Window MoP

Resident Members
  • Content count

    433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Window MoP last won the day on April 29 2011

Window MoP had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

18 Good

1 Follower

About Window MoP

  • Rank
    Training
  • Birthday
  1. Obviously we dont know the full story....but i dont see how this can ever be reasonable, proportionate or justified? The prisoner is not armed at all with anything other than underpants. How can it be right to taser him? Even as pro-police as I am, this just doesnt seem right. Not saying it is accpetable behaviour from the prisoner and he should have been suitably restrained if he was being unreasonable but taser seems excessive.
  2. There are ANPR cameras at the enterance to my village, i have no problem whatsoever with them. Lets face it, they line the motorways so theres not much difference with them on the streets. They are at strategic points and do a good job. Wouldnt like to see any more spring up though, i have to say. On the subject of phones, I had a talk from the missing persons team at work on tracking people etc. Shocked me how much you have to go through to get a phone pinged and even then it isnt exactly accurate.
  3. You cant miss Solihull out! they are legends.
  4. Am i being daft, or are these lower level priorities not exactly why neighbourhood teams exist? there to help with local issues affecting local people. There is also the fact that, left unchallenged or un reported, lower level issues can easily spiral. Take for example a gang of kids coming from one town to another on the train. they arrive in the local park and cause a bit of bother. This annoys the locals but doesnt get reported. Because no police are aware, the kids get braver and braver until they are arming themselves with baseball bats, committing street robberies, and sholifting before legging it on the train. Lower level issues are annoying, but they do need to be addressed and do have an impact on the local community which is why i am a big fan of neighbourhood teams. That said, people do involve the police in a ridiculous amount of nonsense and they are expected to do the role of a million other agencies. But if its not on fire and no-one is hurt, who else do people call?
  5. I'd also urge you that if you are not involved but know of it, let the Police and also Children's Services know as soon as you can. These are serious matters which Social Services also treat just as seriously as the Police. Please do consider seriously coming forward and discussing it with the Police and /or social services. Dont forget you cna discuss things anonymously with both agencies, though if you are involved as a younger person i would encourage you to come forward. we may seem scary agencies but we are all human and dont bite. At the end of the day, we are here to protect people and help whenever we can. As above, i am giving advice only.
  6. As others have said, see a solicitor as soon as possible. Do you have parental responsibility for the child? are you on her birth certificate? If you have PR then you have not only the right but also a responsibility to keep her safe. if you can leave your partner in a planned way, i.e with some thinking and legal advice first, there is nothing to stop you applying for a residence order and hopefully gaining custody of your daughter. you absolutely need to see a solicitor as soon as possible.
  7. Even if you do send it you probably wont get a reply. I have sent a letter before thanking several officers to their CC and never heard anything back - and I hadn't hurt anyone!
  8. Can't answer your ciggie question as I'm not a Police Officer. I would ask yourself the following question - are you sorry because you are truly appalled by your actions or because you think it may lessen your punishment?! Only you know the answer to that - and if it is the former then go ahead and send your letter.
  9. You miss the point Meditate, with Nukewatch it is not what they are doing but what they COULD do that means the Police have a duty of care to the UK population which involves keeping a close eye on them. I have no idea if they are on this register you are on about or not, but they are certainly well known to Police. We are talking about a group whose sole aim is to monitor and disrupt where possible the movement of Nuclear Weapons and materials. Is there not something inherently sinister about this?! Is it not just a little wrong that their members happily walk out in front of trucks carrying such a deadly load, then bleat on about how dangerous nuclear weapons are?! The whole process would be a heck of a lot safer if the Police didn't have to keep tabs on them and could watch out for real, armed threats instead of ex-CND warriors.
  10. 2,4,6,8,9, 12 and 13 - where are your sources/evidence? ta.
  11. Use a knife instead of a brick...courts are terrified of knives and would probably have locked him up for Section 18.
  12. The problem is Meditate, the Police are damned if they do and damned if they dont. For example, 'Jane' hates nuclear weapons ad the fact that they are transported on British roads near British towns. She decides to join a group to protest against this an goes to a few of their meetings and workshops to learn about direct action and protest. Jane's group have a network of spotters across the Country who report in sightings of these convoys, which enables her and her new friends to follow and intercept them. Jane one day gets a bit carried away and runs out in front of one of the trucks, causing it to swerve and crash. Now who knows what could happen - radioactive leaks, innocent people killed in the road accident itself etc etc. The press then look into this and find out that the very Police officers who protect these convoys had no idea who Jane or her protest group were because they have never put them under surveillance, have no idea who is in it and don't know its aims. Basic surveillance helps officers figure out who people are and what threat they pose. Another example, in the height of a national terrorism alert, Armed Police officers follow a man into a train station. Intelligence tells them the individual is almost certainly a suicide bomber so they must intercept him and taken him down at all costs. ON arriving at the scene, the officers hesitate and issue challenge to him. The individual turns, faces them and reveals he is wearing a bomb which he promptly detonates. Innocent members of the public and Police officers alike then lose their lives. In press reports it later emerges that Officers knew exactly who he was and what he was up to, but failed to act on the information. How exactly, in your world of no surveillance on extremist groups who 'seem ok', are the Police supposed to get things right? When tragic mistakes are made, its their fault and when they don't act through fear of Public backlash, it is again their fault.
  13. For the record, Traffic Bob, I would consider Collisions Investigation to be a frontline task. It is part of ongoing investigations and leads to criminal prosecutions. Office roles I am thinking about are anyone who has a 'non-job' or task which could easily be done by a civvie, and if its anything like HMPS then there will be a few!
  14. Meditate - ACPO have begun to run a programme of Counter Terrorism workshops called PROTECT, look into it. They put you in the role of a CT investigator and show you how fast paced investigations are and how quickly decisions need to be made, decisions you later realise may have been wrong in the end but were correct at the time. Then come back and see how to feel about the Stockwell Shooting. Back on task, we all know and understand that the environment and nuclear weapons, amongst others, are major topics for debate and change needs to happen. However, if groups are intent of carrying out terrorist acts (yes, i call it terrorism) like shutting down power stations and attacking them then I see no reason whatsoever why the Police shouldn't be looking very closely at them and their members. Indeed, I would be most worried if they were not. Groups which pose no threat to safety will as a result draw less Police attention and will be subject to less invasive surveillance.
  15. Its a fine line - suspect everyone and you will make no friends, losing valuable information and intelligence in the process. However, under estimate the risks posed by groups such as Greenpeace and environmental campaigners such as the Climate Camp brigade and even Nukewatch and all of a sudden you could be in great danger. Modern protest groups tend to be a mix of radicals and normal people who think they are doing the right thing, from Nukewatch campaigners who think the 'right thing' is to actively publish the movements of UK Nuclear Warheads to Climate protesters who aimed to shut down Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station. For this reason, i don't blame the Police in the slightest for keeping tabs on such people - missiles need to be protected and power stations need to keep running. Sorry if im on a bit of a tangent, but I truly believe there is a danger lurking within these groups which cannot be ignored, and its groups such as these who are more than willing to show half a Youtube video which shows a 'nasty Policeman' spoiling all their harmless fun. Two sides to every story - the Police don't get things correct every time, but then again nor do the protesters.