To all those wondering why police aren't investigating crime

[stillvicarinatutu]

Prompted by a discussion on here.

I'm a police officer and today we received an email from out chief constable to say that only 17% of incidents police in our force attend are for crime .

The other 83% are non crime related - mainly mental health issues. Police forces are now taking on the work of other agencies which means that they are not dealing with crime .

Partner agencies are so stretched the fall out is now being dealt with by police because we don't shut shop, don't only work 9-5 , and cannot say no .

I read and see regularly that police are criticised for not dealing with crime .

Well - this is why . Because we are picking up the slack from mental health, social services and medical incidents.

I think it's time for people to decide what they want from their police . If we weren't dealing with the 83 % of incidents that are not crime related then perhaps we could spend more time on the 17% that are . ?
I don't think people realise that this is happening to this extent .

[MangyInseam]

@Nidan2Sandan

Because they get called to these incidents. If a mentally unwell person is threatening to jump off a bridge, who attends? I can guarantee it isnt a mental health support worker, or a social worker, it's the Police.

If a mentally unwell person is being verbally abusive to a neighbour who gets called, the police not the support worker or the social worker.

Police are called for idiot arguments, neighbour disputes, noise. You only have to read on MN and see all the "log it with 101 OP" to see how often the Police are called.

It isnt on the Police that only 17% are attended, it's on the general public believing the Police are there to solve all our problems.

I'm a little curious as to what actually has changed though.

I am not in the UK so maybe it is different, but in my experience the police have always been the ones most likely to be called for this kind of mental health episode, for example. Lots of what the police have done has not been crime fighting in the sense people think of it.

I am not saying there are no changes, the huge trend in the 60s of de-institutionalization is huge I know. Just as one example.

Arguably some of how housing is managed - but I also think that is a bit more complicated even than just government divesting from public housing. Increased density, more and more people, and communities being less stable is also a huge factor which has frankly been encouraged by governments all across the west.

But I really think there are some other elements. I see drugs have changed communities I would not have expect to be touched just in the last 10 years, particularly meth. And the same thing happened with other drugs when they started to appear in communities here in large amounts the late 60s early 70s.

I always a remember an interview I saw with the American economist Thomas Sowell. It was mainly about a different topic, but he talked a bit about growing up in Harlem in the 40s, and how when it was hot, people would sleep out on their fire escapes, or go to the park and sleep. Not homeless people - families. And this was considered normal and quite safe.

There was not huge amounts of public money going into managing crime or other social issues at that point in the US, or in Harlem. That's not what is changed, and I would suggest this is also the case where I live and in the UK and quite a few other countries too.

We are using the police to mop up a plethora of social problems but I just don't think it's all about shifting work on to them that was done before by others.

[robotchez]

This is why we need abolition of police

[Pixiedust1234]

@robotchez

This is why we need abolition of police

with what? The army? How stupid.

[Bobbleballbags]

I have a question if you don't mind op. I have a brother, he's currently homeless but lived with my mum for quite some time. We have had quite a bit of police involvement over the years because of his behaviour. He's mentally unwell, but in my opinion it all stems from, and is exacerbated by, his alcohol and drug use.

The majority of times the police have been involved has been because he has presented a very real risk either to others (e.g. being violent towards me/ other members of our family), or to himself (e.g. behaving in a way that puts him at risk of harm but not necessarily suicidally). Would those count as police attending crimes or would they count as mental health calls?

For example, I'm thinking of times he has been physically violent to other people, or behaved in very aggressive/threatening ways - basically things that I think would definitely count as crime in most circumstances - but is clearly not compos mentis. I'm just curious how they get categorised.

[FromageRouge]

@stillvicarinatutu

What I'm saying is for every 100 incidents called in to the police only 17 of those are for actual crimes - it's not that we are only attending 17% - it's that only 17% of the calls for our service are crime related.

17% is a startling figure and other services undoubtedly need better funding.

TBF, though, if police forces stopped their recent trends for “checking thinking” and vigorously pursuing non-crime SJW- type issues, they could free up some bandwidth.

Until they do, the public impression that police deliberately waste their own time is going to be hard to shake off.

[StarDolphins]

I agree. Same with A&E - more MH & domestic issues than anything else. There needs to be way more funds put into MH to free up police/ambulances & A&E.

[ChilliBandit]

@Pixiedust1234 - the idea is you better fund mental health services and work on crime prevention like lifting people out of poverty, services for addicts and you can then have a much slimmed down Police force or non at all. Given the OP claims they only spend 17% of their time on crime anyway I don’t think people would notice much.

[underneaththeash]

@stillvicarinatutu

Prompted by a discussion on here.

I'm a police officer and today we received an email from out chief constable to say that only 17% of incidents police in our force attend are for crime .

The other 83% are non crime related - mainly mental health issues. Police forces are now taking on the work of other agencies which means that they are not dealing with crime .

Partner agencies are so stretched the fall out is now being dealt with by police because we don't shut shop, don't only work 9-5 , and cannot say no .

I read and see regularly that police are criticised for not dealing with crime .

Well - this is why . Because we are picking up the slack from mental health, social services and medical incidents.

I think it's time for people to decide what they want from their police . If we weren't dealing with the 83 % of incidents that are not crime related then perhaps we could spend more time on the 17% that are . ?
I don't think people realise that this is happening to this extent .

The police should do what the ambulance service and A&E should do as well and say that that isn't their department.

[FromageRouge]

@robotchez

This is why we need abolition of police

🙄

Right. So once you get that abolition, who will you call if someone assaults you, steals your car or tries to abduct your child?

[ChilliBandit]

Oh I forgot the police also attended the vigil or Sarah Everard and brutally arrested the women peacefully showing their respects. Not sure if that falls under crime or not?

[Brefugee]

tbh what happened at the vigil looked from outside much more like what used to happen at my company in terms of sales at month end. As in "quick, make a push to get more numbers in before end of business". Low hanging fruit: must have been a relatively easy shout for them.

And even if any police (or others here) come and say "no no no that's wrong" - meh. That is exactly what it looks like. See also visiting people about their tweets.

[Florenz]

Too many people join the police for the wrong reasons nowadays, they just see it as a career, not a vocation. They couldn't care less about crime or the victims of crime.

[stillvicarinatutu]

What's changed is that people used to phone 999 in an emergency.

They'd be asked police , fire or ambulance.

Police dealt with crime happening, or that's happened.

Fire dealt with fires and cutting people out of cars

Ambulance dealt with medical issues .

Now we are dealing with more and more that other agencies should be - such as social services, schools, parents , mental health services, drug and alcohol services.

We do try to get to every incident that's created- however if someone rings saying there is someone in a car smoking a spliff for instance, and it gets out on as a non emergency (which it isn't let's face it ) by the time an officer is free to view that incident it could be 10 hours later - they aren't going to still be there ! So no point attending that .

Incidents are triaged. The risky jobs are attended first . So emergency calls - graded emergency are first

Then everything else is graded by threat , harm and risk . If it's deemed a low risk , it goes down the queue . Someone will get there eventually if it's not like the example I gave above - but someone slashing their wrists will take priority over a burglary for instance .
So we are not getting to deal with crime - now it's always been that police would go to back up ambulance etc but now the police are left to deal . The workload has become less about crime and solving it / preventing it and more about chasing our tails running around after other agencies workload.

Police should primarily fight crime .

And we can't . We've become a Jack of all trades . It's not sustainable.

[MangyInseam]

@ChilliBandit

All the police officers I know (about as 10 lots of police in my family) vote Tory so I am not sympathetic when they moan about cuts, Not saying you do OP, I just do not get it.

Having been sat in my local A&E for 12 hours recently I saw at least 8 officers (2 x 4 pairs) over that period very patiently waiting with people having mental health crises. But I don’t think it’s fair for you put this on the public. They shouldn’t have to choose between a functioning NHS and a functioning police force. Aim your frustration at the government.

As a member of the public I would like people with mental health crisis to get appropriate help and I don’t think the police are right for this. I would also like the police to help me when I am stuck in my house because men are fighting outside on the street damaging cars or when teenagers are throwing stones at people walking past. It’s not right I have to choose between the two.

I don't know that I think this is surprising, and I think maybe it would be a worthwhile to consider what's really going on with this.

I have a fair number of family members who work in social services. The overwhelming sense in many of these sectors, and what they are explicitly taught in the social work schools, is that problems like drug addiction, domestic issues, etc, are all caused by lack of social justice, and there is a real sense that the people who are caught up in these problems have no agency as such.

I am not saying all people in social work believe this, they don't. But a lot do and the services act as if they do to a large extent. It can be hard for those who are not of that viewpoint to stick around in some cases too.

But there are plenty of people who deal with the really nasty criminal side of all of this, who don't think tat is the whole story. That creating a system dependency that de-emphasises agency and people making choices for themselves actually does not help people in trouble overall.

I think there is something to that. You see very much the same thing in successful addiction programs. Yes, they may offer supports, but the first step is always having people take responsibility in some way for their own inner life, their choices, for dealing with their past and how they have affected others. Social ills that trap people are, even if they are not caused by drugs, often very similar in the way they work.

I generally find people in the police have a very strong sense that this kind of step is necessary, and they see the total social justice model as being very negative. It's not just a matter of wanting to be punitive. And left parties tend to be very light on that kind of thinking.

[Kumri]

Thank your for taking the time to explain, OP. How depressing. Schools seem to be in a similar position of very little time to teach because so busy being a social service running food banks and safeguaridng interventions etc.

A lot of this goes back to the collapse of the NHS and social service, then ☹️

[fallfallfall]

Yesterday I saw an adult male, hunker down and take a full poop in a shop doorway. This on the city’s Main Street of shops. A security guard from a shop across the street had her radio ready. I don’t have a solution my ideas are considered against his human rights, horrible the police are stuck with this task and the shop owner having to clean it up.

[Pixiedust1234]

@ChilliBandit

@Pixiedust1234 - the idea is you better fund mental health services and work on crime prevention like lifting people out of poverty, services for addicts and you can then have a much slimmed down Police force or non at all. Given the OP claims they only spend 17% of their time on crime anyway I don’t think people would notice much.

Abolition is the criminals wet dream . Normal, critical thinking people don't want it as it actually doesn't solve the problem. We will always need them and its stupid and dangerous to suggest otherwise. I cant see how doing what you suggest will stop the rapists or modern day slavery, but you know that.

[FromageRouge]

@stillvicarinatutu

What's changed is that people used to phone 999 in an emergency.

They'd be asked police , fire or ambulance.

Police dealt with crime happening, or that's happened.

Fire dealt with fires and cutting people out of cars

Ambulance dealt with medical issues .

Now we are dealing with more and more that other agencies should be - such as social services, schools, parents , mental health services, drug and alcohol services.

We do try to get to every incident that's created- however if someone rings saying there is someone in a car smoking a spliff for instance, and it gets out on as a non emergency (which it isn't let's face it ) by the time an officer is free to view that incident it could be 10 hours later - they aren't going to still be there ! So no point attending that .

Incidents are triaged. The risky jobs are attended first . So emergency calls - graded emergency are first

Then everything else is graded by threat , harm and risk . If it's deemed a low risk , it goes down the queue . Someone will get there eventually if it's not like the example I gave above - but someone slashing their wrists will take priority over a burglary for instance .
So we are not getting to deal with crime - now it's always been that police would go to back up ambulance etc but now the police are left to deal . The workload has become less about crime and solving it / preventing it and more about chasing our tails running around after other agencies workload.

Police should primarily fight crime .

And we can't . We've become a Jack of all trades . It's not sustainable.

Why do you think the public are the drivers for this? The idea that police should be involved in various non/crime incidents came from lots of places, but not generally from the public.

Various public sectors bodies have become so risk adverse that they want police presence for all sorts of things, and so underfunded by government that the overspill falls on to the police.

Campaigners for various causes have decided that “institutional capture” of the police is a good strategic move so that now police time is being used for frivolous things like checking pronoun use and recording ideological “non-crime incidents”.

None of this came from Joe or Joanna Bloggs. Although The Bloggs are often directed now to report things to the police that aren’t crime.

[stillvicarinatutu]

@Florenz

Too many people join the police for the wrong reasons nowadays, they just see it as a career, not a vocation. They couldn't care less about crime or the victims of crime.

A career ? You work 24/7 shifts , 365 days a year . Get assaulted. And the starting salary is 19k . It's hardly a career. You could earn more in Aldi.

[ChilliBandit]

@Pixiedust1234

Abolition is the criminals wet dream . Normal, critical thinking people don't want it as it actually doesn't solve the problem. We will always need them and its stupid and dangerous to suggest otherwise. I cant see how doing what you suggest will stop the rapists or modern day slavery, but you know that.

It’s not my suggestion, I was just explaining the theory behind it. It’s not just get rid of the police tomorrow. I do think there will always be a need for the police but I do think large scale reform is needed too.

[FromageRouge]

@Pixiedust1234

Abolition is the criminals wet dream . Normal, critical thinking people don't want it as it actually doesn't solve the problem. We will always need them and its stupid and dangerous to suggest otherwise. I cant see how doing what you suggest will stop the rapists or modern day slavery, but you know that.

Absolutely. Reform is one thing. Abolition is quite another. There has never been a credible expectation in the whole of social science endeavour that you can abolish crime entirely by anti- poverty and other social measures. Crime and deviance is much more complex than that.

[gold22]

I'm a police officer too and fee the same in regards to picking up the slack for other services.

Category 2 ambulance for someone having a stroke, police to attend on a grade 1, family kick off with police because they want ambulance, ambulance unallocated but have a 45min wait time 🤷🏻‍♀️

Sat in hospital all night with a 136 patience because there was not 1 MH doctor available to attend for the whole force area because someone made a mistake with a rota, we were told doctors have lives when it was questioned.

2 15yr old kids who got the last train to force area rang up at 1am to say they wanted a lift back to their home area over an hour away and knew we had to do it because they were classed as missings, parents not bothered and refused to pick them up telling us it was on us. When chatting with them they had done this on numerous occasions and were talking about where they were going to do it to next- this left 0 patrol free for actual emergencies.

[Brefugee]

A career ? You work 24/7 shifts , 365 days a year . Get assaulted. And the starting salary is 19k . It's hardly a career. You could earn more in Aldi.

disingenuous, OP, and i was hoping this thread wouldn't descend to that kind of trash. Of course it is a career. Starting pay for anything should be low or else you can't progres.

And if you don't know it's 24/7/365 when you sign on, you haven't been paying enough attention. You also have a pension and career progression and training. work hard, keep your nose clean and brown-nose the right people, you could be the next Cressida Dick.

People who work in Aldi get assaulted and spat on too, btw.

[ChilliBandit]

@MangyInseam - I have a huge amount of sympathy for addicts, I recognise it’s a cycle of addiction, poverty, petty crime that’s incredibly hard to break out of. But when I am in physical danger I need someone to help and at the moment my only option is the police, except they don’t turn up. I’d love to be able to call on a social worker or MH professional to assist but I can’t.

[FromageRouge]

@stillvicarinatutu

A career ? You work 24/7 shifts , 365 days a year . Get assaulted. And the starting salary is 19k . It's hardly a career. You could earn more in Aldi.

Oh it’s you vicar. You know this isn’t all coming from public demand really, don’t you? You do sound very fed up.