize peoples vehicles is a whole abuse of our civil rights and human too and is a worrying what comes after this mindset.
Another part of this disturbing Act is that if a defendant is convicted of say of theft the court dealing withthe issue has the powers to Ban the person from driving now i ask you Coalition Goverment what the bloody hell does a theft have to do with driving?????
Driving punishments are for driving offences this bit of the Act beggers belief it's like saying a person gets a parking ticket and a Ban too neither have any connection with each other or relevance so this should be repealed ASAP.
We all have to recognise that we have to have police enforcement of law and order or else we will all end up living in 'dodge city' areas where criminals and their assosciates would 'rule the roost'.
I know that there are neighbourhood policing strategies that target those criminal elements within our communities. However, I would like to see the return of the community beat officer. Not one in name only, but one who is given a patch to work and who would work days and evenings not only to attend community meetings but to be pro-active in dealing with problem elements within his own area. They could call upon a team of plain clothes, that would be part of his sub division in any event, where issues of serious crime need to be dealt with!
Why is this idea important?
We all have to recognise that we have to have police enforcement of law and order or else we will all end up living in 'dodge city' areas where criminals and their assosciates would 'rule the roost'.
I know that there are neighbourhood policing strategies that target those criminal elements within our communities. However, I would like to see the return of the community beat officer. Not one in name only, but one who is given a patch to work and who would work days and evenings not only to attend community meetings but to be pro-active in dealing with problem elements within his own area. They could call upon a team of plain clothes, that would be part of his sub division in any event, where issues of serious crime need to be dealt with!
Stop the police buying expensive cars and targeting motorists, they are just tax collectors not interested in crime at all, why buy lexus, subaru, volvo etc and stop using unmarked cars. Get them on the streets targeting drug dealers and criminals.
Why is this idea important?
Stop the police buying expensive cars and targeting motorists, they are just tax collectors not interested in crime at all, why buy lexus, subaru, volvo etc and stop using unmarked cars. Get them on the streets targeting drug dealers and criminals.