This is wrong...

#1
I'm very much a hang 'em & flog 'em type, but I don't think the police should be allowed to do this...

BBC
 
#3
I can't really get excited about it, lock the bloody car.
 
#5
So you think its right for the police to interfere when theres been no crime comitted? I'm all in favour of the police being more severe with real criminals, but harassing and wasting the general publics time like this is not on, its not a fcuking locker been left open in a block, its peoples private property in civvy life the state wants to intrude into...people should have to deal with the consequences of being stupid enough to leave their motor open, not have the old bill waste my tax money cleaning up after them...
 
#6
Bradstyley said:
...people should have to deal with the consequences of being stupid enough to leave their motor open, not have the old bill waste my tax money cleaning up after them...
That's the point isn't it?

I wonder how much it costs in "my tax money," to open a criminal case file, send out a fingerprint wallah, take statements, and fill out paperwork ad nauseum when a crime is committed compared to a beat bobby making a driver more aware about crime prevention by taking these steps?
 
#7
...I don't know, do you reckon they might have to fill out a fair bit of paperwork relating to this as well? Or do you reckon they stand up at the beginning of a shift and say 'help yourself to unlocked cars, no procedure to follow there lads?' Whaddaya reckon?
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#8
Hmm..

Option 1. Open car, leave note, return items to police station, complete short report, hand items back to owner, end of issue. No loss of kit or damage to car, no cost to owner or insurance company, no increased premiums next year. Hopefully owner stops being such an idiot, and crime is prevented.

Option 2. Station receives call about break in. Officers attend, evidence gathered, files opened, evidence compared to database entries, officers provide case number for insurance claim, scrote captured (if lucky), court case, close file. Car owner claims off insurance, loses out on his excess amount, insurer pays remainder (including for damage to car) and increases the premium for that driver for the next 2 or 3 years.
 
#9
The_Duke said:
Hmm..

Option 1. Open car, leave note, return items to police station, complete short report, hand items back to owner, end of issue. No loss of kit or damage to car, no cost to owner or insurance company, no increased premiums next year. Hopefully owner stops being such an idiot, and crime is prevented.

Option 2. Station receives call about break in. Officers attend, evidence gathered, files opened, evidence compared to database entries, officers provide case number for insurance claim, scrote captured (if lucky), court case, close file. Car owner claims off insurance, loses out on his excess amount, insurer pays remainder (including for damage to car) and increases the premium for that driver for the next 2 or 3 years.
Erm......I see the error in your post there.
 
#10
BBC said:
We don't want to take people's property as it is an awful lot of bureaucracy and hassle for us but we are doing this to make sure people take responsibility of their valuables.
If they remove property then yes, I reckon they do have to fill out a fair bit of paper work, but they are only taking property from a small percentage of the vehicles that are left unlocked.

Now, I don't pretend to know what paperwork is involved, but even if they do remove property then it stands to reason that a simple "come and get your laptop form the station you tit," note plus, I imagine, a form stating that the property has been signed back to the owner in good order is much less hassle than opening up a new case etc.

I know a police officer who frequently reminds someone on his beat to stop leaving his keys in his van. (admitedly it's a leafy village beat and not Brum city centre) I conceed that they guy who does it is a buerk and being burgled would probably hammer the message home, but It takes my neighbour five minutes and is much easier for him to do than to deal with a robbery.
 
#11
Bradstyley said:
So you think its right for the police to interfere when theres been no crime comitted? I'm all in favour of the police being more severe with real criminals, but harassing and wasting the general publics time like this is not on, its not a fcuking locker been left open in a block, its peoples private property in civvy life the state wants to intrude into...people should have to deal with the consequences of being stupid enough to leave their motor open, not have the old bill waste my tax money cleaning up after them...
Absolutely - I though the whole point of the police was to prevent crime where possible rather than solve cases. Hence we all like uniformed patrols,school visits, stop and search etc.

Similarly, I know offrs/SNCOs who used to lift unattended/unlocked things (even rifles) to prove a point. Hopefully, it'll stop joe public being such a numpty or victim at minimum cost and personal inconvenience. Isn't that model policing?
 

maguire

LE
Book Reviewer
#12
Bradstyley said:
So you think its right for the police to interfere when theres been no crime comitted? I'm all in favour of the police being more severe with real criminals, but harassing and wasting the general publics time like this is not on, its not a fcuking locker been left open in a block, its peoples private property in civvy life the state wants to intrude into...people should have to deal with the consequences of being stupid enough to leave their motor open, not have the old bill waste my tax money cleaning up after them...
I'd be more f***ed off if I knew a copper had clocked my unlocked car with my laptop left on the seat, said nothing and let some smackhead lift it fifteen minutes later.

as others have said, no harm done and it teaches you a lesson.

or do you think it's infringing upon the theive's human rights to remove their livelihood?? :roll:
 
#14
Bradstyley said:
So you think its right for the police to interfere when theres been no crime comitted? I'm all in favour of the police being more severe with real criminals, but harassing and wasting the general publics time like this is not on, its not a fcuking locker been left open in a block, its peoples private property in civvy life the state wants to intrude into...people should have to deal with the consequences of being stupid enough to leave their motor open, not have the old bill waste my tax money cleaning up after them...
How dare the Police interfere and potentially prevent a crime! Next you'll be getting outraged over the Fire Brigade (sorry Fire and Rescue service) educating people on fire safety and installing smoke alarms after all they should just turn up to put fires out, not prevent them...


How much anger would you feel if the Police had noticed an unlocked car with (for example) a laptop on show, they'd not bothered to do anything about it and it was stolen? I can see your "Sun" style thread now 'Lazy law enforcer allows larceny shocker'
 
#15
This is a common sense thing. Some will get it, and the numpties wont. Prevention is everything and if it helps reduce a 40% increase in car crime, then it's a good thing.
 
#17
But lawyer Orlando Pownall QC, who lives in Richmond Hill, said: "It undoubtedly is a trespass and there could be civil proceedings if a person shows a damage or loss has resulted from the trespass.
This is probably the crux of the matter. Unfortunately there are too many dishonest chav mongs in the UK who would take advantage of being able to claim "My laptop/camera/phone didn't have that scratch on it and my wallet had loads more money in it. You owe me a gajillion quid rozzer". In order to prove that things were as they were returned the feds will no doubt have to provide a mountain of paperwork and witnesses.

It may be just easier for Plod to run a VRN check and then just contact the (mong) owner and let them know about their poor key admin.

Incidentally, what would happen if the Bill removed, for safekeeping, a laptop later found to be full of, for example, kiddie porn? Would this be admissable in court? I doubt it*. So logically if this practice is to be continued it needs to be formalised in law. Sadly, with our beloved leaders any attempt to do so is only likely to lead to the Police being given wide ranging powers to search any vehicle, or indeed house, without a warrant all in the name of Crime Prevention.





* At least I really fcuking hope so.
 
#18
Overall I support this policy, however a friend of mine said his time at Hendon he never met so many thieving bastards in all his life. Recruits would steal anything of anyone's that wasn't nailed down, including kit, equipment, wallets and even underwear.
 
#19
This is similar to the things they were doing round my end, except they were going into peoples unsecure houses. Normally in the middle of the night when the owners are asleep!

The photo at the top of the article sets the wrong impression a bit though.
 
#20
milsum said:
Overall I support this policy, however a friend of mine said his time at Hendon he never met so many thieving bastards in all his life. Recruits would steal anything of anyone's that wasn't nailed down, including kit, equipment, wallets and even underwear.
Nailing down underwear (outside the Catholic Church), should be discouraged. Staples will cause less lasting injuries.

What's the problem? Clearly, anyone who leaves a laptop in an unlocked car wants strangers to help themselves. Why should the police interfere? Next thing you know, they'll be making dogging illegal...
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top