True but the scrotes being chased are going to know if the cop chasing them is trained or not It may deter some of them
tbh i kinda agree with you.. perhaps compulsory basic training before they turn bad and a focus on being good at something... i dont know what the answer is.. some sort of implant that disrupts any social media/mobile phone would be good. they seem to live for that shit
A common story for boxers and army requires seems to be ‘or i’d Have ended up in prison’ So may be out could work for enough
I have no issues with running down the criminals. It will deter some but not all. In some cases parents can make a difference...if they even know what their kids are up to. Where we used to live you could ride snowmobiles on the city streets to get to the trail system but kids were illegally cutting through city parks. I watched a kid come out of a park one evening on his sled and proceeded to follow his tracks (clearly seen in the snow) right to his house on the next street over, knocked on the door and fortunately his dad answered. He was furious when he found out and right there told him, "...grounded from the sled, hand over the key" . He also apologized to me. Unfortunately, it was too difficult to enforce as other's still went through the parks and they eventually banned sleds from city streets altogether. It's definitely a tough management issue. Punishment can only be part of the solution as it will work for some. Like medication, sometimes it only deals with the symptom and not the source of the disease.
For the driver of a vehicle to collide deliberately with another vehicle amounts in law to dangerous driving*. And there is no exception to that for police officers on duty (unlike e.g. for speeding). For a Chief Constable/Commissioner to declare a policy of ramming offenders does not override the law. The risk must be substantial of a police officer being sued and/or prosecuted and convicted. In my view, this is highly unsatisfactory. The Home Office should bring to parliament a legislative amendment providing that a police officer has a valid defence to a charge of dangerous driving, even if causing a collision, provided they were acting reasonably, doing their duty, and acting with the authorisation of their police chief. This would also have to include "Causing death by dangerous driving", since no doubt sooner or later their will be a death in these circumstances **. * Road Traffic Act 1988 s.2 etc ** Road Traffic Act 1991
I find it highly unsatisfactory that people think they can violate my personal space, threaten my life, take my things and someone thinks I should just let it happen. I am not an advocate of police using violence giving the fact that so many abuse it but it sounds to me like the moped gangs are running the show. They won't let you people take care of yourselves so somethings got to give to restore the order of things. Let the extreme forces battle it out for a while, police vs. criminals as it was meant to be. At least I thought that's what the police were for?
The UK appears to be inexplicably, hopelessly confused over the issue of law and order. It's possible that the en masse infiltration of the university system from the 60s onward by the far left has led to laissez faire attitudes towards law and order (or it could be a deliberate socialist tactic to destabilise the UK). The groundwork from the 60s and 70s university takeover is bearing fruit now. Or maybe it's that people cannot be arsed to run or pay for police, prosecutors and prisons. Probably that.
Interesting you mention confusion, from the book I am reading...a TED talk by the author. Very interesting!
