to think that Labour's stance on moped ramming is stupid

[longfingernails]

The Metropolitan Police have been knocking over moped muggers with their cars, and releasing the footage as a deterrent. It's a fantastic idea which has cut moped crime dramatically.

Predictably, the Shadow Home Secretary has said 'it shouldn't be legal for anyone'.

Why is Labour's instinct always to side with the scumbag criminals over the victims, the police and the decent people?

The pursuits are one of the things that put the public further at risk. Stopping them instead of a chase is safer.

www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwic9aL24_neAhWqzoUKHasQAFsQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.standard.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fcrime%2Fdanny-pearce-murder-man-25-guilty-of-repeatedly-stabbing-young-father-to-death-for-5k-rolex-in-a3858991.html&psig=AOvVaw2UzJIKwRpiIhyAORXMJxml&ust=1543587030384689
This one around the corner from me

No, it isn't, NoThankYouHun. I work in London every day and have yet to come across feral conduct.

Hahahahah

There are hives of mopeds running roughshod all over Fulham. They take whatever they like while organising future crimes. An absolute menace.

KissingInTheRain - the point a PP was making is that it has deterred crime, i say it just moves it on! NOT that we shouldn't arrest and charge/imprison the criminals.

One thing i think that has been lost in Policing is that (so called) minor offences, shop lifting, car & van theft, class B drug use is now tolerated by the police.
Committing these crimes with impunity leads to far more serious crimes being committed.
This comes down to resource.

So, we ve just had a Police force say they only look at 30% of reported crime, what message does that send to the criminal fraternity?

Miscible But at the incident, surely the police should use what ever force necessary, it would be to late to radio in for a motorcycle policeman

Adequate police funding, the use of motor bikes or scooters that can pursue mopeds effectively.

They tried that where I live. The cost of matching the number of gangs on scooters was prohibitive. It doesn’t work.

What does work - and is proven to work - is knocking over criminals on mopeds and arresting them.

Minor crime is not “tolerated”. They simply don’t have the resorces to deal with them.

And yes, I completely agree that if we get on top of minor crime and intervene at an early stage that we can prevent offenders escalating their behaviour however those days are gone now.

hesta Not to mention you would need several motorbike cops to deal with passenger and pillion passenger.

@Miscible is going to come back to say that these don't count because the muggers don't have "privilege". London is turning into the Wild West, yet people are still wringing their hands.

jasjas

I accept that. We do need to spend more on all areas of social intervention. Prison policy is especially awful.

But enforcement will always be necessary.

Why would anyone think a high speed pursuit putting the public at risk is preferable to this? If it is the criminals you care about, this method also risks their safety far more.

*For clarity, a high speed pursuit is more dangerous to the criminals that a tactical knock.

Puzzledandpissedoff In a civilised society, people wouldn’t be being mugged etc

I totally agree, but can't quite see how this kind of "justice" would help either

To my mind, what's needed is more of a zero tolerance approach to stop criminality escalating from little things to much more serious offences ... it worked to an extent under Guiliani in New York and there's no reason it couldn't here if the will existed

I realise of course that this would mean a lot more resources, but that needn't be impossible if money was channelled to the right things instead of being spent on hordes of people to tell us how offenders aren't really to blame and all the rest

Nicknacky - but until we go back to those days, we are always going to fighting fires and substituting one crime wave with another.

Its a political decision.

The police have made perfectly clear that these tactics are only used when they’re sure that the riders have been properly identified as suspects and have been given full opportunity to stop.

Because the police have such a good record for the infallibility of their judgments.

There's an illustration of the the police intercepting moped thieves using bikes without knocking anyone off.

Puzzledandpissedoff can you suggest a better way to apprehend a dangerous offender on a moped? I don't think anybody would disagree with wider crime prevention methods but that doesn't prevent attacks that are happening now.

jasjas We will probably never get back to those days. So we need to deal with serious crime as effectively as possible and try protect the public. This isn’t weans stealing sweetie from Woolies, it’s violent offenders. A couple of the videos I watched earlier they had electric saws as weapon. Fuck me, that’s horrific.

Miscible pursuits increase danger to everybody. Why do you think that method is preferable?

@TwistedStitch - because she priorises criminals over the law abiding citizens they prey on.

miscible errrrr the first biker nudges into the offender so how is that any different? And it’s fairly obvious watching that that the offenders weren’t tooled up with saws and machetes.

And they stopped at red lights lol!

Because the police have such a good record for the infallibility of their judgments.

Another argument against all police powers.🙄

There are no doubt examples of moped robbers - they are not thieves: they are violent offenders - handing themselves in. Nobody would get hurt then.

I don’t regard that as a reason not to knock over suspects properly identified either.

I've just watched that video. The police were brilliant. BUT the police were also put at risk of being injured either in a collision or by the offender. In London the likelihood is that the moped gang is armed. How can you be sure they will run off like they did in this video and not stab the police officer or throw acid in their face? Why is it better to put the police and wider public at risk than knock them off their bike?

Hesta54, the point is that with adequate funding to cover all policing, it shouldn't be necessary to radio for anyone. It would make sense, for instance, to have regular or motorbike patrols in areas where this type of theft is known to happen.

miscible even before the cuts it would have been impossible to have enough specialist officers on bikes to be in enough areas to stop these attacks happing. They aren’t isolated to one small area.

TwistedStitch, by that token we should simply invite the police to shoot at anyone they think might be a criminal. After all, when they run after a shoplifter, how can they be sure they won't throw acid at them?