Jinxer 43 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 How things change as time goes by, I could only find one thing that's the same today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajorDisaster + 579 Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 The hat? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powdermonkey 11 Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 Yes, the police have changed since 1959 and rightly so. It was 56 years ago after all. Society has also changed; gone are the days of respect for the police and the law, not to mention consideration for others, to be replaced by abuse and selfishness. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmyriddle 87 Posted May 3, 2016 Share Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) Oh the nostalgia! Makes me wanna crack out the Daily Mail! But in all seriousness, it's funny how much society has changed. Their beats are tiny, the fact that the have no radios and have to use a pillar box... And just a few years before this the Police didn't even used to carry handcuffs. They'd have to sit on someone until backup arrived (kinda like those PCSO things!) although no idea how they did that without a radio! Thing that struck me the most was the fact that the voice over justified their appointments only being handcuffs and a small truncheon and how guns "aren't needed as everybody respects the uniform of the Constable"! This is why Britain is and has always been away with the fairies. I mean, how arrogant to think that people will maintain their position in our strict class based society and of course not show themselves to be the low class miscreant that they are by biffing a copper! Reminds me of the two Ronnies sketch "I look up to him because he is upper class, but also down on him". Or how we used to invade half the world in order to instil politeness and culture to those savages in the colonies. I mean why wouldn't they be grateful for our tea and culture?! Edited May 3, 2016 by jimmyriddle . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike88 + 257 Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 (edited) Behind the nostalgia, the police were way more corrupt, lazy and unaccountable back then than they are now. My parents joined in the early 80s and even then being drunk on duty was perfectly acceptable. You could easily get away with fitting someone up or giving them a shoeing. Thankfully for the most part those days are over. And at least now the kit is practical and generally fit for purpose (except the custodian which I like but let's be honest is totally useless). Edited May 4, 2016 by mike88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powdermonkey 11 Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 When I started working for the police in 1992 officers still went out on the street with just a wooden truncheon and a pair of handcuffs, no stab vest. The first ones issued were worn under the shirt making for much discomfort on warm days. The truncheon wasn't in plain view as it slipped into a special pocket in the trousers leaving just the leather loop handle on view, which could be covered by the tunic. As it was post PACE most of the "verballing" had gone and taped interviews had come in along with the CPS doing the prosecutions. Was there still corruption? Of course there was and there always will be on scale or another, just as there will be in any large organisation. I wish the police had been able to keep the custodian helmet, it made them distinctive, easy for people to spot if they needed help or vice versa to know to behave, and it would allay one of Jinxer's concerns about being to tell the difference between private security, traffic wardens etc. As mike88 says, the current uniform & kit is more appropriate for modern policing but I've yet to meet an officer, or PCSO for that matter, who doesn't look like a sack of spuds. The tunic, trousers and custodian were far smarter. As for lazy and unaccountable, well, there'll always be lazy cops and we've seen a greater increase in accountability but still have the disgraceful covering up with Hillsborough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulietAlpha1 + 515 Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 2 hours ago, mike88 said: Behind the nostalgia, the police were way more corrupt, lazy and unaccountable back then than they are now. My parents joined in the early 80s and even then being drunk on duty was perfectly acceptable. You could easily get away with fitting someone up or giving them a shoeing. Thankfully for the most part those days are over. And at least now the kit is practical and generally fit for purpose (except the custodian which I like but let's be honest is totally useless). This is the first thing that springs to my mind when people speak about 'traditional neighbourhood policing'. They focus on the very nice concept of police officers being friendly and approachable to everyone, using minimum amounts of force, not having access or need of firearms, tasers, CS and stab vests etc. They seem to think forget how much more regular it was for officers to give someone a good 'shoeing' using a wooden truncheon, with far less accountability, and yet we still hear people offering, "Why can't police just patrol on foot with handcuffs and a wooden truncheon?" It shows a horrendously poor understanding of everyday police work. I'm sure back in the day (before my time) British police were the envy of the world, but now I think we've fallen behind the times in our attempts to preserve this antiquated, fairytale vision of policing. I don't think police officers being equipped to deal with the threats that they face conflicts with our 'policing by consent' ideals. It gives officers more tactical options to provide a better service to the public who call us for assistance, and to defend ourselves against people who'd want to harm us. During a shift a few months ago, I heard on the radio that two men had been seen chasing a man down the street with machetes. In any other country, officers would have been able to respond to the scene (as they would a non-armed incident) and stop the threat, either by their presence or the use of some of their tactical options, before containing and arresting the suspects. In this case, an RVP was set up a few streets away, followed by an agonising twenty minute wait for an ARV to arrive. Needless to say, by the time officers actually arrived on scene, the suspects were long gone. Fortunately, as far as I'm aware, no-one was hurt. Is that really offering the best service to the public? There's no reason why we can't be sufficiently equipped to do our job, whilst still maintaining public confidence and treating members of the public with the respect they deserve. Just because I may carry a taser or a sidearm, does not mean that I intend to use it at every given opportunity. I doubt it would have any effect on my day-to-day work, other that having to consider the protection of my firearm/taser in confrontational situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmyriddle 87 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 Behind the nostalgia, the police were way more corrupt, lazy and unaccountable back then than they are now. My parents joined in the early 80s and even then being drunk on duty was perfectly acceptable. You could easily get away with fitting someone up or giving them a shoeing. Thankfully for the most part those days are over That is crazy. In what universe is the police being drunk okay?! I think standards now are better, there's less ill intent with setting people up etc. but still a whole lot of laziness or avoiding jobs. We still have some ways to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinxer 43 Posted May 8, 2016 Author Share Posted May 8, 2016 On 03/05/2016 at 09:28, MajorDisaster said: The hat? No the 999 phone number. No matter what they were or what they did the public had respect for them. If you were a criminal you were getting caught for a crime and done for that crime, not stitched up with something that fits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remmy + 1,401 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 2 hours ago, Jinxer said: No the 999 phone number. No matter what they were or what they did the public had respect for them. If you were a criminal you were getting caught for a crime and done for that crime, not stitched up with something that fits Oh dear you are talking rubbish Jinxer and I am being polite. Mind you your post did make me giggle thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinxer 43 Posted May 8, 2016 Author Share Posted May 8, 2016 1 hour ago, Remmy said: Oh dear you are talking rubbish Jinxer and I am being polite. Mind you your post did make me giggle thanks What bit did you find funny, the fact I said the Public had respect or the fact I said criminals got caught for crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remmy + 1,401 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jinxer said: What bit did you find funny, the fact I said the Public had respect or the fact I said criminals got caught for crimes. Well the fact that you believe that the police had respect. Take the rose tinted specs off life was hard back then for the great masses of the working class maybe your confusing fear with respect? Don't get me wrong I agree our culture as a whole may have been more respectful but this isn't without its problems, child sexual abuse being overlooked or ignored is but one example. But I don't agree that the public as a whole had more respect for the police, that's far too simplistic. But more amusing was this statement "If you were a criminal you were getting caught for a crime and done for that crime, not stitched up with something that fits". If you honestly believe that I suggest you start reading up on the modern history of police force and the reasons PACE was introduced in England & Wales. As a start read up on the old "Sus" laws. However please don't think I am saying the police of old was corrupt, but it was certainly more common. The police for all its faults has evolved enormously over recent decades and as a result is far more professional and accountable. Edited May 8, 2016 by Remmy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike88 + 257 Posted May 8, 2016 Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) 9 hours ago, Jinxer said: What bit did you find funny, the fact I said the Public had respect or the fact I said criminals got caught for crimes. Known criminals used to get unsolved crimes stuck on them that they probably hadn't even perpertrated. They'd be arrested on no evidence, have their statement written for them by officers and left in the cells until they signed it. That happened and it wasn't isolated. That is crazy. In what universe is the police being drunk okay?! I think standards now are better, there's less ill intent with setting people up etc. but still a whole lot of laziness or avoiding jobs. We still have some ways to go Many stations used to have bars and officers would have a few pints before going out on patrol, or drink in pubs while on duty and no one would bat an eyelid. My Dad told me once he was at a sudden death and a CID officer was so drunk he tripped over the body. Edited May 9, 2016 by mike88 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinxer 43 Posted May 9, 2016 Author Share Posted May 9, 2016 No way I don't believe that, What ???? you can't be saying Policemen got drunk at work, the next thing you'll have us believe is they used to knick our watches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewie_griffin + 484 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 10 hours ago, Remmy said: ... However please don't think I am saying the police of old was corrupt, but it was certainly more common. The police for all its faults has evolved enormously over recent decades and as a result is far more professional and accountable. The thing is, improvements in police accountability and professionalism have gone hand in hand with a loss of respect amongst the general public. I'm not sure that there's a simple explanation for this but some of it must be the fault of the police themselves. The other thing is nostalgia for a bygone age. I'm sure that many people alive today look back fondly to the year 1959 (the year in which the film was made) and yet male life expectancy the UK in 1959 was the same as it is today in Guatemala, or El Salvador. Yet people who say 'Things were better in 1959' aren't lying, they just have priorities other than life expectancy. My point is that people who say, 'The police were better in 1959' aren't lying either, they just have different priorities. Maybe those priorities aren't 'professionalism' 'accountability' 'corruption' or any of the other things that we commonly think of as being important. People want the police to a) Show up when called b) Show a presence on the streets c) Be generally nasty to the nasty people and good to the good people None of these things are easy, but somewhere along the line we've lost our way. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now