How can they even contemplate this ?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by adrian9901, Aug 10, 2011.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. How can the gov still even think about cutting the number of police officers in our contry when we are spread so thin that London needs help from 26 different police forces nation wide ?

    your views on it ?
  2. Its not the number of police thats the issue, its the way they are led and the way they are restricted from policing by current legislation/litigation.
  3. Additionally, the need to send help in from outside the Metropolitan Police AOR is a surge response. It's not as if we have widespread rioting and public order issues (large demonstrations etc) every day (thankfully) so there should be no need to retain a manning level to cope with extreme situations.

    That said, I believe the Government does need to seriously (and urgently) review whether the proposed cuts are going to lead to reduced capability rather than simply removing some staff following the reduction of unrealistic administrative burden which is currently forcing front line police officers into rear echelon desks.
  4. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Even if/when MPS was at full strength, it would need Mutual Aid from other Home Office forces to assist in the civil disturbances such as the recent riots. The additional 13,000 officers in London last night has nothing to do with the shortage of Met policeman and women. This is no different from having a Duty Watch on board alongside, but ramping up to a higher state of readiness (e.g. Op AWKWARD) when a significant incident occurs. :roll:
  5. Nothing new here under Tory rule, coppers were drafted in from all over the country to the coal mining areas during the miners strike. Anyway I for one don't give a shite as I am alright Jack, this country has been destroyed by successive governments so it's everyman for himself.
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2011
  6. Finks,

    Your successive governments didn't just appear out of thin air - Perhaps the voters (and those who didn't even bother to vote) bear responsibility.

    it's everyman for himself ?? Surely a few headline-grabbing examples of destructive mob activity don't mean that you are now supporting/recommending anarchy as a viable alternative?

    Ah well, if it makes you happy .... :roll:

  7. Not anarchy BOOTWU but much as I detest the woman the Thatcher philosophy that there is no such thing as society and you can only cast your vote for one from the selection of dross that is available but I am as happy as a dog with two dicks.
  8. Considering the track record of successive governments in this country over the past 21 years, I would gently ask, 'What else do you expect' ? MP's never step foot into real life at all.
    They slash everything then wake up and realise there's a mass shortage.It's called 'Living in Westminster La-La land'.
  9. Maybe we should elect normal people to run this country rather than some posh kids out of Oxford
  10. You mean like John Prescott? Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrgghhhh!
  11. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    You already have that ability at the Ballot Box. Or perhaps you're another political apathist who doesn't vote because you "wanna stick to the man!/Can't be bothered..."? Or maybe you're not old enough to vote yet... :shock:
  12. I think he is more likely alluding to the fact that many mps are now professional politicos partaking of their hobby which is politics. Often with the money of a successful partner to fund their whim. A lot of that is me paraphrasing Michael Portillo's missus who I had a chat with at MPA shortly before the tories were ousted. She was talking about the likes of herself and Cheri - I had mentioned that she was successful in her own right.

    More normal options are a rarity on ballot papers particularly amongst the main parties where individualism is stifled with candidates briefed to be ön message" That tends to leave extremists, cranks and single issue candidates all with limited appeal/chance of success.

    BTW I have voted in every election since I was 18.
  13. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    I understand what he was alluding to, Wurz. But it was a lazy accusation by the OP.

    However I stand by my comment; the professional politicos do not become MPs unless [the collective] "we" vote for them. And the financial backing only provides funds for their electoral campaign, and does not guarantee them a seat - yet...

    As for the rarity of 'normal' candidates on the ballot paper, perhaps the political apathetics (good name for an independent party, me thinks!) can demonstrate their frustration by actually attending the Polling Station and spoiling the paper (i.e. ticking more than one box) rather than picking one at random (usually the safe/favourite candidate) or the selecting the "good-looking one who speaks my kinda language", who often tend to hide their true Nationalist tendencies behind political rhetoric... :oops:

    [The collective] "we" missed an opportunity to get rid of this system with the AV Referendum recently, but hey! The apathetics won, so we get the system we deserve... :cry:

    (And I too have voted in every local/general election since I was able to, whether in person or by proxy. It is a right that people have fought for, and I hold that sentiment dearly.)

Share This Page