Police numbers - reduced!!

[Trumpton]

[steve56]

Bring Back The Sweeney!

[Trumpton]

!laugh! Sir.

[Officer Dibble]

"and replacing them with admin staff."

What, you mean yet more bureaucrats?




Officer Dibble







Officium Dibblus est amplus amor deus

[Sam Slater]

If it means more police on the streets rather than behind a desk then I'm all for bureaucrats.

It may save money as well as an administrator behind a desk isn't a copper, and won't be on coppers wages.

[Officer Dibble]

"It may save money as well as an administrator behind a desk isn't a copper, and won't be on coppers wages."

How can it save money? Coppers have been catching crooks and doing their own paperwork since time immemorial. So how can bringing in loads more bureaucrats on 25k a year to do jobs that were already being done by police officers make any kind of financial or business sense? I private firm would go bankrupt if it followed those principles.

The issue here is of course bureaucracy. It may be the case that coppers have less time to deal with crooks due to the huge increase in bureaucracy and political correctness during the last decade. But how come we managed just fine with minimal bureaucracy up to 1997? Shouldn't we be cutting bureaucracy? Cutting unnecessary paperwork and PC bollocks? Why can't we sack the bureaucrats, give the coppers an extra 10k a year and let them see to their own reduced paperwork? I'm sure they?d agree to that. I?m sure the majority of folks (taxpayers) would rather pay a bit more for efficient multi-tasking coppers then pay a lot more for legions of paper pushing bureaucrats.

But of course the more bureaucrats there are, the more people will be beholden to a Brown government. Maybe there?s method in NuLabour?s bureaucracy madness?




Officer Dibble







Officium Dibblus est amplus amor deus






.

[Officer Dibble]

"Why anyone would want to spent years and many thousands of pounds training someone to catch rapists and then pay them to sit behind a desk defeats me. "

Yes, me too. So let's put the kybosh on all that form filling. Let's kick the gender and diversity awareness indoctrination sessions into touch and dispense with the bureaucrats who administer it all. Lets get back to real Jack Regan policing - catching crooks, chavs, pikeys, nonces, etc. Before giving them a good slap and throwing them in clink. Because that's all that's required.

And what?s this about rapists being given free reign prior to 1997? As far as I can recall rape has always been considered one of the more serious crimes and prosecuted accordingly, under whatever government. I don?t recall hordes of rapists being on the loose prior to 1997. Certainly no more than today? What an odd thing to say.

Whether crime is falling or not depends on who?s spinning the statistics. So, in that case, it?s not surprising that people fall back on their own experiences and trust their own senses when forming an opinion about crime. One or two things are clear. People are far less inhibited about committing crime and assaulting other people than when I was a lad. Whereas before you might have risked getting a thump if you were involved in any street ?bother?, now you risked being shot, stabbed or beaten to death ? as we see on an almost weekly basis.





Officer Dibble







Officium Dibblus est amplus amor deus

[Deuce Bigolo]

Just more out sourcing Trumpy

If you really wanted to reduce police numbers just stop the pointless war against illicit drugs which we've been losing for god know how many years

Better yet nab the drugs and start selling it for next to nothing
Then at least some of the petty crime committed by junkies would decrease