Saturday, 11 March 2006
Friday, 10 March 2006
The lady in the photograph is a heroine. Aged 82, she was banned from a local pub for refusing to take off her hat. The ban on hats was brought in so that CCTV could get a good look at the usual clientele of baseball-capped hoodie-wearing yobs.
Nobody in authority (Hah!) in the pub could understand that 82-year-old ladies hardly ever smash up pubs or assault staff and other drinkers, so the hat and the lady were declared to be unwelcome.
For her part, the lady stated that she was of an age and generation where a hat was de-rigeur.
This came to me by way of a newsletter that I subscribe to. I note that it has been bought by the NHS. Shame that lack of funds prevented the one development that would have been of real value. If it were possible to wire these into the National Grid, I would forego some of the money spent on me in other directions. Oh - I also volunteer to press the button when the slightest tumesence is detected.
penile plethysmograph (PPG)
The penile plethysmograph (pluh-THIZ-muh-graf) (PPG) is a machine for measuring changes in the circumference of the penis. A stretchable band with mercury in it is fitted around the subject's penis. The band is connected to a machine with a video screen and data recorder. Any changes in penis size, even those not felt by the subject, are recorded while the subject views sexually suggestive or pornographic pictures, slides, or movies, or listens to audio tapes with descriptions of such things as children being molested.
Just in case my inclusion of this leads for calls for me to be so analysed (!), please read the whole thing.
Wednesday, 8 March 2006
It amused me during training when we were shown the ‘corporate’ image of the police. Members of the public (good or bad) that we deal with are referred to as customers to our business and true to this senior management are no longer leaders but managers. In fact we can’t call them superior officers any more – they’re supervisors.
What amazes me is how wrong the police have managed to get the corporate image. If I walk into a show room looking into buying a car I may have a priority feature. Let’s say I want a fast car. Really fast. Don’t care about anything else as long as it’s faster than faeces off a shovel after a particularly hot curry. Unfortunately I’m also aware it’s not free, it’s going to cost some dollar. Now as I don’t build cars or design them I go to a firm that has been doing it for years. After all they know how to design a car and all about aerodynamics and engines and the like. I don’t. I give them as much money as I can afford for the fastest damn car they’ll give me for it. Guess what? The car goes fast. Yes, it might break down a few times, but then I wanted it fast not efficient, otherwise they’d have sold me a different car altogether. It’s not that comfortable either, it tends to be a bit bumpy as the suspension is quite hard. And despite ‘the customer always being right’ they wouldn’t sell me a car that was just as fast, efficient and comfortable. Not because they didn’t want to – because I couldn’t bloody afford it!
Now, call me old fashioned… and perhaps I’m going to be wrong about this one but I thought the police were there to stop crime. In fact I thought we knew quite a bit about it – the prisons are full after all. We’re not social workers, councillors or otherwise. We know how to build a fast car, councils are better at building comfortable, slow ones.
So why do we try and let the customer tell us how to build our type of car?! I don’t care how much they say they feel comfortable seeing a police officer walking the beat or how much they think it deters crime, I’m sorry to say it doesn’t. Nor does us doing it in fluorescent jackets! In fact if anything it makes crime a damn sight easier because they know exactly where we are. To build our fast cars we need LESS visibility. We need the criminal about to shoplift to wonder if the person buying a sandwich is in fact a plain clothes police officer ready to jump on him.
And guess what? Although we’d love to stop crime in the first place crime is still going to happen somewhere we’re not. Now we could do as you want and walk there or we could try and catch the person responsible for it by getting there quickly in a car. And before you try and tell me how to build my bloody fast car again no we can’t always do both, we don’t have enough mechanics working on this car and you won’t pay what it would cost to hire them.
We want to stop crime, we REALLY do. But whilst we’re spending time looking at a space where your car once was or bumbling down your residential road on foot lit up like a Christmas tree we could be saving lives or keeping an eye on the person we know stole your car in the first place and maybe even catch him at it. When we build that car people will make room on their drive for it, alongside that MPV estate they bought from the council down the road. That one might be more fuel efficient but we all know which one you enjoy the most.
In 24 hours, more than 100 calls about snowball incidents were reported to police in south east Kent. Police reminded the public, that people throwing snowballs could be prosecuted for assualt in cases where they are used to attack people causing injury. In one incident, a stone hidden in a snowball hit a moving bus and caused £1,000 damage. "We are not being killjoys and know children enjoy having fun in the snow. What we are saying is - do it safely," said Ch Insp Paul Wilczek.
Well, I'm glad we got out alive. Massive cash heists and now this!
Tuesday, 7 March 2006
| Sith Lord |
You scored -50 on the Force Sensitivity/Jedi Chart!
| Other Sith like you are: Darth Vader, Count Dooku (Darth Tyranus), Darth Revan and Darth Malak. |
|My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender:|
|Link: The Jedi Test written by zabomb on Ok Cupid, home of the 32-Type Dating Test|
Monday, 6 March 2006
Police blogs are dropping like flies. Internal investigation committees are being set up, and mass emails sent to police to warn them of the dangers of blogging. Thats what I've heard anyway...
On a serious note, I can understand why senior management don't like blogs. It is very, very rare that a blog expresses their agreement with an 'official policy', and sings the praises of what a good job the police are doing. On the whole, blogs are used to rant and rave about them. With these 'anti-policy' views being thrown about, its no wonder they are slightly perturbed. However, going around threatening blogs is not the best way to deal with this!
Have any of you ever wondered why we write blogs? Why we spend our own free time putting our thoughts down on virtual paper, for all to see? The simple reason is because no matter how much we talk at work, no one is listening. There are NO forums for ordinary police officers to stand up and say "Thats good on paper, but THIS is what happens on the street". We can't knock on your doors and say "We've tried this policy, and I know it makes you look good to the public, but its causing more problems for us, because of THIS". There really isn't any way for us to do this.
We can't speak to our supervisors about the problems that policy causes - well to be more accurate, we could but it won't help. Sergeants are just as annoyed at most of them as us, and could only pass them to the inspectors. Inspectors are too busy managing all of the teams and policies, and might pass them to the Superintendants. The Superintendants are 1) Too busy playing buzzword bingo at the latest meeting and 2) Too far removed from the ordinary officer on the street to understand the problems brought to them.
Blogging is our only way to vent our frustration, and yes, we do want the public to know how frustrated we are (and WHY we are frustrated) because all that senior management teams care about is the view they give to the public. I honestly believe that senior management teams don't actually care anymore about catching criminals or solving crimes, which is what every officer joined to do. They only care about getting that extra detection, making those statistics look a little better, putting one more high visibility jacket (doesn't matter if its an officer or a PCSO) out onto the street so that the public will see them.
I could be wrong. Perhaps I have badly misjudged you. Its possible - I've never met you. I've never seen you. I've only read your blanket emails, seen your name at the bottom of every new policy. If I am wrong, and you truly do care, give us a proper chance to speak.
Sunday, 5 March 2006
| You are a |
You are best described as a:
Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid
Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test
One of the things mentioned in the warning was
....... the 'impact of expressing views and opinions that are damaging to the organisation or bring the organisation into disrepute' must be considered. Disciplinary proceedings may be considered.We have not seen very much of the Commissioner Blair recently. I am sure that there is a damned good case for considering how his 'views and opinions brought the organisation into disrepute' at the time the man on the tube train was executed. Even if one ignores his reckless making of statements that were untrue, there is the situation where he was the head of a force that came into disrepute and he has a responsibility there. Has that ever been considered? Will we see disciplinary proceedings instituted against him?
Another point I am uneasy about is the general state of the force. None of the blogs I read - and I think I got just about every one there was - were insubordinate as I would regard it in a disciplined force sort of way. All appeared reasonable in expressing frustration at the way the force was organised which reduced the service they should be giving the general public. So, why did these reasonable police officers feel that there was no point in addressing matters through their chain of command? There will always be malcontents in any organisation. None of the bloggers I read came into this category; I saw enough disgruntled employees in my own civilian career to recognise them. What though will be the effect of this unnecessary censorship? Will it send the writers and their friends off in a state of excitement at the way their organisation values them and the way they perform their duties?