June 2018
M T W T F S S
« May    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Are our policepersons ever ashamed of their uselessness?

(Wednesday blog)

I’ll not write about the Trump/Kim meeting. Enough rubbish has already been spoken and written.

The only comment I’d like to make was the utterly disgraceful way the BBC and C4 News tried to ridicule the whole event and tried to make Trump into a laughing stock who had supposedly been outwitted by Kim. (I’d better mention that I’m writing about Kim Jong-un, not Kim Kardashian in case I have any younger readers who are not totally up to date with world events).

Had it been O’Bummer who was meeting Kim, the British mainstream media would have been creaming themselves in ecstasy at O’Bummer’s great statesmanship and brilliant negotiating and wonderful peace-making etc etc and demanding a few more Nobel Prizes for the ‘great man’. But instead, it was Trump in the limelight and the progressive pillocks at the BBC and C4 news could hardly contain their fury at the hated Trump’s success.

But let’s move on.

Britain’s once admired, but now despised, police

Here’s a nice photo. It’s a British policeperson:

As you’ll see, this policeperson is both female and apparently from the BAME community. So, no doubt she’ll soon be heading up the Met or have some other equally senior position.

The policeperson is wearing brightly-coloured epaulettes to show her solidarity with the LGBTXYZ  or whatever community and any other supposedly ‘oppressed’ minorities.

And here are some Met police enjoying the LGBTXSTY march:

Well, given that there’s no crime in London, why shouldn’t Met policepersons relax and have some fun?

Here’s a policeperson, with a clown:

Though it’s difficult to identify which is the policeperson and which is the clown.

I can’t call these individuals ‘police officers’ as the words ‘police officers’ suggest people with some sense of duty and some authority effectively dealing with crime rather than spending their time and our money showing how progressive and liberal and libtard and diverse and inclusive etc etc they are.

Some of us old-fashioned, bigotted, Little-Englanders might feel that these policepeople’s time and our money would be better spent hunting down the baddies and reducing the anti-social behaviour and crime blighting our cities and towns rather than in promoting identity politics.

But don’t take my word for it. Here’s a comment made by a former police officer (yes a real one, not a ‘policeperson’) in the comments section of a national newspaper:

“As a retired police officer with 22+ years of exemplary service (all of it on front line and terminated by injury), I feel compelled to enter into the conversation relating to the current state of the British Police Service.

The definition of the duties of a Police Officer when I joined was as follows;

The primary functions of a Police officer are:
– The protection of life and property,
– The prevention and detection of crime and,
– The prosecution of offenders against the peace,”

What happened ?

Nowadays, the Police Service in which I was once so proud to serve, seem to have given up on the majority of its founding responsibilities and duties to involve itself in identity politics and the investigation of `undefined offences` of a questionable nature and origin. In doing so, and abandoning the once accepted and proven patrol responsibilities and practices in order to involve quite a large proportion of its officers to `investigate` computerised `hate crime`, seemingly, as defined by various immigrant and minority groups.

The Police Service is now in the process of alienating itself from the public it purports to serve, and many of the law abiding public are becoming ever more critical and less supportive of the police. (As evidenced in the comments pages of almost all news organisations ).

I have my own thoughts regarding the way the British Police Service has arrived at this sad state. But I will say that the current situation will not be corrected by the use of a desk-bound force of uniformed officers engaged in the detection of `thought crime`. I am confident that a large proportion of serving and retired Police Officers are of the same opinion.

The vast majority of crime is prevented and detected by officers on street patrol, and they need to get back to it ASAP, or this nightmare will not end well for anyone.

5 comments to Are our policepersons ever ashamed of their uselessness?

  • Andy

    What possible use is there for these tiny women police on the streets? They would struggle to subdue an unruly puppy yet alone a 6ft marauding cultural enricher.

  • David Craig

    Some of them aren’t so tiny – they’re so fat that they have difficulty waddling more than 10 metres. How they’re going to nab a couple of marauding yoofs on a moped hasn’t yet been properly explained to us.

  • Alan Thorpe

    I cannot see how officers on a street patrol can prevent crime happening. Times have changed since the 50’s when we all knew the local bobby. If we can see the police then the criminals can see the police. The chance of police on the beat finding a crime taking place must be small. The problem is that we have too many violent criminals. Unarmed police can do very little.

    What concerns me more is what our completely useless teenagers will be capable of. If they ever join the police they will be walking around with placards saying peace and love is all we need. If a crime takes place they will visit to give comfort and support by singing Ariane Grande songs.

    Be very afraid. Things will get much worse than they are now.

  • Stillreading

    Most of the time our police have no teeth and, furthermore, they don’t even care. It’s well over a decade ago now that I had an almost new campervan stolen from a privately owned rural car park a long way from home to which, because of footpath rights, the public had access. There was a narrow window – about 4 daylight hours – in which the crime had been committed. The local police never as much as paid me a visit! I offered them CCTV footage, which I obtained from a local resident who’d had it installed for his own security, of the thieves driving the vehicle away mid-afternoon. The relevant police declined to take a look at it. They could scarcely have been less interested. The only interest they showed in the theft was when THEY rang ME more than two months after the event, after I’d put in a claim to my insurers for over £23,000 and been interviewed by a private eye in case I was on the fiddle. The police gave me a grilling on the phone, asking me why I had accessed their website several times to ascertain the progress of their “desk bound” (their words, not mine) enquiry and as good as accused me of being complicit in a fraud. It wasn’t until I verbally confronted them and asked them outright if they were making an accusation against me, that they backed off. I was disgusted. For the record, I did then write to my MP and to the MP of the constituency in which the theft took place (both Tory-held) and eventual feedback from the car park owner was that I’d ruffled a few police cages! Some small satisfaction I suppose. Never got my vehicle back though! If they’d got off their butts as soon as I reported the theft (5 p.m.on a weekday) they might have apprehended whoever was driving it down the M1 in the direction of London around 1 a.m. the following morning, when it was recorded by a “number recognition device” – known to you and me as a camera. Never use one word when several will do!

  • Mr J G Fields

    In our new England with freedom of speech curtailed
    are you allowed to criticize P.C. Plod?
    Be careful Mr Craig you may end up with Tommy
    Robinson for exercising your constitutional right.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>