Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 25/01/17 in all areas

  1. Not seen the video at this stage, but my initial feeling is that if the police deliberately hit a motorbike and riders that had been involved in a crime (and so long as it was properly considered and sanctioned), then - good. Spare me the bleeding heart do-gooding whining; perhaps this will make others think twice instead of now possibly deliberately choosing such a mode of transport because they think they're untouchable.
  2. Moved to a more appropriate location. I think @JD180has summed it up quite well really. When we took on the three extra sites we had to look at ways of financing them. The software for the sites comes with a cost that is ongoing. This maintains the latest version and security updates. Not only do we have the forum software but there are numerous add on's and again these cost money as does hosting and all the other costs associated with a vibrant online community. We would love to provide this completely free for all but it simply isn't viable. Those that contribute financially to the sites get a more functions and areas than those who make use of the free account. We had hoped that the amount of paying members coupled with the sponsorship and advertising would be sufficient to give the whole site to all but it simply isn't that easy and add to this the future development of the site we needed to look what was the main reason for using the site and the services we provide. The simple fact is that we used to have a lot of members who would come and read the recruitment areas and not contribute and then others who sign up for the free account, ask a recruitment question and then never come back so we took a management decision to charge a very small fee to use those areas. We structured the membership groups around what people use the site for and how much but at the same time we recognised that it had been built by the members we had. This is why we took the decision to allow the 'Resident' members to still have access to those areas but newer members wouldn't. The simple answer is that to keep the forums running for those who use the free accounts we needed to find a way to fund it and this is just one of the ways.
  3. As usual Sceptre makes a valid point, succinctly - We do not explain in proper terms using ordinary language and do not speak matter of factly. Our elitism over the past 20 years or so has effected our standing. If we are uber professional demi-Gods then why is it that we occasionally do something that doesn't seem professional to the public? I'd say unrealistic training expectations play a large part in this issue. Point 1. We are given in the realms of 32 hours initial use of force training and 8 hours a year refresher training and yet we talk of home office approved techniques, escalation of force etc and we are judged as if we are ninjas - by both the public and the disciplinary system. We are expected to be prof To put that into perspective - if we were looking at an amateur jiu jitsu enthusiast (jiu jitsu can cover a broad spectrum of the use of force tactics used by police) you would expect a committed participant who was looking to attain a level of real world competence to attend two 1 hour sessions a week. After 6 months of attending their club twice a week they would have an appreciation of the basics of jiu jitsu. They would not, however, be considered competent. They would probably have passed their first qualification stage. After 12 months they would probably be quite proficient in stances, take downs and delivering strikes and be looking at more technical moves. By this stage they would have in the region of 100 hours of training time. A police officer hoping to have had the same amount of training input would probably have to have been in the job for 8 years. However, due to the training being condensed and only repeated yearly there is almost zero chance of muscle memory being obtained from the training offered. The police officer with 8 years in the job who isn't regularly utilising his officer safety skills is less competent than somebody who has been taking martial arts classes as a hobby for a year. The system has set the police officer up to fail with unreasonable expectations in comparison to the training received. Point 2. Most of us have completed one 8 hour input on mental health including powers, common signs and symptoms and force policy. We also probably completed a 90 minute e-learning package. A mental health nurse, prior to registration, completes 3 years of foundation training in all aspects of mental health geared to one of four specific specialty areas. This initial training includes on the job clinical training. Once registered there are ad hoc CPD training courses to keep them competent and up to date. Police officers with their training deficit, compared to even a newly qualified mental health nurse, has received somewhere in the region less than 1% of the training of the mental health professional. They are, however, asked to go to addresses and conduct what is ostensibly a mini mental health act assessment on behalf of the NHS. Half the time there are crime issues at play also - police officers are expected to juggle their responsibility to policing and mental health. Mental health professionals refuse to attend patients at the scene. Police officers must make the choice and discover the legal route for whether a person receive mental health assistance. Police officers are set up to fail. Point 3 We receive no (well I haven't in any of the three police forces I have been in) meaningful safeguarding training beyond being told of the power to take children into emergency police protection - a 1 hour PowerPoint presentation conducted as part of police foundation training. Social workers, prior to registration, either complete a 3 year social work course or a 2 year conversion course of they are a graduate from a different discipline. They receive as part of this on the job training with mentorship. Again, police officers attend daily safeguarding incidents, particularly with regards to children, which require instant decisions to be made. Social services will not attend the scene. In many cases it is social services who have passed the buck onto the untrained frontline police officer. They will, ironically, State to police officers that it is the officers decision as he is the one at scene...yet refuse the invitation to attend themselves to assess. There are many, many more examples to fit my point with varying degrees of relevance (I'm not even first aid at work trained and I'm sent to ambulance calls weekly!) and it leads me to two conclusions - either we put our hands up and admit we are not trained to do a large amount of what we currently undertake but we do the best we can in the circumstances or we stop going to jobs which aren't our remit. To be honest, without further training and input from the professionals in the relevant fields I'd be happier to go for the latter. If the public think we are ineffective at what we do I'd be interested to see what would happen if were taken out of the equation and responsibility was put back to those trained and paid to specialise.
  4. I personally only look for rapists and murders. Anything less than that isn't worth my time.
  5. I am now officially going in to week 12 of training school after an annual leave week with only 14 weeks left - nearly half way! It's gone ridiculously fast that I can hardly believe we're in double figures already. It's been a fair few weeks since I last posted an update here, and after a bit of prompting I've decided now is probably a good time. We've been doing a lot of legislation over the past few weeks, and had two consolidation role plays days to practice what we'd learnt. These days consist of getting fully kitted up including high vis jackets and roaming around in pairs/threes until you are deployed over the radio to an 'incident', where an assessor and several students from the local college act out a scenario. The hardest part of these, for me, has definitely been the radio stuff. It's a whole other language to me and I've never experienced anything like it before, I still even get a bit stumped over Phonetic Alphabet, the other day I was spelling out 'JONES' and 'October, November' came out of my mouth, much to the amusement of the assessor. Like I said, we've had two of these consolidation days so far and I hated every second of the first one, despite the scenarios themselves not being too much of a disaster, the worry and pressure made me soo nervous. For example, we completely forgot to search a shoplifter who we transported to (fake) custody only for the assessor to pull a massive knife out of his hoodie, schoolboy error!! But to be fair to us, we had only just covered searching so I think we were worried about how much it had been drilled into us that searches can so easily be unlawful. But, the second time around, I enjoyed every single scenario we attended as I really felt that I had grasped how to achieve the best outcome, and I especially enjoyed the ones that involved talking to people rather than going straight in with legislation, but actually really enjoyed the satisfaction of getting them right. We also spent a week visiting the stations we'll be working at and those in the same area as us as well, so for me that was my station and the station that has the custody suite, which are a fair distance apart. Although not the most exciting week ever, it was really great to get to meet some of the people I might be working with and familiarise myself with the station. We spent a day in Court which was also quite interesting, and it was a lot different to when I visited several years ago on work experience with a journalist who I'll never forget being so angry at as he laughed someone crying as his case was heard in court. One officer took us for a tour around the area I'll be covering in a marked car, which to me was really, really cool, having never been in one before. The area that we cover is so huge though, and the stories of a small number of people being on shift at the same time and the amount of time it takes to get from one end of the area to another has made me a bit nervous!! I definitely payed a bit more extra attention in PST after knowing how far away backup could be and how often I'll be single-crewed. Since I last posted, we have started and pretty much finished our Personal Safety Training (PST/OST) which was so much fun from beginning to end. I woke up the morning after each session with plenty of bruises but really enjoyed having practical lessons and being shown how to defend myself. I think for a lot of us on my course it made it all seem quite real, as we joked around pretending to stab each other with plastic knifes, that in just a few months time we'll be out there and may well have to use these techniques from the very start. I've started engaging a lot more in Police news lately, and reading posts by UK Cop Humour on Facebook, and every post that is dedicated towards a fallen officer makes me feel so much different now that I am one of them. I've gained so much respect for the job through the stories from our trainers and understanding the daily struggles that officers face, even just leaving their family for a shift and not knowing what is going to happen in the hours that follow. I think it's really hit me just how dangerous this job can be, but that the work I will be doing will be so personally rewarding that it makes it all worth it (I hope!). Files, files and more files have been thrown at us left right and centre and on Friday we had the whole day to complete a GAP (Guilty Anticipated Plea) file which was hard enough, let alone learning what needs to be included in an NGAP file. To be honest, this has confused me quite a lot, and although I really enjoyed doing the file, it was really just because we had all the information in front of us, and I can't bear to think how hard it'd be to build one of these up completely from scratch! It has, however, made me really excited for our Interviewing course which is just around the corner. We recently went on a training night out to a nearby city which was so much fun, and really bonded us as a team even more than before. It was great to let our hair down for the night and, for me, get dressed up and look like a normal human being again rather than having my hair all scraped back and barely any makeup on. Following this we've had a week off for annual leave, which has been nice, but I'm itching to get back to it tomorrow as we start on Road Traffic stuff for the next two weeks before our Driving course which comes in March. I think the highlight for these past few weeks for me was our individual review that happened at the end of last week where I really began to feel like I was actually headed towards where I'm meant to end up. My trainer said that he loved the way I spoke to people during consolidations and thought that my humour would get me far, which was so encouraging for me as all this time I've been a bit worried that this job might turn me into a robot. The knowledge that I might actually be doing OK has given me so much more motivation and confidence for the remainder of the course and I think it came at just the right time for me. Other than that, my boots still aren't shiny and my tunic still has dodgy creases, but every day that I put on my uniform and walk up to HQ I feel more and more proud of how far I've come and more and more excited for what is to come next. Thanks for reading, sorry this was a long one!
  6. I couldn't care less frankly that a woman made commissioner. What I'm pleased about is that the majority of people have said she's approachable, operationally aware and flexible. Now THATS the good news for women in policing - a woman has made commissioner and it would appear based on merit - a key point for credibility.
  7. Don't forget, you are never on your own. Don't be embarrassed about asking for help. No one knows everything, even 30 year veterans need advice off someone sometimes, and no one will expect you to suddenly be able to do everything as soon as you're out of your ten weeks. Biggest skill is being able to appear like you're listening intently to someone, whilst inside you're desperately trying to work out what the he'll you're going to do next! [emoji16]
  8. It's a difficult one. I hope the guard was reasonable in his approach and if so is shown due leniency. Apprehending a shoplifter can be difficult and I've been in a similar situation myself as a guard when a man stole some whisky, I managed to grab it off him and roll it to one side before the tussle which ensued. It sounds like in this instance he was tackled the bottles broke causing significant bleeding and ultimately death.. Such a waste of life. Of course. A security guard, or any other person for that matter, should be able to prevent crime or effect a lawful arrest. If the offender creates such a dangerous risk to themselves or other people then the burden should ultimately rest with them and should not prevent the arrest from taking place. It's sad it could result in the loss of a life over something insignificant in comparison however it's the life they decided to lead. I dare say it sounds like he fell on his sword so to speak. Sent from my D2303 using Tapatalk
  9. On a different note; is there any evidence Diana Abbott is useful or necessary as Shadow Home Secretary?
  10. Regs don't mind if you're finishing a shift at an earlier time than them. The ones I've spoken to haven't, at least. They get that you have been working all week and then turned up for a tour and may not want to finish at the same time as them as you came on sooner. They really just appreciate being double crewed, at least if you're competent... With my force, it's stated as 16 hours a month, but in reality it is more. Extra training/ncalts, team meetings etc bring it up, and the 16 hours is supposed to be operational hours, so training doesn't count. My division are brilliant though and this is very lax, as long as you are not taking the urine. As long as you're not putting admin and training down every month for your 16, it's ok. training runs in weekends and nights to give the least inconvenience to those who work 'normal' hours. This cuts in to family time, but it's part of the job. I have a wife and young son, and a house to renovate, but manage fine. The wife grumbles a bit sometimes though! I tend to work Saturday nights, say 1900-0300, but times vary. Working a Friday night after work isn't good, but I have done in the past. I wouldn't recommend it! We are also asked a lot to work events, and those that continually shun them get pulled up on it. You can't always work where you want - ie spend a shift on response when there is an event on you've been asked to work. If there's an event on, I try and do those too. It adds variety, tends to be an 'easy' shift, helps supervision and honestly looks good on your record! We aren't tied to a tutor. We are given to a special SGT who oversees our progression, but we can go out with who we like, within reason. When a proby special, you can't go out with another non independent for example. You can go out with an independent special, or a reg. We can go out with traffic, dogs etc too, at any level of training. We just arrange a shift with them and let supervision know if ((EDIT, NON)independent. Once independent we tend to arrange our own shifts as we want, no need to go through our sarge. They stand back and observe, only intervening when necessary. This isn't to say they are hands-off, but they are good at their jobs and don't micro manage. We try to keep very new in service ones out with other specials to find their feet first, before getting chucked into a response shift. It's up to the duty SGT to decide where they want us that shift though. we also have a new policy of giving at least 3 days notice for a shift too, to stop people just rocking up and expecting to play out. Some were getting a bit cocky doing this and signing out cars etc without checking with supervision, and it's been jumped on. Your force may not require this though. If you are asking to get an idea of it with a view to applying, go for it. Training seems daunting whilst doing it, but you'll look back and think "why was I worrying?" I'll be honest though and say it doesn't prepare you for the job too well, learn on your feet once attested. I prefer this though! The job is great. I've had a royal mess up with a day's training today - supervision completely dropped the ball - but I take the rough with the smooth, and it's rarely that rough. You get gritty jobs, finish far later than planned, fight people and have tons of typing. It sometimes gets stale and you don't have motivation to turn in. That's brief and passes though! It's all outweighed by the good bits. You're part of a team and the bond is incredible. Hard to describe really, and that's just as a part-timer. You sometimes wish you had more spare time outside of policing so you could police more (I realise regs may not have this attitude...!) It does affect you. Your family life/social life will suffer a bit, and some jobs will affect you. Help is always there though. You will lose spare time too, but it's brilliant. You get bitten by the bug. I realise this may not be the best sell, but I've tried to give a brief and honest opinion. No doubt I will read it back and realise I have missed loads out. May add to it later. Do it!
  11. Read the news articles and my posts to answer your own question. But just in case you haven't got a clue what training firearms officers go through....the answer is yes very experienced. No thier judgement isn't lacking in fact firearms officers judgement is constantly assessed during training and operations. Although it's something that you would not not appreciate as with all due respect you have never put yourself through such training. That said we do make mistakes but if I am sure you made one or two mistakes during your career. But if they were honest mistakes you learn from them and move on. You are missing the point totally, these officers were putting themselves in harms way to protect this very community from what they and members of the community believed was an armed threat. What do you mean by cock up? You are starting to look silly again. Yes Tasers can kill "they are defined as less lethal" not none leathal. I suggest you do a little research into the unfortunate incident that lead to the death of that person and the IPCC investigation into the incident. Taser is a tactical option which can and should be used to protect life when it's appropriate not as a last resort. Early use can protect people including subjects from serious harm if used correctly. Btw I'm assuming you didn't mean last resort means we should shoot him first then taser him? I perfer to use a Taser as a means of avoiding using leathal force first, I find that works best for all during a firearms incident. Not strange at all I would gladly acknowledge if I'm wrong and apologize if I was involved in this incident. We mean no harm to the people we deal with, firearms officers are still police officers who strive to protect life and protect the public from harm. However I would also explain why we took the actions we did, which the organisation has. As I have pointed out already we work on the information and intelligence available at the time, we do not have access to hindsight. Once again you really are quite wrong, it seems you have ignored all the points or observations I have raised throughout this thread. I welcome different points of view but only if everyone keeps an open mind. I can only assume that's for one of the following reasons. It doesn't suit your point of view and I and others can present rational arguments all day long, to no effect as your so obtuse. Or perhaps you are deliberately attempting to provoke a response, which I'm my view is simply trolling. Or you truly believe what you say is true, which is quite concerning if you are a retired officer and like my first point means any meaningful debate is pointless witness you. If you have any issues with my response either PM me, or make a complaint to management. For the reasons I have outlined above I honestly feel any further debate with you is pointless.
  12. That whole discussion was a waste of time and this debate will never be resolved, an outcome will never be agreed on. Police officers will continue saying, "We need more firearms and tasers," and members of the public, with frankly no credentials, will keep shouting, "No" as loud as they can until we back down. When I say 'we' I mean SLT. If we tried to bring in body armour, CS and batons now there would be uproar in much the same way, I don't doubt. 'You'll look too aggressive.' 'You'll look like you're expecting to use force.' 'You won't be as approachable.' The same arguments can be applied to every change police try to make. If we went to work tomorrow and there was a box of Glocks and a box of Tasers and a box of body-cams on the table in parade and we all kitted up and went out on patrol, half the population wouldn't notice, some would agree that it was about time, and some would be in up in arms. And then, if the SLT ignored them, everybody would get used to it, just as they get used to everything else we implement. I genuinely don't understand why those panellists were selected, other that for the fact that they would disagree with everything Steve White and Mike Pannett said. Good on the two members of the public that said, "If the police say they need more guns maybe we should trust them." And, "When I was a volunteer at the Commonwealth games and I saw armed officers everywhere, to start with I was scared. But then I felt safe because they were there to protect me." And then there's Naomi McAuliffe saying, "If we increase the amount of armed/taser officers, we'll increase the range of situations that they're able to deploy their firearms/tasers in." What nonsense. There's absolutely no basis for what she said, but she's on national television saying it. A number of other anti-gun comments made during the programme: - I don't want to see police with guns in high density places like airports. Why would it make me feel safer to think that they might start shooting with all those people around? What an absolutely narrow sighted and ignorant thing to say. It shows a glaring lack of understanding about the current terrorism threats and the likelihood of an attack taking place in these highly populated areas. The police are there to stop the people who come to these places to harm the public, not to start mindlessly shooting bullets into a crowd. - If we increase the quantity of firearms/taser officers we will be unable to cope with the training requirements and the standards will slip. This is a valid point in my opinion. There will be struggles to maintain the levels or training and re-quals without sufficient forward planning. - The classic 'our police has it's history in 200 years of unarmed policing' 'police officers will be less approachable if they're armed or carrying taser.' This idea that a police officer does nothing but wander around town centres exchanging pleasantries with everybody and knowing them by name is long gone. Was it ever anything but fantasy? Officers are running from call to call, dealing with violent individuals who have no qualms about using weapons, vehicles or infectious diseases to harm the public, escape justice or even maliciously injure/infect officers purely out of malevolence. To stop officers being equipped to deal with their day job because it offends the sensitivities of these middle-class lefties that have never been assaulted or really put in fear of anything is absolutely ridiculous. One of the commenters actually seemed concerned to speak to a police officer who was carrying a weapon - should the officer decide to use it on him. Why would that be a consideration? A police officer is not going to randomly turn their gun on the public. These people watch too many films - and I don't even know which films. That programme absolutely made my blood boil. And to clarify, I used the term 'middle-class lefties' not as an insult, but simply because I feel it sufficiently describes the type of people that were making these obsolete arguments in the discussion. I consider myself to be moderate-left in many topics, but not law and order. My simple suggestion would be to offer all of these prominent opinion-offerers a use of force awareness session and that might change their opinion. I've seen a few that have been done in the USA with journalists and activists and I've yet to see one where the outcome doesn't involve the participants acknowledging the difficulties of managing conflict and having a new respect for law enforcement. As has been said somewhere else on this forum, the majority of the general public do not know what what police officers deal with and would be shocked if they did. I feel that while the opinion of the public is important and should be considered, unless these opinions have experience or evidence to support them then they should not carry much weight and should not be defining. Me neither. The idea that we should take the options away from officers so that they can concentrate on talking the offender down is folly. Some people simply cannot be talked down whether out of desperation, mental health or whatever. If a person threatens a police officer with a weapon, the police officer needs to be able to negate the threat - dare I suggest - without running away from it. I think even if we did increase firearms and taser, it doesn't mean we will begin pulling weapons at every call without tac comms first. It's not how we work. But it is important that officers have the tactical options.
  13. Oh come off it. Any copper chasing a shoplifter is likely to tackle them if they get close enough, whether they're carrying bottles or not. If anything, knowing he has a couple of bottles on him makes me more likely to go for the tackle, to stop them getting wrapped around my head. Unless more information suggests that the security guard's actions were genuinely disproportionate, I don't see how he's done anything wrong.
  14. It's about time that criminals using any form of transport are held responsible for their actions. They can choose to stop at any point - if they decide to do a runner, then they should be held accountable for any damage or injury caused, whether to themselves or passers-by. This was a lovely demonstration of a takedown of a moped, which as we all know, is used by criminals because they've had virtual guarantee of being allowed to run free in the past - hopefully, this will get the message through to them that they no longer have a free pass to run from the law. Sent from my Hudl 2 using the Police Community App
  15. I do receive PMs, maybe you're restricted from sending them; either way I'm not particularly interested in an internet slagging match. You put your head above the parapet in threads as a veteran and an expert often in a rather supercilious fashion, so you can hardly complain when people point out your lack of understanding of things like arrest versus detention or the way you misread S61 in the fingerprinting on the street conversation - such things perfectly illustrate the point that no amount of experience can make up for not knowing the law and how to read it in the first place and are relevant to your position that theoretical training is of little value.
  16. And that is the reason I'm still not going to go and nudge a bike for anything less than murder. Yes the public are apparently supportive, along with the job. But that's still a toss of the coin. If they did get hurt, if the management team on the next day's had a migraine and feeling grumpy, if they were the wrong minority for whatever area I was in. Then it's career devastation time. That v the current penalty for theft of a bike? £50 and a community order? Nope. Not worth it.
  17. At the risk of spoiling this argument....sorry healthy, riveting debate about PACE. I'm just a simple bobby, I don't claim to be the font of all knowledge or be well versed in the fine detail of PACE. But I like to think I'm fairly good at my job and have managed to avoid dropping in the brown stuff...most of the time. So just before I dare to go back to the original incident I wish to make a couple of observations, if you detain a person other than a clearly identified reason, say for the purpose of a search, then you are asking for a complaint of unlawful arrest. Please don't try to explain or convince me why you can as my view is based on my experience and my desire to collect my pension. Secondly if there is a power to obtain fingerprints without consent on the street (and nothing on this thread has convinced me there is) call me old fashioned but just explain what your doing and why if they refuse to consent nick them for obstruction and sort it at the custody suite later. It offers your career far more protection. Anyway going back to the incident in question IF as we suspect the officers involved believe the male was another person and that person was wanted then everything else that followed is acceptable based on the officers honestly held believe of the threat faced and the force used by themselves was reasonable. I would probably have handled it in a totally different manner but the simple fact is that if I believed this person was wanted, I attempted to explain that and attempted to verify the males identity and they refused or try to leave they are getting nicked simple and I would use whatever level of force was reasonable to achieve that goal. I would much perfer the male cooperate and we all avoid wasting our time but if I have to roll around on the floor so be it.
  18. Looking at many of the threads on the site, the mega changes and difficulties faced by the police service, is it time for a Royal Commission on Policing to have an extensive look at our work, how we are organised, how we protect the public and how we are protected. Money is tight and like most organisations the police need to fin better ways of doing things. I think we need a Royal Commission to independently review policing and perhaps look at the following areas 1. Regionalisation of forces. Although many elements of policing have been amalgamated, can we work more efficiently and bring to bear greater resources by adopting a full regionalisation program, with a minimum force size of 10,000 officers 2. Should the police be routinely armed? If not what proportion should be and whether all officers should be equipped with Taser? 3. PCSO and special constabulary. Should the police service have a paid reserve, similar to what they have in NI. What is the value of having PCSOs, should they be disbanded and resources redirected into regular officer or they be given additional powers and used more effectively. 4. Is there a need for a national motorway policing service, which is also fully armed providing additional ARV responses to forces. 5. Should there be a national infrastructure police service. 6. Should there be a single national uniform/equipment standard with all officer dressed and equipped the same except for insignia 7. Should PCCs be disbanded and replaced with regional bodies to oversee policing 8. How should officers be trained? Do they need a degree or should regionalised training make a return with officers undertaking an intense residential training programmes. 9. What are the merits of a direct entry scheme for Inspector, Superintendent, Chief officer level. 10. What role and function should private specialist forces have in the 21st century, and are there areas which might benefit from an expansion, reducing the pressure on local police forces? 11. Is there a case for amalgamation between police and fire services and other emergency services? These are not necessary my own views but some of the area I think may benefit from having an indepth look at.
  19. Dick Heads Met.
  20. 5 likes
    I am now officially going in to week 12 of training school after an annual leave week with only 14 weeks left - nearly half way! It's gone ridiculously fast that I can hardly believe we're in double figures already. It's been a fair few weeks since I last posted an update here, and after a bit of prompting I've decided now is probably a good time. We've been doing a lot of legislation over the past few weeks, and had two consolidation role plays days to practice what we'd learnt. These days consist of getting fully kitted up including high vis jackets and roaming around in pairs/threes until you are deployed over the radio to an 'incident', where an assessor and several students from the local college act out a scenario. The hardest part of these, for me, has definitely been the radio stuff. It's a whole other language to me and I've never experienced anything like it before, I still even get a bit stumped over Phonetic Alphabet, the other day I was spelling out 'JONES' and 'October, November' came out of my mouth, much to the amusement of the assessor. Like I said, we've had two of these consolidation days so far and I hated every second of the first one, despite the scenarios themselves not being too much of a disaster, the worry and pressure made me soo nervous. For example, we completely forgot to search a shoplifter who we transported to (fake) custody only for the assessor to pull a massive knife out of his hoodie, schoolboy error!! But to be fair to us, we had only just covered searching so I think we were worried about how much it had been drilled into us that searches can so easily be unlawful. But, the second time around, I enjoyed every single scenario we attended as I really felt that I had grasped how to achieve the best outcome, and I especially enjoyed the ones that involved talking to people rather than going straight in with legislation, but actually really enjoyed the satisfaction of getting them right. We also spent a week visiting the stations we'll be working at and those in the same area as us as well, so for me that was my station and the station that has the custody suite, which are a fair distance apart. Although not the most exciting week ever, it was really great to get to meet some of the people I might be working with and familiarise myself with the station. We spent a day in Court which was also quite interesting, and it was a lot different to when I visited several years ago on work experience with a journalist who I'll never forget being so angry at as he laughed someone crying as his case was heard in court. One officer took us for a tour around the area I'll be covering in a marked car, which to me was really, really cool, having never been in one before. The area that we cover is so huge though, and the stories of a small number of people being on shift at the same time and the amount of time it takes to get from one end of the area to another has made me a bit nervous!! I definitely payed a bit more extra attention in PST after knowing how far away backup could be and how often I'll be single-crewed. Since I last posted, we have started and pretty much finished our Personal Safety Training (PST/OST) which was so much fun from beginning to end. I woke up the morning after each session with plenty of bruises but really enjoyed having practical lessons and being shown how to defend myself. I think for a lot of us on my course it made it all seem quite real, as we joked around pretending to stab each other with plastic knifes, that in just a few months time we'll be out there and may well have to use these techniques from the very start. I've started engaging a lot more in Police news lately, and reading posts by UK Cop Humour on Facebook, and every post that is dedicated towards a fallen officer makes me feel so much different now that I am one of them. I've gained so much respect for the job through the stories from our trainers and understanding the daily struggles that officers face, even just leaving their family for a shift and not knowing what is going to happen in the hours that follow. I think it's really hit me just how dangerous this job can be, but that the work I will be doing will be so personally rewarding that it makes it all worth it (I hope!). Files, files and more files have been thrown at us left right and centre and on Friday we had the whole day to complete a GAP (Guilty Anticipated Plea) file which was hard enough, let alone learning what needs to be included in an NGAP file. To be honest, this has confused me quite a lot, and although I really enjoyed doing the file, it was really just because we had all the information in front of us, and I can't bear to think how hard it'd be to build one of these up completely from scratch! It has, however, made me really excited for our Interviewing course which is just around the corner. We recently went on a training night out to a nearby city which was so much fun, and really bonded us as a team even more than before. It was great to let our hair down for the night and, for me, get dressed up and look like a normal human being again rather than having my hair all scraped back and barely any makeup on. Following this we've had a week off for annual leave, which has been nice, but I'm itching to get back to it tomorrow as we start on Road Traffic stuff for the next two weeks before our Driving course which comes in March. I think the highlight for these past few weeks for me was our individual review that happened at the end of last week where I really began to feel like I was actually headed towards where I'm meant to end up. My trainer said that he loved the way I spoke to people during consolidations and thought that my humour would get me far, which was so encouraging for me as all this time I've been a bit worried that this job might turn me into a robot. The knowledge that I might actually be doing OK has given me so much more motivation and confidence for the remainder of the course and I think it came at just the right time for me. Other than that, my boots still aren't shiny and my tunic still has dodgy creases, but every day that I put on my uniform and walk up to HQ I feel more and more proud of how far I've come and more and more excited for what is to come next. Thanks for reading, sorry this was a long one!
  21. Exactly. Is there a set of plausible circumstances whereby the security guard would be arrested? Yes. Is there also a set of plausible circumstances whereby the security guard would not be arrested? Yes. (That's saved 6 pages of forum)
  22. Of course it'd look shocking if you write it up in that manner. Besides, you don't 'know full well' that the glass is going to break and kill him, what you do know by taking him to the floor is that he's unlikely to take that bottle out and use it as a weapon, as well as being less able to make a further attempt at escape. The notion of grabbing someone around the waist and jiggling him about to make the bottles fall out is ridiculous.
  23. Your view in NI is probably a little different to the rest of the UK in fairness. The RUC had a proper siege mentality for a long time, and a lot of the population are still old enough to remember how they and some parts of the army used to carry on. As time goes on and more all people remember is the PSNI, increasingly staffed with English people like you who aren't conspicuously from the other side of the fence and who don't give much of a toss about the politics or about Catholic versus Protestant, that mindset will gradually start to fade. Over the past sixty years as a country we've learned, forgotten and learned again that insurgencies are beaten by winning hearts and minds. @Radman has it spot on about the silent majority and the vocal special interest groups - in many ways we have allowed ourselves to become risk averse and our priorities to shift too far in the wrong direction, so the concerned family who have seen a prowler outside their house are left to wait in trepidation because we have decided to go and see someone who rings up threatening self-harm four times a week but has never yet inflicted any meaningful injury or to chase after a fifteen-year-old girl who goes absent from care (without any obstacles being placed in her way but that's a separate issue) on a regular basis because her having a sixteen-year-old boyfriend apparently puts her at high risk of CSE. Over the years I've been a special (and they do seem to fly by) I have seen a bit of a resurgence of common sense and empathy, but there's still a lot of progress to be made. Incidentally the recent report on missing children and CSE was a perfect example both of compassion fatigue in cops and also the distorted mindset taken by regulatory bodies whose heads are in the clouds with no grasp of the practicalities. To come back to @bensonby's point directly, while we do have issues with compassion fatigue and a cop mentality in the police, by far our biggest PR failing in my eyes is that despite mammoth efforts our work is not transparent. When something controversial happens, nobody senior ever takes to the press to explain how the regulations work or what considerations we have to bear in mind; maybe at best we get a "police officers do a very difficult job", more likely it's just a "we immediately referred ourselves to the IPCC who found no wrongdoing". Again, pats on the back for transparency in the chief's office but does anyone actually understand why we chose to taser someone or shoot them or ram a car off the road or keep the M25 closed for four hours after a fatal? Nope, because we haven't even tried to explain it to them.
  24. There are already thousands of PCs in this country, myself included, who have incurred large student debts from university. It doesn't suddenly make us this struggling, corruptible collective. That Police Officers shouldn't pay for their own training, I think we can agree, but the rest of your post is nonsense.
  25. So having read these comments my favourite two are: 1. Linking abuse of children by their male sports coaches at some point, somewhere, to the pardoning of gay men and women convicted of this law at the time. Investigations of historical abuse completely worthy of investigation but the inference is fairly plain to see: that gay men abuse children, ergo, making gay men bad people as one assumes a reverse burden requiring one to assert that one is ,in fact, not someone whom potentially abuses children. 2. That "ramming" diversity matters is getting, presumably, awfully tiresome akin to the, presumably, tiresome, "health and safety" mantra espoused by authorities. Indeed, not withstanding some examples of adverse or overzealous implementations of this concept, promoting public health and trying to stop workers on building sites and factories for dying whilst trying to earn their crust, is somehow also tiresome. Conclusion: gay men and women will continue to "ram it down your throats" until such a point where they, we, me - are not arbitrarily accused of being a would-be flipping paedophile in a discussion about our government pardoning those convicted of being just themselves. Commentary, I should add on many newspaper web sites about this from the good public, tells me that gay people have an awfully long way to go before they exist on a level playing field with the straight white man.
  26. Cue the all too often encounter now over travel fraud, people watch these videos on YouTube and believe it to be some kind of bullet proof legal argument. Fare Evader: "Have I committed a crime though officer?" Me: "Yes, you've travelled on a train without paying your fare..." Fare Evader: "Nooooo that's a civil matter between me and the railway company innit, am I free to Go?" Me: "No." It just becomes vexing, the last two TIs I dealt with I had this back and forth, I ended up arresting two lads because they refused all details and decided to stick their phones in my face as I tried to deal with them for a £5 ticket... Spouting the freeman rubbish from YouTube. People are daft enough to fall for it.
  27. An old railway bobby I used to work with when I first started used to love correcting what he considered to be 'rude' behaviour or behaviour which he deemed to be selfish or inconsiderate, he saw it as a means of correcting society in his own way... I remember one very icy January morning we were called to a lovely lady screeching at staff over a lost hat and wouldnt elet anyone get a word in, she went from being annoying to being a nuisance to everyone on the station. After five minutes of trying to reason with her my colleague took ahold of her and dragged her out into the cold bluntly telling her "Until you learn to behave yourself in a reasonable manner, don't bother coming back..." I'll never forget the stunned look on her face. Memories... I remember how he'd always report people for summons who were caught smoking on the station that had ignored rail staff requests to put the cigarette out or had been abusive to staff in someway. I've always argued that these low level, anti-social problems that disrupt people's lives and cause problems for the everyday person have far more of an impact than what we would consider to be 'crime.' I hate using the term ASB as I see it now as just a means for organisations to wite off the behaviour as "not important enough to deal with."
  28. You do speak a load of old tosh. There have been many historic railway constabularies (with full powers in relation to railway mattes) that were merged into the BTP, which took its form 70 years ago. At what point were Railway Police ever just a 'bunch of security guards'? Certainly, not during living memory. Sent from my iPhone usring Police Community
  29. To me this site is value for money. Its just a small sum to get loads of feedback. Nothing is free nowadays. Sent from my SM-N910C using the Police Community App
  30. Have to say I agree with the OP, Making someone pay to post a recruitment query is in my opinion wrong, If I had of had to pay to do that I certainly wouldn't have hung around. But the site WAS free so I stayed and Contributed because I liked the site. Still doesn't seem right to make people pay for an opportunity to post in the recruitment area.
  31. I would love it if someone, anyone, could look into policing and make a decision about anything. What type of hats we wear, who carries taser, what rank structure we will have, how we recruit, get promoted etc etc and on and on. People on the street ask me how to get into the job. I dont know any more. And if i did, by the time they apply, it would be wrong. Someone needs to get a handle on the police and make us the police. Not 43 separate little kingdoms
  32. The shift went well cheers guys! It was a fairly Q one, but I enjoyed getting out there and patrolling the patch on my own. Back in again tomorrow so will see how that goes. Thanks again for all the words of encouragement Sent from my SM-G930F using the Police Community App
  33. Deep breaths everyone. The thread has been pretty well argued for much of it, please keep it in the same manner.
  34. I'm a bit saddened that many of the arguments here seem to be a mixture of legal misunderstandings and cover your backside attitudes. It is not necessary to arrest someone in order to seize their clothing or with their cooperation to isolate them from other people and get an early account on tape, and the relevant provisions (Notes 2 and 2A) of Code G apply to an arrest for manslaughter as much as to any minor offence and specifically to this sort of reasonable force case. I don't know why someone brought lawful orders up as we all know that a constable cannot lawfully be ordered to arrest anyone. As for the guard's actions, if he had any legal advice at all worth its salt he'd be able to advance a strong defence on the principles laid down in R vs Palmer (1971); if that was apparent from the outset it would point towards innocence and make it harder to form the requisite grounds for suspicion. If the guard was willing to play the game, and none of the facts we've been given suggest he wasn't, then it would be perfectly possible to remove him to the police station voluntarily, seize his clothing, take any specimens required by consent, facilitate legal advice then have a couple of detectives attend and voluntarily interview him without any detriment to the investigation or personal risk to whoever made that decision. The problem is as some of the replies suggest we're not always very good at coming up with bespoke solutions to specific problems and prefer to take the safe option even if it might sail close to the wind legally and ethically.
  35. I'm going to have to dissent on this one. The police's own press statement to me seems to suggest no crime has been committed! The decision to arrest the guard seems overzealous on the facts that we have. As long as the guard offered to attend the police station, surrender his clothing and assist with the enquiry I can't see why his arrest was needed. Due to the venue I would suggest that corroborative evidence in the form of CCTV would be available immediately as scene in order to negate any suspicions of foul play. Until a PM has been conducted it would be incredibly difficult to imagine what benefit an interview with the guard under arrest would achieve that a voluntary attendance interview couldn't achieve. Most of my colleagues are unaware of the Code G re-write. General police knowledge of the re-hash was 'you can't use prompt and effective anymore and you have to ask to interview someone voluntarily before you can arrest to interview' which is dangerously untrue. As sceptre alludes to; the Code G training made quite a large point of telling officers it was their duty to consider evidence suggesting innocence as much as evidence suggests suggesting guilt. It also made reference to officers considering PRE-ARREST whether in use of force cases the conduct might be lawful self defence (rather than the trotted out line of 'THATS FOR THE COURTS TO DECIDE' which is wrong and a neglect to fulfil your duties effectively). I ask any of you on here who have dealt with a death in police contact - did you arrest your colleague? Were you arrested?
  36. Got my bump cap today. I look like a complete and total... silly person.
  37. The long neck of the law... Sent from my D2303 using Tapatalk
  38. Thus providing credibility to the argument that the more an officer knows about the law, the more reliable the outcome will be. I'm afraid that I strongly disagree that experience in itself should be relied upon to somehow be bestowed upon new stuff by older as a corporate mechanism for training. The job is more co own than ever, more law, more technology, more function in multi-agency working, more project and programme delivery participation. All this alongside the timeless steam of incoming domestics, shoplifter detained, pub fights and car crashes. Putting aside the actual reason government are doing this (money), having a higher standard of academic achievement in the subject matter of "policing" is hardly conducive to a lowering of standards. And comments along the lines of "officers with degrees were rubbish at their job" is no more of a truism as "short men are rubbish at opening jars"!
  39. My concern is that these provisions won't be a case of maximising the role of designated police staff to lighten the work of the overstretched constable but a backdoor provision to drive down PC numbers drastically for the pure reason of cost savings. If you follow the provisions to one possible conclusion: Mass uplift of PCSOs and other designated staff to fill the wastage numbers of PCs. Due to the cost savings involved they could probably recruit 1.5 PCSOs/designated staff for every officer who resigns or retires. PCSOs then become the core asset on local uniformed policing teams responding to calls for service, appointment calls and neighbourhood patrols. They attend calls for service, complete summonses, fixed penalties and daily policing business. Traffic PCSOs would receive response driver training and road traffic courses. They would attend all RTCs with only serious/fatals calling on the expertise of a single Traffic/Crash Investigation PC. Designated detention officers run the custody suites, under the watchful eye of a single Custody Officer, dealing with all aspects of detention including booking in, constant observations, searches, breath test procedure etc. A small cadre of designated Escort officers would be trained in response driving and van permits. They would become the prisoner transport function as well as resourcing hospital guards. They would attend arrests and take a brief arrest handover document from.the arresting officer then go back to custody and book in. Designated investigation officers would man CID departments conducting interviews, investigations and house searches. They would work under Detective Sergeants and DIs with DCs all but redundant except for Major Crime/Special Branch etc. There would be specialist designated investigating officer roles for vulnerable persons, financial, cyber crime and then district based investigators attached to the custody suites to deal with arrests made by constables. As for the PC - an expensive asset who is incredibly difficult to get rid of. Nationwide PC numbers will plummet. PCs will continue to man specialisms requiring the office of constable - firearms teams, dog handlers, public order teams. There will be a uniformed PC fugitive team whose sole responsibility is to locate outstanding offenders for arrest. On a district level there will be a handful of uniformed response PCs on duty at any one time. They will be taser equipped, MoE trained, pursuit trained officers whose role is to attend jobs involving a serious risk of violence or a need for constable only powers such as arrest/mental health detention/stop search. The problem is that with this model you have no surge capacity and a silo mentality. You can't put the PCSOs in custody - that's not their remit. Detention officers? Dont ask them to take a prisoner to hospital that's for the escorts officers. Escorts officers? Well their remit is the street so don't ask them to cover the constant observations in custody. The PCs? Well they'll probably just do as they're told and continue plugging the gaps..
  40. I actually don't think the majority of folk hold this opinion, most would like to see a major crackdown on law and order. The problem with our society is we seem to have spoilt, sheltered, very privileged, highly left wing liberal mindsets in key/influential positions either in government, the media, mainstream press, think tanks etc. These people seem to dictate policy, procedure and set down governance on how everyone should live their lives, anyone who doesn't meet their set criteria of lifestyle or mindsets tends to be pushed out or branded. Most men and women on the street understand that the system is far too heavily weighted in the wrong direction.
  41. I think alot of it comes down to naivety on the wider publics part (we are right) distorting their view of reasonableness. Whether that be with regards to use of force, prosecution or even down to resources. At the same time there is one small area I think we as the police consistently get it wrong - complacency/dulling of empathy. We are so used to, now, using threat/harm/risk to prioritise our time due to exceptional demand and budget cuts. We, quite rightly when thinking objectively, are indifferent to low level vehicle crime/theft/criminal damage. "WHY DO WE NEED TO ATTEND THIS?" we ask. What we forget is that low level vehicle theft, to the victim, could be only the first or second time they have been a victim of crime in their life. The cost to them, from one 'unsolvable waste of time' report where we will just say tough luck and give a crime number, could cost them several hundred pounds - for some people that could be an entire months disposable income or more. Whilst I've certainly been guilty of it myself and sometimes we DO need to rationalise people's sensitivity for them...it's one of our main failures I feel. Quite often I've found if you are up front with the victim but show interest and give them a premium service they don't really mind the result being undetected and filed. I receive some criticism because most of my victims get alot more time from me than they do from colleagues so I can be seen to be tearing the rear out of things. However generally I don't get victim complaints - and occasionally somebody will feedback positively to my supervision. I don't think my clear up rate is any better than my colleagues...in some cases it is probably worse because I do my utmost to divert alot of crimes away from arrest/interview where possible because the end result often doesn't best serve the victim.
  42. So, like every other rank and file cop.
  43. Make suitability for taser part of recruitment and put better use of force training into the initial training course and I'd see no problem with everyone being taser trained; whether they be established regulars, specials or probationers. At the moment not everyone in the job, for a multitude of reasons, is suitable for taser or firearms training. If we focus recruitment around it, it stops being an issue and there's little legitimate argument against a wider rollout. Sent from my iPhone using Police Community
  44. Makes you think which, if you could choose, what you would prefer to be subject to. Hit with a baton or tasered? Personally I would rather be tasered than hit with a steel bar, which to be effective needs to be used with bone cracking force. Funny how taser actually gets tested on people, whereas I have not heard of people being voluntarily hit with a baton, probably due to the prospect of a permanent disability. I don't get how the baton, which is a clumsy lethal force weapon, is preferred over the Taser being carried by specials and student officers.
  45. Seen, I will have a proper read later when I have a moment. What does this mean? What do you see as "taking over" and "augmenting"? The prospect of excitement and adventure has always attracted people to the police, I wouldn't call it unfortunate. Yes, we've all met a few who didn't have the maturity or treated it all as a game but it's daft to look down on people who come to policing because they want something varied, active and different to the average 9-5. I'm firmly in favour of attachments to different facets of policing and opportunities for specials to specialise - they're not taking anyone's opportunities or replacing headcounts so that argument isn't relevant and it does help to develop those individuals and give them skills which will benefit them in whatever walk of life they're in. A volunteer who's accustomed to delivering difficult messages, dealing with confrontation, has seen dead bodies and gotten used to dealing with serious crimes in a thorough and professional manner is likely to be calm, unflappable and methodical at whatever they turn their hand to - it's a pity the job doesn't seem to have the interest in developing specials to reach this level of competence despite the obvious benefits.
  46. I couldn't disagree more. If as a nation we realise that the law was wrong then, as we become more enlightened, then we should look at pardoning people. It is the simple fact that gay men were discriminated against by the law. It is wrong to make a link between between someone's sexuality and historic abuse.
  47. PC Steve Williams of BTP Pan-London Response, Finsbury Park died last night at sea in Brighton, the circumstances aren't fully known yet however his partner Lauren, serving BTP officer at the same station has set up the following page to raise money for the RNLI who battled so much to save him in the early hours of this morning. Any donations from this site are appreciated. https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/Laurenandstevie Rest in peace, Stevie - you'll be missed, along with your haircut and cheekiness that only you got away with!
  48. As I've said, this is all very well and to be very much supported, but it's meaningless unless there's the officers out there to bring such drivers to book. To my mind, the fact there appears to be so few officers imposing the current law and penalties that leads to drivers feeling able to use their devices so freely anyway.
  49. @Radman's point had nothing to do with taser. He was referring to people watching videos on YouTube that tell them they don't have to tell the police who they are. This then results in incidents that could be dealt with nice and low-key, resulting in arrests etc. that would have been completely unnecessary if the person had used some common sense and listened to what the police officer had told them. Nothing to do with taser.
  50. Aware there is already another topic on here in relation to Martin Finney of the NCA being awarded the George Medal but two other officers are also to receive the Queen's Gallantry Medal. Well done to all involved!