How significant is this report that claims the public feels police officers are "more interested in being woke than solving crimes"?

[JellySaurus]

Home Secretary should reform failing police forces - think tank https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-627323366^

Very pleased to see this statement, and the BBC reporting it, but is it going to make a difference?

ok - he has a loads of dolls of say from non-white back ground which he performs various gross things to in his home because of prejudices he has against ethnicities? nothing illegal done.

People do all sorts of particularly awful legal and consensual things in their homes. Are you advocating for them all to be put on a register?

Why is whether a man has ethnic dolls he role plays grim things with at home where no one else can see him, anything to do with his ability to work in a school? It's fascinating to see how much police think they should be able to monitor and interfere in private lives. I don't want misogynistic men who look at hardcore porn to teach my kids, is that ok? Can there be a list?

PCSO's don't have any powers of arrest, any more than you do or any police liaison officer does.

@Felix125 not quite true, they can make an arrest under Section 24A of PACE (commonly known as a "citizen's arrest"). Four forces equip their

However I can see why no crimes are solved if you guys don't even understand the concept of a crime, or a resolution to the crime. You seem to be spending all your time on non-crime. Which is the point of the original article.

This, in a nutshell.

I think this sums up the public perception of the problem.

The police are, quite properly, concerned that a caller claims that someone has stickers which can be seen by the public from outside the property, which are inciting hatred and threatening personal harm to a group of people. The police feel that this must be investigated, so two officers are sent.

someone else rings up to say that a gang of youths is terrorising children in a local park. The police record the incident. No further action is taken.

Someone rings up to say that their house has been burgled. The police give them a number so they can claim on their house insurance.

It’s a question of priorities, or perceived priorities.

Sorry only just seen this - she posted that her complaint was nearly ready yesterday on the bird app.

What we are forgetting though, is that where Non-Crime Hate Incidents are concerned, there is no discretion, no common sense, and no due process. When someone says that an action you made which is not a crime (perhaps you moved your bag when they entered a room) and claims that they perceive it to have motivated by hostility, the suspect is automatically guilty and can effectively have sentence passed upon their future employment prospects without their knowledge and without opportunity to appeal.

What 'safeguarding' is going on here I wonder...

Here are some officers safeguarding some bottles of urine at the EHRC

I had to explain pegging to my dh the other day

do you think someone needs to explain the whole doggy thing to those officers?

People can be tracked by there date of birth? Do you have any idea how many people were born on the same date as you? Same time? I had someone with the same exact first and last name as me at my school same again different person at my place of work when I got married I shared the same name including middle name with ex husband aunt

My ex can pass a dbs its not infallible

I just came to post that! Instead of arresting him, his urine now gets more protection than women.

It's a well known loophole.

Well known apart from the police it would seem.

What we are forgetting though, is that where Non-Crime Hate Incidents are concerned, there is no discretion, no

No point whingeing about the police they don't make the laws. It's Gov.

Indeed, mercifully things have started shifting recently. NCHIs were in response to the MacPherson report into the handling of the murder of Stephen Lawrence. Hard cases make bad law.

You may have missed the post where a female PCSO, if they complained enough, would have been able to get a female police officer posting on this thread a Non crime hate incident logged, on the records of a female with a sticker in her window.

The discretion and decision to carry out this, is on the police officer deciding to log this. The female would have no knowledge, no right of appeal and no idea until it comes back on a DBS check.

And yet when I suggested that the serving police officer's language towardds us on the thread was abusive and offensive, they ran a mile, deleted all their posts and cried about their job being important to them. Not in any way comprehending that it might also be the same for the female with a sticker in her window.

The police are the ones with all the power here.

Yes: one of the most shocking realisations of this thread has been that they regard what they do as only a job with apparently no understanding of the effect the appearance a police officer on the doorstep asking about stickers and reading material can have on law-abiding, concerned citizens. As the judge said in Harry's case, we don't have the Cheka or the Stasi here, picking people up for what they might be reading or thinking.

I'm just going to say that as a lurker some of the police officers on mn have given good advice and support to a lot of women on the other boards about domestic violence, relationship boards , sexual abuse for years.

These women supported other women.
Why not talk to them ? Is this what we've come to ? So set in our beliefs and opinions that if someone disagrees they must be a man , or lying or fair game to blame for systemic failings and mistrust ?
What a shame for the women those women helped and might have helped in future.

I'm glad they've supported women on other threads. Here they have refused to listen to all the women telling them something they don't want to hear.

From what I could see they weren't the only ones refusing to listen.

You might have done women in need of that kind of advice a disservice if they have left mn .

I understand what you are trying to say but I don't think anyone wins when other women lose out because of a need to be seen as right .

The hostility was palpable. I do t know if anyone else would say it but there was a missed opportunity on this thread . Not just from the two officers .

I will continue to lurk . Best wishes.

If you have a point, make it.

Who else refused to listen, and to who?

Who had to be seen as right when the whole thread is about the behaviour of the police in not doing their job?

What was this missed opportunity?

Why lurk, come and tell us off for not doing it right and then lurk again? Show us how to explain to two police officer in ways they will get it without upsetting them. I await your superior skills...

I'm glad they've supported women on other threads. Here they have refused to listen to all the women telling them something they don't want to hear.

This.

Sorry only just seen this - she posted that her complaint was nearly ready yesterday on the bird app.

Thank you, great news.

What we are forgetting though, is that where Non-Crime Hate Incidents are concerned, there is no discretion, no

There is though. Read the revised College of Policing guidelines in response to the Harry Miller court victory.

I posted a link to a blog by barrister Sarah Phillimore upthread. It says that it's possible to record for "hate" stats without identifying the person. Which I also take issue with because the stats are inflated trumped up bullshit, but it's a start.

Alisondonut

Why lurk, come and tell us off for not doing it right and then lurk again? Show us how to explain to two police officer in ways they will get it without upsetting them. I await your superior skills...

Is this a public forum where discussion and debate is allowed or have I misunderstood? Remarks like this do prove my point in terms of the hostility.
Why is it necessary to be facetious?
It looks like a dictatorship, (or the stasi?) agree with me or feel my wrath ....is that what mn is now ? I thought you didn't want to live in a dictatorship and that was the point of the thread?

If you just dismiss any other discussion or god forbid an opinion that differs - is that not what this becomes?

It's a public forum. Not an exclusive members only club - or have I got that completely wrong ?

Forgive me if I have but I've never seen a discussion on mn where everyone had to agree with one particular stance.

If that's what this is I'm probably on the wrong forum .