Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: noobree Jul 16 2009, 11:55 AM

I think I read in the NWN recently that crime rates in Newbury had increased by 30% in the last year.

I've never been one to argue that simply having more police presence is the solution because life's more complicated than that. It's impossible for the police to be everywhere and there are lots of arguments against the idea of having more coppers on the beat discourages criminals (e.g. they can see the boys and girls in uniform just as easily as we can and they just lie low until the area is clear).

However, the constant drip of burglaries seems to be worsening by the day. Maybe not a Tsunami yet (where we lived before we were burgalled 3 times and that was par for the course) but something bad is happening. And down here south of the river we rarely see either police on the beat.

My guess is that TVP concentrate their personpower in Reading and other hotspots and that leafy Newbury gets a bad deal.

Are there any pf the girls and boys in blue on here who could shed some anonymous light on the problem? Maybe the whole thing has been caused by Neigbourhood Action Groups - crime has certainly rocketed since they were established!!

Posted by: Iommi Jul 16 2009, 12:09 PM

I understand that Reading gets the lion's share in police resources (in terms of police per square mile) and Newbury, by comparison, is quiet.

Posted by: GMR Jul 16 2009, 01:57 PM

Whether one agrees that Newbury is a bad crime area or not it is starting to get a reputation. I was speaking to somebody who has never been to Newbury and they said "Oh, you live in Newbury.... I wouldn't like to live there with all that crime."

Posted by: scott Jul 16 2009, 04:27 PM

LOL

where do they live? moss side? are our local small time crimes being reported nationally now? (lets be fair, burglary, fights, etc are pretty small time. touch wood, cant remember a murder etc for a long time)

Posted by: GMR Jul 16 2009, 06:22 PM

All I know is that they come from up North.

Usually if you mention Newbury they say "Where is that?" and then you have to explain Vodafone, Newbury Racecourse and near the Hungerford massacre before the penny drops.

Posted by: anon123 Jul 16 2009, 06:37 PM

Your opening post was spot on noobree. those that are left at Newbury are over worked, under manned and dispite what most might think, Work damm hard to look after the area and do the best job they can.

That said, I wouldnt live anywhere else, I love the town!

Posted by: JeffG Jul 16 2009, 07:20 PM

Ooh! (<-note the disguise)

Do I detect (pun!) an anonymous police presence? I look forward to seeing the other side of the argument put in other posts where the police are discussed. Can only be good for public relations.

Posted by: Biker1 Jul 16 2009, 07:34 PM

I find that a mention of the by-pass and Greenham Common usually puts us on the map for them!

Posted by: anon123 Jul 16 2009, 07:56 PM

JeffG, your powers of detection can't be that great. Police employees have been posting on NWN for years. The problem is they are few and far between because:

1) Generally MOP's have made up their minds and are not interested in the otherside.
2) Someone usually see's it as an oppurtunity to have a go hidden behind the security of their computer screen. Why would one want to be verbally abused on a computer at home when they can spend 12hours a day at work getting it face to face.
3) Fear of detection by management.

A & B are observations of posters comments on this forum.

General concensus is that local police are useless, lazy and spend most of their time dealing with pointless things (just opinion formed from posters comments). Thats like me coming to your office with no idea what it is you do and accusing you of being rubbish at your job. But, they deal with the things that are reported, what's pointless to one is not so pointless to the person if effects!!

The best way to get the opinion of your local police is to go to the station and ask them. If you want to know about policing in your town, ask? Go to a Neighbourhood meeting, speak to the station boss.

I won't be entering into a full blown discussion about this issue and don't expect me to be posting my opinion on many police related topics. I like my job

Posted by: GMR Jul 16 2009, 07:59 PM

Yes, that as well.

Posted by: GMR Jul 16 2009, 08:18 PM

I wouldn’t say the police are lazy and I do agree that they work hard at what they do.

As for “pointless”; there are priorities and there are priorities. Yob crime, abuse, criminal damage are more in important than dealing with certain traffic offences and petty crimes (but you always see them quick to jump and score at low level crime). What annoys people is when the police concentrate on pointless crime while more serious crime gets overlooked; when reported. I’ve reported crimes that I had witnessed and there have been other cases where people have reported crimes and the perpetrator hasn’t been brought to book. This annoys people and that is when people start pointing the finger at the police. Now you can argue that that isn’t always their fault and I agree; but it is somebody’s fault and I do know that many police officers aren’t happy. Individually you can’t blame the police but don’t they have a collective responsibility? The police are quick to march the streets of London protesting about their pay, why can’t they do the same when certain convictions are turned down by a higher authority?

I talk to many police officers who are furious with higher authority but your unions aren’t doing anything to deal with their concerns. Also; you read in the papers that certain counties the police have a no tolerance policy but in other areas they don’t. So it is up to the individual police force then? Does one area regard their citizens a higher priority than others? All counties should have a no tolerance policy and courts should act accordingly.

People take their anger out at the police because they are the praetorian guard of the governments and courts, or seen as.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 16 2009, 11:24 PM

I'm not not interested, I'm interested in what really goes on. What is a shame that the Police don't do more to engage the public. Take his forum for instance, it would be a good area for the Police to come and debate 'openly'.


I can understand that, it must be a thankless task.


And this attitude by the management just makes them look like cowards and the public sense this - see first comment.


That is true, but some people have lost faith in the police and don't see them as the guardians that they might have once been seen as. Youths don't seem to fear the police like they once might have.


I didn't know there were any there!


Cushy little number, eh?

Posted by: GMR Jul 16 2009, 11:43 PM

I agree totally with you on this. However, I was told that it is a policy of the police not to get into debates with the public; how do I know this? After witnessing a crime and getting no response I sent a couple of emails to a certain police officer (I am a member of a NAG committee). I didn’t get any response to my email other than we will look into your complaint (which they did). Nevertheless when I tried to engage them even more – being connected with the NAG committee - I was told – again - that they weren’t allowed to enter into debate with me because of policy. I was also told – as a member of NAG – that debating with the police the NAG wasn’t the time or place. When I asked “where was the right time or place?” I didn’t get a reply. When I asked what was the point of the NAG committees up and down the country I was told that they are PR exercises to show they were engaged in public discussion (a contradiction there me thinks). I was later told by a senior police officer a few years ago that they were a “necessary evil.” A government initiative.


It is a sad reflection on the police force when they don't/ can't get into debate with the people who pay their wages.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 16 2009, 11:54 PM

I agree and this 'technique' is used all over the civil services, NHS for instance, they hide behind patient confidentiality, etc. I can understand that they cannot be too candid, but they would help themselves if they were more visible and approachable. Other than I have two friends who are police officers and I work with a part time officer, I don't know of any other policeman. Which probably isn't a bad thing!

Posted by: Bloggo Jul 17 2009, 08:41 AM

I don't expect you to answer this as I know it is difficult.
I've no doubt that you as individuals are doing the best job you can however I think that your bosses don't have the political will to tackle low level crime head on and low level crime leads to high level crime. We need a zero tolerance policy to make any difference.
You say yourself that you are subject to abuse on a daily basis from the low-life that you come into content with. Not so long ago the police were respected and would not tolerate such abuse or disrespect. This can't be acceptable to either the Force or the public.
My perception of Newbury is the same as Noobree and GMR in that standards are slipping, crime is rising and in my opinion the police are not responding to this in a way that I would wish.
I'm just so disappointed that I don't see it improving.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 17 2009, 09:10 AM

Bloggo - Saw a guy on a bike drinking a can of Special Brew cycling past a PC the other day. He was innebriated and a danger to both himself and the Public. I KNOW the PC saw him slugging out of his can but he did nothing. Yet if this guy got injured we would have to pay for his medical bills, his benefits etc etc. As its Ok to now drink and cycle I presume that we'll soon all be able to get in our cars after 6 or 7 pints down the local.

Posted by: Bloggo Jul 17 2009, 09:18 AM

Yep, unbelievable what the police turn a blind eye to and the morons can get away with.
You have to ask why wasn't he at least stopped and advised of his foolish, ant-social and down right stupid behaviour.
You're right if this behaviour is seen as acceptable then it can only get worse.

Posted by: GMR Jul 17 2009, 09:42 AM

My daughter is going out with a police officer and all the police officers I know are very kind and friendly. But, yes they should engage more with the public. There seems a them and us atmosphere and the only people who can change it are the police.

Posted by: anon123 Jul 17 2009, 11:22 AM

Bloggo lack of respect by "low life" and their verbal abuse is nothing new it is why they are low life. No amount of improvement in policing will ever change that.

As for community engagement, it works both ways. I have lost count of the times I have stopped to buy some lunch (contrary to popular believe were human and do need some fuel occasionally)! and been verbally abused by someone who think's they don't pay my wages for me to stop and eat! Or for not being busy because I have time to eat.... you get the picture!
I get dirty looks from people for filling up my police car at the petrol station! I always try to be polite to people but very rarely get it back. Im sure if you spent all day trying to be nice to people and only got grief back you'd sometimes wonder why you bothered and stop bothering. That's a basic standard of the human race.
Yes there are some officers who are damm right arrogant, lazy and rude but, the majority are not!

The overall workings of the police are decided way higher up than the PC on the street, but he/she is always the one that gets the grief. Give them a break and direct your anger and frustration to the people that do have the power to change things.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 17 2009, 11:34 AM

Yes, my feelings are, as above, the police are a 'political football' and I also feel that the senior ranks are letting the junior one's down. I can't remember a police officer that has treated me badly. They have usually treated my with courtesy. We had an officer that was assigned to our area and he was great, sadly, his abilities were recognised and he moved on. This another thing that happens, it seems, that large cities and towns get the pick of the ambitious ones due to improved wage deals.

Posted by: noobree Jul 17 2009, 01:06 PM

That's only a general consensus amongst idiots, I'd suggest! I certainly don't feel that way. You do an incredibly difficult, and often dangerous, job and I'd be very surprised if most people - albeit the silent majority - are right behind you. Anonymous comments on whinge boards like this don't count, except yours and mine obviously. In my experience those who are first to complain are those who do the least to help. I appreciate that I've just complained, but I'm complaining about complainers so I think that's OK!

My original post was intended to ask whether we really have a problem and, in particular, whether crime levels in Newbury are really getting significantly worse.

Posted by: Anon Jul 17 2009, 01:12 PM

The overall workings of the police are decided way higher up than the PC on the street, but he/she is always the one that gets the grief. Give them a break and direct your anger and frustration to the people that do have the power to change things.
[/quote]


I totally agree with you! I hear so many people moaning about the police and how they don't do this and don't do that. What about what they do, do for the us?!

People should really look a little closer at our society and the people who run it i.e the government (a what a bunch of robbing so and so's some of them have been proven to be!). It is our Government that has decided that community policing is best for our country, (which i short means the softly softly approach!) maybe we they should look at a more 'law enforcement' approach to policing. The criminal justice system in this country is historic and hasn't moved on with the evolution of society, so how do you expect our police officers to keep everyone happy when the whole system is fundamentally flawed?

Sorry I am rambling i will shut up now!!

Posted by: Andy Jul 17 2009, 01:25 PM

I come originally from SE London....trust me, this is heaven compaired to some areas there.

The thing about crime in modern times, I believe, is that is is much more readily available to find out about via the media, internet etc. Therefore we just hear, read and can find out about it much easy and so get the illusion that is is getting much worse. Which it probably is but nowhere near to the degree we imagine

Posted by: JeffG Jul 17 2009, 01:51 PM

I saw a news item a couple of days ago about Manchester police's zero tolerance approach to burglary. It showed a house that had just been burgled and had a car stolen, and SOCOs were swarming all over the place.

I suppose it comes down to local funding budgets as to what is achievable with the resources available.

While I'm posting, I'd just like to add my "me too" to those who have said they have they have nothing but respect for the police on the ground and the tough job they do - but it's how the resources are managed that affects the public's perception.

Posted by: GMR Jul 17 2009, 02:10 PM

I read that if the conservatives get into power the will make the chief of police accountable and electable by the people. If that is true then all the government will do is shift the blame from themselves to the police. The problem isn’t accountability or electability but the resources, the courts and laws to back up the police and they won’t get that by passing the buck. The only way the government can help is if it makes tough laws to back up the police. The other problem this country has got is the European Human Rights laws that on the whole support the criminal more than it does the victim.

Posted by: GMR Jul 17 2009, 07:00 PM

And how do we do that? Are you going to give us the names of the police who are “higher up” the food chain and responsible? I doubt it. I’ve worked in also sorts of jobs; management, dealing directly with the public and supermarkets and when members of the public get annoyed with stupid rules/ systems/ policies of a certain company or organisation they always take it on the front line troops as they are easily accessible.

A few years ago people had problems with the trains and the rising prices and the public took out their anger and frustrations at the porters who worked there. In America the police got fed up with being abused by the public for incompetence from higher up the food chain and went on strike; it worked (at least for awhile). The police can’t go on strike in this country, however, if you made a gesture of sympathy and support by resigning en masse – which will cause mass unrest and anarchy - the lunatics up the top might actually take notice and do something. The problem with that idea is that you’d be too busy protecting your own interests therefore such gestures will never happen. We have seen in the past that people’s uprising in this country has and can work; the poll tax for instance. People protested, Thatcher went along with the pole tax. Until somebody makes such a gesture then the front line troops will always suffer for the bureaucracy and stupidity of the morons from above.

Posted by: anon123 Jul 18 2009, 01:00 PM

GMR I don't need to give you those names it's all widely available in the public domain.

Posted by: Roost Jul 18 2009, 01:14 PM

As anon says, those names are in the public domain, but try and get hold of these people to speak to....! I'll bet you'll get the response "They're not available at the moment, can I take a message and get them to call you back.....!" Several days, nay months pass and still nothing is heard.
I know several police persons and they alss express disquiet about the job, its priorities and the 'supervision' of the 'superiors'. I think that the police do get a rough ride and get blamed for a lot of things that aren't necessarily their fault (sentencing, courts / prisons releasing perps etc) and sometimes they deserve a break.
Another thing, there was an earlier post about suggesting that an officer stop a lowlife who was on his bike drinking alcohol. Is this a high priority for you? For most this would be minor and the investigation of burglaries may take a higher priority.....

Posted by: GMR Jul 18 2009, 01:54 PM

Yes they are but they are not easily approachable. The only options normal citizens have is either write - which will be ignored - or act in unison; ie go for the easier targets.

You also know their names and whereabouts; have you and your colleagues shown your disgust at the way you’ve been treated because of THEIR policies/ rules and took your frustrations out at them? If not why not? Or are you happy with the status quo? People prefer easy options and that will always be the front-line troops.

People wrote to Thatcher and their local MP’s in their thousand over the pole tax; nothing. People went out in the streets and protested; including attacking the police and, as I said before, Thatcher and the pole tax went. If you want the abuse to stop either the government changes its policies or either you act or the citizens of this country; and that usually means taking it out on you and your colleagues. I am not saying I agree with that approach, but that is the only options available to the ordinary citizens of this country.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 18 2009, 05:37 PM

When the police protested about their reneged pay deal, I think that was only fair because the Government had betrayed them (and themselves) - The amount was not even peanuts compared to the amount the financial institutions received recently. The issue I see is that the senior ranks are thinking more about their pension than about delivering to their rank and file.

I think it is important for the Police 'Service' to remain disciplined and to see them rioting would be counter productive. The wage protests yielded nothing either. This is all under the assumption that the rank and file are 'disgusted' of course.

I don't think the Poll Tax was defeated by riots - It was just a bad piece of legislation that wasn't workable. Civil disobedience in the form of non payments, rather than riots, did more harm to the policy I feel.

As for a crime tsunami in Newbury - I don't see it, but that will be poor consolation to people that do suffer from being a victim of crime. I know a number of people that have moved to this area, in part, because of the relative low crime rate, in particular low level crime.

Posted by: GMR Jul 18 2009, 06:18 PM

It is not only the police the government betrayed. They came into power saying they will get tough on crime and the causes of crime and since they’ve been in power crime has gone up.




Nobody is suggesting that they riot, just stand up and be counted because they are unhappy with the decisions from above; including too much paper work and red tape.



They weren’t defeated by “riots” alone; large groups of people protesting up and down the country and of course what you said; “non payment” of the poll tax contributed to it being ditched.




I wouldn’t use the word “tsunami” but I have seen crime go up in Newbury and I’ve also seen fewer and fewer people ringing the police to report the crime; how do I know this. One it has been reported nationally. But also the police and people I’ve spoken to.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 18 2009, 10:04 PM

Not according to the BCS

"HOW HAVE LEVELS OF CRIME CHANGED OVER THE LONGER TERM?

Long-term trends show that BCS crime rose steadily from 1981 through to the early 1990s, peaking in 1995. Crime then fell, making 1995 a significant turning point. The fall was substantial until 2004/05, when BCS crime levels stabilised until the further decline this year. BCS crime is now at the lowest ever level since the first results in 1981. Trends in BCS violence, vehicle related theft and burglary broadly reflect the trend in all BCS crime."

Source: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs08/hosb0708summ.pdf

Whether this reflects crime in Newbury, I don't know.


All services complain of this and often the reason for the red tape is born out of things that have happened in the past that necessitate it. The paper work can be mitigated by updating the methods by which they record crime. Red tape can be necessary because clever lawyers can otherwise engineer acquittals. Indeed, in the past, people have complained about victimisation, so the red tape is designed to mitigate that.


Agreed, but I suspect you might overestimate how much power the rank and file have to make many protestations. A bit like in the army, members don't like to be seen winging. Very much like the old saying, 'If you can't take a joke, then you shouldn't have signed on'.

This might be a good reason to watch the Police Conference this year, if it hasn't already happened. It would be interesting to see what it is they feel they lack that would be practical to provide.


I have seen news reports that suggest that people not reporting certain types of crime as a theory, but I'm not sure it is fact that fewer people report it every year. I do know though that people are reluctant to report crime for a number of reasons. One thing I don't like is that when one phones the police, you get put through to a call centre not in Newbury.

What is quite unnerving is how few police there can be in Newbury some times, but on another note, perhaps the paucity of Police in Newbury is a tribute to how peaceful it is most of the time, so when something does happen, it comes as a shock.

Posted by: GMR Jul 18 2009, 10:08 PM

Iommi,

you make some good points which could go either way.

Concerning call centres; I agree. At one time calls used to go straight through to Newbury, but not any more.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 18 2009, 10:17 PM

I'm not sure I like the sound of that!

Let's just assume I'm right and we are a low crime area, that is no reason of course to pack our bags and go home. We should remain vigilant and also realise, whilst crime generally might be low, there will be people in the same area that are suffering immeasurably.

Posted by: GMR Jul 18 2009, 10:23 PM

I can't argue with that. I am sure there are many parts of Newbury that is ok; I can only speak personally and going by talking to other people.

Posted by: Darren Jul 19 2009, 04:59 AM

There hasn't been a control room in Newbury since about 1992, when it was closed and all calls (except direct dial to extensions) when to the switchboards and 999 to the Wantage Control Room.

The question has to be asked, why do people report crimes? Is it because they want the offender caught, prosecuted and sentenced? Not really. it's because without that little reference number, they cannot report it to their insurance company and make a claim.

A classic example of this was someone who reported the theft of their wedding ring. The thieves ignored all the other jewellery, cash and valuables and took just the ring. A bit of questioning revealed they hadn't had it stolen at all, but had lost it at home. They then wanted it reported as lost, given a reference so they could make a claim. This was refused as it was lost at home and there was no chance of anyone else finding it and handing it in.

The police are not a reporting service for insurance companies.

One of biggest problems is that the police are the only 24/7/365 contact for all other public services.

House been burgled? Call the police
stolen car? Call the police
lost my cat? Call the police
noisy party you weren't invited to ? Call the police
pothole in road. call police and demand it's filled in
car parked on road with VEL that expired yesterday? Dial 999 and ask for police
etc
etc
etc.

Police officers get fed up with being used as social workers for all of society's ills instead of being able to get on with catching criminals.

Also, everyone wants a police force who operate a 'zero tolerance' policy on crime. Until it impacts them of course.

In this country (despite what some think) we have 'policing by consent' and as population we can withdraw that consent. We don't because even anarchists don't want to live in anarchy as there is always an anarchist bigger than you.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 09:41 AM

999 is the number for all the emergency services, Ambulance, Fire Rescue, Police, etc... Your point Darren, is a worthy one, albeit irrelevant in this discussion.

Posted by: GMR Jul 19 2009, 10:09 AM

That made me laugh

Posted by: Darren Jul 19 2009, 11:03 AM

I said public service, not emergency services.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 11:26 AM

It might be that people misuse 999, but provided it is not malicious I don't see the problem as such, but what it does suggest, is there is a need for a general citizens help line that people could be directed to. People will ask for the police because they seem the logical choice of the ones available.

Behind the examples of non emergency examples you cite, could lie a crime. I feel, however, the police should always be involved where the public's welfare or property is at risk.

House been burgled? Call the police (a legitimate call I think)

stolen car? Call the police (a legitimate call I think)

lost my cat? Call the police (not legit)

noisy party you weren't invited to ? Call the police (a legitimate call I think, should it become too rowdy)

pothole in road. call police and demand it's filled in (a legitimate call I think, if it is dangerous to road users)

car parked on road with VEL that expired yesterday? Dial 999 and ask for police (not legit)


While the above are not necessarily emergencies, it is more than likely that people dial 999 because it is a familiar number and can be dialled 24/7. Emergency is a subjective term and most people, I would imagine, feel their call is an emergency.


This is all, however, irrelevant in this thread.

Posted by: JeffG Jul 19 2009, 12:28 PM

Misuse of the 999 service is a big problem. It wastes the operator's time when there may be a real emergency to be dealt with.


Some counties e.g. Hampshire have been trialling just such a number for reporting non-emergencies (I think it's 111). We in Berkshire have to look up the 0845 number for Kidlington.


But definitely not a 999 call, unless it's happening right now.


You are joking, right?

Posted by: GMR Jul 19 2009, 01:06 PM

There is only one number I know and that is 999; if I need the police then as far as I am concerned it is an emergency.

A friend phoned up the police and they said "it is an emergency" in which he replied "no" and they turned up three days later (he as reporting a crime, but the suspects had left); the moral to that incident is that it is always an emergency.

Posted by: GMR Jul 19 2009, 01:07 PM

There is only one number I know and that is 999; if I need the police then as far as I am concerned it is an emergency.

A friend phoned up the police and they said "it is an emergency" in which he replied "no" and they turned up three days later (he as reporting a crime, but the suspects had left); the moral to that incident is that it is always an emergency.

Posted by: Darren Jul 19 2009, 04:50 PM

I don't think it's irrelevant.

The percieved increase in crime can well be down to the police being run ragged by complaints about things that are not a police matter. There are other agencies that that are set up to deal with them.

All my examples are based on personal experience. This also included a call from a certain major high street food/clothing store that called in demanding an officer to attend and tell the person playing bagpipes across the road to move as it was driving customers away!!!

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 05:03 PM

How long does it take an operator to cancel the call as not an emergency? In any case this is about call management, it's fixable, it needn't get in the way of 'real' emergencies.


It isn't just about an easy to use number, it is also about getting to speak to someone with one's concern. Non emergency numbers seem to ring off the hook.


See my first point.


Not at all, I said if it posed a danger to motorists, in particular, motor cyclists and to a lesser extent bicyclists.

Like I said earlier, but seem to have missed the point. The 999 is a free to use number by any one, that means you are susceptible to calls that the call centre wouldn't regard as an emergency, but I am sure most people use it in good faith. If it is a 'real' problem, then a new call system should be devised.

At the end of the day, the country is full of people all with differing ideas about what constitutes an emergency. Something seemingly harmless and would remain so if dealt with promptly, can sometimes develop into an emergency.

In our country we also have people with differing amounts of wisdom, that is to say, some people don't realise that they are doing wrong, especially if at the time they think they are doing the right thing. Take this thread for instance, Darren and JeffG both seem not to realise that this isn't the correct thread for this discussion.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 05:09 PM

And the police are not able to deal with these issues? That is to say, why can they not advise the complainant that it isn't a police matter, why are they run ragged by issues that don't concern them? Perhaps some one should have a word with Old Bill about how they use their time?

Mind you, seeing how quiet Newbury usually is, I suppose they are glad for an excuse to get off their backsides for a while!

Posted by: JeffG Jul 19 2009, 07:17 PM

Man, you have a bad attitude.

Why not write this down: 0845 8505505. It took me nearly a minute to look it up in the phone book.

And it doesn't "ring off the hook" (when was the last time you called it?) - I've always got through very quickly.

I would never call 999 in a non-emergency. That is just plain selfish: "my call is just as important as the guy down the road having a heart attack".

And I don't care if you think this is irrelevant in this thread.

Posted by: Darren Jul 19 2009, 07:24 PM

Ahem.

I wasn't the one who first mentioned about calls no longer going to Newbury police station.

I wasn't the one who first mention TVP placing most resources in the Reading area and Newbury being less resourced

I wasn't the one who first mentioned Newbury police being over-worked and under-manned.

So, would someone be so kind as to explain why my comments are irrelevant to this discussion?

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 07:32 PM

Why do you say that?


I also found this site as well (re. 0845 police rip-off).

http://www.crimestoppers.org.uk


I have NEVER rung this or 999, nor have I ever needed to!!!


You haven't read my post properly have you!!! NOR WOULD I RING 999 unless it was an emergency!!! I was speaking generally, NOT about what I believe is right. Read what I have written again and tell me where you think it has bad attitude!


That is you prerogative, but it just makes you ignorant of good etiquette on forums. The original poster has already explained that this wasn't intended as a Police bashing thread, yet you ignorantly persist in keeping off topic, which includes being abusive.

Posted by: Darren Jul 19 2009, 07:38 PM

From saynoto0870.com

Thames Valley Police 0845 850 5505 01865 841148 Enquiries &
NON emergency calls ONLY

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 07:42 PM

No, you are right, I take it back, it seems the police are 'run ragged' dealing with pointless tasks that they have no obligation to fulfill!

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 07:50 PM

I'm unable to check this page's integrity, but...

"STOP THE 0845 MONEY MAKING NOW - IF YOUR POLICE AREA IS A MONEY MAKER - WEAK EXCUSES WILL BE MADE TO CONTINUE NOT TO CHANGE TO 0300

Such as:

'It will cost too much to change" "The excess money made goes to charity" "The public will not remember a new number"

The largest Police Force in the UK has managed to change and they were not ripping people off in the first place (Metropolitan Police - London) 0300 123 1212

Complain to your Police Authority, Member of Parliament - they can only ignore people for so long. Yes the Home Office stand idly by, Gordon gleefully (no doubt) counts the extra Tax."

...what were we talking arguing about again? I've lost my thread!

Posted by: Darren Jul 19 2009, 07:53 PM

Quite
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7489457.stm

Posted by: Iommi Jul 19 2009, 08:01 PM

And it would seem that a subtle change in the way they handle calls, they have seen a drop in trivial calls, excellent!

Posted by: GMR Jul 19 2009, 08:17 PM

That was brilliant! I loved the moon thing. "Yes, it is the moon, over!"

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Jul 20 2009, 08:16 AM

Please do not call 999 unless it is a MURDER.

If you have problems such as burglary, low life drug dealing, drunks urinating in your garden, pub fights, general theft then please call the alternative number that will be coming soon.

VIGILANTES R'US - LETS LYNCH THE SCUM on 0800 . . . . . . . (We would not want to make a profit out of a good lynching or two)

Posted by: GMR Jul 20 2009, 09:44 AM

The time will come when that will happen. If the police/ government/ courts don't get to grips with certain nasty elements within our society then people might start to take the law into their own hands.

Posted by: JeffG Jul 20 2009, 11:10 AM

This was concerning my "bad attitude" comment, because you implied it didn't matter if someone called 999 in a non-emergency, because the operator could just clear the call. I'm sorry if you thought that was abusive.


Well, that's news to me. I know about 0870 of course, but I thought 0845 was local call rate.

(By the way, that site is itself a politically-motivated rip-off of the official Crimestoppers web site which is http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/)


Then you are a very fortunate person.


Please don't call me ignorant (twice). That I regard as abusive. I am well aware of good netiquette, and have used forums for years with no problem. I was responding directly to comments you made in this thread.

And where in the whole of my post was I in any way "police bashing"?

Posted by: anon123 Jul 20 2009, 11:53 AM

I have been watching with a slight grin on my face. Firstly this thread has gone way off topic, calls to police have nothing to do with the crime levels, why? Because you can't crime a crime that doesnt exsist. Therefore if it is not a crime being reported it is not a crime!!! Make sense.

Secondly yes the police deal with a lot of things that should be dealt with by other agency's who work 9-5 mon-fri!!

As for call levels, i used to answer 999 calls yes there are alot that are not emergency's... example:
Me: Police emergency.
Caller: there is a fire in the field nearby.
Me: have you called the fire brigade.
Caller: no i didnt want to disturb them!!!!!!

But you must remember that whilst the police deal with a lot that should be the responsibility of other agencys, when something bad happens then the police are the first people to be blamed!!!!!!!!

And yes all the resources that used to be in Newbury have been sucked into Reading that's why you see less in Newbury. So to that extent it does not take a genius to work out why the perceived crime levels have risen. That said I have been in Newbury for sometime and although there are less officers I do not feel crime has risen!!

Lastly when I originally posted I made mention of that fact that if police officers post they generally get a bashing, I was surprised when most said they had respect for the police. Surprised because having read other threads it seemed to be the people who bashed the police that this was coming from.
So I'm not surprised that a police bashing is exactly what this thread has turned into.

If you want the police to engage and discuss with you then talk like grown ups and be sensible about it. Rather than turning every thread into a rantathon.


P.S last time I called work on the 0845 number it showed as local rate on my phone bill.

Posted by: Iommi Jul 20 2009, 01:27 PM

Anon123, if I support a football team, sometimes I will bash them if I feel they have fallen short of expectation, but that doesn't mean I have stopped supporting them!

My point about non emergency 999 calls is that provided they are called in good faith I don't have a problem with that as with a small amount of good call management, it needn't usually pose a problem. In my job I rather people assume an emergency which turns out to be false, than for it to be ignored when it is.

Posted by: GMR Jul 20 2009, 01:47 PM

I agree. I support the police but that doesn't mean we can't criticise them. Criticism is healthy. I am British and i suport this country, but that doesn't mean we can't voice our concerns.

Bush said “you are either for us or against us”. this was a psychological and subliminal ploy to make people think that if they criticise the government then they are terrorists or anti-American. It then forces the population to keep their mouth shut in case they are accused of supporting anti-American propaganda. Rubbish; it is healthy to criticise. Without criticising certain groups/ people etc it creates arrogance and a self importance attitude; which can be very dangeorus for the people.


People have criticised the police on here and any member of the police or public are welcome to come on here and defend them if they choose. That is democracy. The other way is fear/ intimidation/ communism. I think the debate has been Healthy. I don’t think anybody has been using really abusive or very bad language and that is the only concern we should have.


Glenn

Posted by: GMR Jul 20 2009, 01:49 PM

The only time I've ever called the police - and that is always using 999 - was when it was a real and current emergency. I have never called the number for anything trivial.