Skip to main content

Thank goodness we have the police to uphold the law!

Now, the motorist was obviously being a bit of a git, but I do happen to think that the police might be over-reacting slightly here.

Personally, I feel totally relieved that we have such nice, reasonable people in the police—the kind of responsible people who will only uphold the law, rather than using bullying and vandalism as tools to intimidate the population.

Oh. Wait...

Two police officers have been suspended after they were filmed smashing up a disabled man’s car while the terrified pensioner sat in the driver’s seat. [Skip to 1:06 minutes in.]

Footage captured on a police dashboard camera shows one officer striking the driver’s seat window with a baton up to 15 times and another officer jumping on the bonnet of the car and kicking the windscreen in an apparent attempt to crack it.

It's time that the police were made accountable to the people that they serve: no, not the government—us.

It's time that every policeman had the Peelian Principles beaten into them throughout their training. And, in this case, there are definitely a few that should be highlighted to the thugs involved in this incident.
  1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.

  2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.

  3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.

  4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.

  5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.

  6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.

  7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

  8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.

  9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

It's time for elected police chiefs and long, long prison sentences for any policemen who overstep the mark.


Morlock said…
It's time that the police were made accountable to the people that they serve: no, not the government—us.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, DK.

The police do not serve us; rather they swear on oath to serve the Queen. And as our monarch chooses to allow the government to exercise her powers...

They don't work for us. They've never worked for us. Get a grip.
10:always run away as fast as possible from muslims,in order to preserve your pension.
Voluntarist said…
"5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law."

...which principle is incompatible with elected police chiefs.
JuliaM said…
"...which principle is incompatible with elected police chiefs."

Why so? Are you suggesting that they would break/ignore the law if their constituency demanded it?
Voluntarist said…
@JuliaM "Why so? Are you suggesting that they would break/ignore the law if their constituency demanded it?"

Well the law is an ass anyway, the police have near arbitrary power, so no-but-yeah; I think they'd persecute minorities more so than currently just to get re-elected.
Anonymous said…
So who took the video?
JuliaM said…
@Roger Thornhill: Yeah, the TH example is a pretty good one. The fact the police are so dead set against elected police chiefs is, as far as I'm concerned, another good reason to implement it ASAP.
Voluntarist said…
@JuliaM @Roger Thornhill

My position is that the police need to be privatised as a priority: they are literally getting away with murder and "wagging the dog", IE: dictating the form of new legislation to empower themselves further. Meanwhile if anyone is brave enough to start a private police force I will happily pay for them to arrest Cressida Dick, Ian Tomlinson's killers, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, etc. None of that will happen with elected police chiefs, it'll just mean glossing over the fundamental problem.
selsey.steve said…
I retired as a Chief Inspector from a REAL Police Force (not in the UK). If any of my men had done this sort of thing they would have handed me their Warrant Cards before they went off duty.
The only excuse for this sort of behaviour is if the driver had been identified as a person wanted for a violent crime or a violent/armed criminal fleeing a new crime scene.
There is NO other excuse. The idiots shown in this video deserve time behind bars.
Please don't associate all Police Officers with this sort of unforgiveable behaviour.
JuliaM said…
No, it's certainly NOT 'all police'.

Unfortunately, the others don't seem too concerned at their behaviour, do they? In fact, you can see in the video one cop almost gets hit HIMSELF in the enthusiastic backswing of ASPMan...

If the police would police their own, and ensure that 'pack mentality' didn't override the law, there'd be little need for professional standards.

Popular posts from this blog


Your humble Devil apologises for his lack of posting: it has become increasingly difficult to actually put quill to vellum, as it were.

It's not purely that the political situation is rather uninspiring, it is also that I have become very much out of the habit of writing (about politics, at least). As such, every time that I fire up the blogging screen, I feel an incredible weariness.

I asked Pete to blog here because I thought that contemplating the actual mechanics of leaving the EU was important: I wanted to know, as much as anything. My reasons for voting Leave are actually very similar to Pete's, i.e. the rebooting of democracy and power structures in this country: however, he has a knowledge of the intricacies of the technical aspects that is beyond mine and I thought these worth setting down, here, for the record.

I shall try to post a little more frequently going forward. But, please, be warned that the reasons for eschewing this format haven't really gone away. My…

Gove's legacy?

Michael Gove has, quite honourably, said that it was right for Theresa may to sack him as a minister...
"I had six years when I was a government minister. I had a chance to make a difference - I hope that I did."The reforms that Michael Gove made in his time as Education Secretary will come to be seen as the most significant improvements to the British education system since the late 1800s—particularly in the introduction of Free Schools.

Gove made a difference—and his contribution should never be forgotten.