“Josephine i aggree the police are reactive in this day and age, but without suuficient resources to deal with the daily deluge of incidents reported and other resources to be proactive it will not change. Crime is higher now than it was in the past and the nature of policing has changed beyond recognition of years gone by. There are too many retsrictions placed on the police that just tie their hands.

Scrap most of the paperwork, let police make the decison who is charged again, and not the CPS. Change Police and Criminal Evidence Act to allow the police to do what they and us want them to do. Brink back the life on mars days!”

“Grimlander wrote: "It's the PREVENTION, surely, that matters"

Dead right, GL. The Police have become RE-active in stead of PRO-active.”

“Pete, Gy - commented on 28-Jul-2010 22:13

Four sus-looking teenagers? how about six of 'em pelting your house with (no doubt stolen) eggs, throwing the wheelie-bin about the garden, hammering on the side the house...? Time taken for police to attend 'in person' (x2)? Two+ months.

maybe somebody's reading our views of police performance and you are the first beneficiary?

and no. I didn't dream it!”

“In defence of the police yesterday I rang the 0845 number, got straight though and reported 4 sus looking teenagers and in 3 minutes flat, I had 2 police vans and 2 PSCO's on bikes in the area and questioning them on their actions.

I tip my hat for the fast response.”

“Come on chaps... back to the thread -- I hope!

Duty of the of the police = the protection of the person and his/her property. As my favourite ferret says, "Shimpool!"

You can't do that sitting in an office juggling figures or 'meeting targets' by so doing. You can't do it it by sitting in a white car on the A18 eating your fish & chips while waiting for somebody to go past too fast.

Surely, chaps, it's time to get back to the nitty gritty of policing -- the PROTECTION of person and property -- NOT the pursuit of people breaking TRAFFIC laws on main highways; NOT the pursuit of people who've ALREADY done the dirty deed.

It's the PREVENTION, surely, that matters, whether it's puking and drinking in the street, assaulting passers-by, verbally or physically, or operating VEHICLES on FOOTways. Stop that when it's HAPPENING and you might get a grip on burglary and housebreaking... like wot it used to be!

Leave chasing motorists to a 'traffic police', except as seen by a bobby on the beat in built-up areas (driving without due care would do -- and a note of the reg-no in the notebook -- as long as justice is seen to be done). It's called PROTECTION of the person and property... NOT ALLOWING IT to happen and then fruitlessly chasing it!

I doubt I'll see it, just once again... but it would be nice, before I die -- IN MY BED, I hope.”

“(Apologies once more for straying off topic)

Neil wrote: "Who taught you that the ECHR had nothing to do with the EU? Moi. You never even thanked me....."

No No No Neil .. wrong again. And I don't know where you've got this fixation from.

As I've *also* told you many times before, I live eat and breath the EU. The suggestion that I wouldn't know something this basic is ludicrous. I doubt you could 'teach' me anything about the European Union. Sorry kiddo...”

“In response to Andy, it is a nice idea and thought to have response officers on standby to attend incidents in progress, however the reality is not that simple.

This town suffers from a great lack of resources in the police, everyone mentions about the same old escuses the police come out with however they are in the main not excuses. Genarally day to day the police in Grimsby do litterally run out of resources to attend crimes. When something comes in which is taking place officers are pulled away from incidents that aren't as important to attend. However what all need to realise is that when you have X amount of bobbies on duty and they are all at incidents in progress, making arrests and having to complete statements and paperwork for those incidents, who is left to attend new incidents or be on standby.

The Government needs to have a change in direction around policing and let the police do the job they are supposed to, instead of bogging the system down with paperwork and regulations that stop the police being effective on the streets. Thats when they get onto the streets after doing all the forms the government insist are completed.

In the current wave of budget cuts, do you honestly think things will improve. To have a good police service they need money, resources and the backing of government and the public to let them get on with it. Could you do your job with one hand tied behind your back and constantly looking over your shoulder through fear of getting a complaint, or disciplined for not filling inthe right piece of paperwork, let alone failing to meet the quotas that have previously been in place.”

“jobs for the boys, again”

“Well I for one am willing to try ANY new idea.
Lets face it, a constant diet of lies, massaged figures, "new ways of reporting crime", "new ways of calculating results", "new ways of calculating outcomes", promises of action on anti-social behaviour, cycling on pavements, drinking in public places, boy racers on the promenade, blah, blah blah. What do we get ? Same old lack of action, year in and year out.
The old excuse of tackling more serious crime simply does not wash. Despite being a victim, I have never reported a crime in this area that has been "tackled" at all. (A polite letter several weeks later does not count)
Self - regulation does not work. The police must be made RESPONSIBLE to the public and priorities must be set according to local problems, not targets. Failing senior officers must be demoted, not allowed to leave on fat pensions.
And while the terms and conditions of employment are being written lets have a three year contract so that the public can remove "Commissioners" who fail to measure up !”

“If it makes you feel any better,Jo. I also had to point the fact out to the "Sun" newspaper. They did not know either.....”