111 Swines - Useless Pigs

[TLDV8]

What is this pre-occupation with alarms and insurance? Are you sayinmg that it should be legal to burgle a property if it doesn't have an alarm and/or secured like Fort Knox?

Well I'm sorry, but I don't hold with that philosophy at all. That's like saying it should be legal to shoot anyone that's not wearing bulletproof clothing.

Either the Police have the job of protecting us and our property, or they don't. And when I say "the Police" I'm not talking about the guys on the front line, they just do the job they are paid to do to the best of their ability, Its the policy makers who need to be held to account. As far as I am aware the Police are responsible for maintaining law and order, and as such they should be resourced to fullfill that responsibility.

If the responsibilty for personal and property protection is to fall onto the individual, then let the politicians make that call, and let them give us the authority to take the law into our own hands. Let anarchy rule? I hope not.

The police owe you nothing when you do not atleast make an effort to protect "your own" property...Perhaps you need to spend some time with the Police and see what is not reported in regard to Real crime in this Country...The Police are not there to hold peoples hand when they can not see the obvious..its not the 60's where you could leave the door unlocked,keys in the car at the shops etc.... .. How can it be so hard to see,precautions have to be taken to protect material objects ?Blaming the system,making excuses seems to be the way these days,once again..Where is the accountability?.

[spudchucka]

There's a saying amongst criminologists that the police reflect society and that society gets the police that it deserves.

[Jantar]

The police owe you nothing when you do not atleast make an effort to protect "your own" property.

That is a strawman arguement. Whether I, or anyone else makes an extra effort to secure their property, burglary is STILL a crime. The fact that my house may, or may not, be unlocked or fitted with an alarm, doesn't give anyone the right to burgle it.

Perhaps you need to spend some time with the Police and see what is not reported in regard to Real crime in this Country.

You have absolutely NO idea about any relationship I may, or may not, have with the police

The Police are not there to hold peoples hand when they can not see the obvious..its not the 60's where you could leave the door unlocked,keys in the car at the shops etc....

When did it become illegal to leave the door unlocked, or leave the keys in the car? Once again you are missing the whole point. Who is the criminal when a crime of dishonesty takes place? When did it become legal to commit a burglary just because a house doesn't have an alarm fitted? When did it become legal for me to shoot you just because you aren't wearing a bullet proof vest?

How can it be so hard to see,precautions have to be taken to protect material objects ?Blaming the system,making excuses seems to be the way these days,once again..Where is the accountability?.

The only blame for a crime being commited is assigned to the criminal, not the system. Any blame assigned to the system is for the lack of resources, or to the setting of priority.

[Dafe]

I can't tell by your location where you live. But if it's anywhere near Wellington, I install alarm systems professionally. I can sort you out with a good security system, as sophisticated as you want or just a budget one if you prefer.

[Ixion]

The police owe you nothing when you do not atleast make an effort to protect "your own" property...Perhaps you need to spend some time with the Police and see what is not reported in regard to Real crime in this Country...The Police are not there to hold peoples hand when they can not see the obvious..its not the 60's where you could leave the door unlocked,keys in the car at the shops etc.... .. How can it be so hard to see,precautions have to be taken to protect material objects ?Blaming the system,making excuses seems to be the way these days,once again..Where is the accountability?.

Arguably, all that alarms, locks etc do is divert the criminal to someone else. If half the houses have alarms and half do not, the burglar will pass by the alarmed house and burgle the one without an alarm. If all have alarms , then he will simply burgle the first one, having improved his techniques so that the alarm is not a problem to him

Alarm or no alarm, burglary is a crime. The law says (Crimes Act 1961)

Burglary—
(1)Every one commits burglary and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who—
(a)enters any building or ship, or part of a building or ship, without authority and with intent to commit a crime in the building or ship; or
..

and

[219.Theft or stealing—
(1)Theft or stealing is the act of,—
(a)dishonestly and without claim of right, taking any property with intent to deprive any owner permanently of that property or of any interest in that property; or

It DOESN'T say "enters any building ..with intent to commit a crime unless the building does not have an alarm or is unlocked"

If you do not have an alarm, or leave your premises unlocked, then the police may be less sympathetic. And the judge may be persuaded to give the captured thief a lesser sentence.

But alarm or no alarm, locks or no locks, insurance or no insurance, the crime remains the same. And the Police are duty bound to prevent it if possible,and catch the culprit if it does occur.

Mind you, if I were Mr Sergeant Plod, and I had two burglaries, and only enough coppers to deal with one of them, I'd probably give priority to the person who had the alarm and locks. Just out of sympathy. But ideally there should be enough coppers to prevent both crimes.

Note incidentally, that despite some ill informed commnts by senior Police spokesplods, the crime IS a serious one - punishable by up to 10 years in gaol.

Pity some of the supine wallies that we call judges don't read the law and apply it.

EDIT:. Regardless of whether or not you " make an effort to protect "your own" property.." , the police owe you the same duty that they owe all Her Majesty's subjects - the duty of maintaining the Queen's Police. The statement to the contrary is simply totally wrong .

[scumdog]

.its not the 60's where you could leave the door unlocked,keys in the car at the shops etc.... .. How can it be so hard to see,precautions have to be taken to protect material objects

Yeah well down here 90% of houses are unlocked when I visit them, I see cars left outside shops with the engines running, I see cars parked with the keys still in them, I see unlocked cars everywhere at the supermarkets..
I could go on but if you live in a place like that guard it jealously!!

When there is one cop for an area 50km by 80+ km of course it will take a bit of time to attend a burglar alarm but we DO attend.

[WINJA]

There's a saying amongst criminologists that the police reflect society and that society gets the police that it deserves.

SOUNDS LIKE BULLSHIT TO ME , WE SHOULD GET THE POLICE FORCE WE PAID FOR

[inlinefour]

SOUNDS LIKE BULLSHIT TO ME , WE SHOULD GET THE POLICE FORCE WE PAID FOR

Sounds like a piss poor excuse to behave like a wanker. However it would appear that the minority of Police do that. Not quite a reflection of society I think... (thats is there is a bigger proportion of wankers in society)

[spudchucka]

SOUNDS LIKE BULLSHIT TO ME ,

You're the expert on bullshit Whingey.

[Jantar]

.... WE SHOULD GET THE POLICE FORCE WE PAID FOR

For some strange reason I agree with you. At present our front-line guys are over worked, under staffed, under paid, and can't get leave when they need it. We should pay them more.

[TLDV8]

You can't buy experiance,that is one of the problems...Newbies,are semi worthless until they get up to speed. You have front line staff who accumulate time off,are told to take it,yet can't because of the situation they are in,with the contradicting..Why is this not done ..Major Catch 22
>
I can see where there may be a difference in thinking..There is no comparison between Southland and South Auckland except the sky is blue on a sunny day.. fwiw

[Ixion]

For some strange reason I agree with you. At present our front-line guys are over worked, under staffed, under paid, and can't get leave when they need it. We should pay them more.

With all respect, not sure that's the answer. I've observed that once a certain threshhold is reached pay usually only becomes a big issue when there are other problems festering beneath the surface .

If people enjoy their work, are happy with their conditions and respect their workmates and bosses, you won't lure them away for a few thousand more . And if they don't giving them a few thousand more won't actually solve the problem

Think about it - you hate hate hate your job, you hate the work you do, you detest your fellow workers and your boss , and your conditions stink. Not going to be a happy camper, you'll be off if you get a chance, But, we'll give you an extra $5000 . OK, for a month or so you'll be chuffed with the extra money and think life's not so bad. But by next year that will have worn off and all you'll think about is that you hate your job, you detest your fellow workers, your boss is a bastard and the job conditions stink.

I'd suggest we need to fix the job conditions first , then look at the job itself, then the money .I've always found this approach works much better than focusing on the money (both as a boss and as a union delegate) . 'Tis harder , though.

[Jantar]

With all respect, not sure that's the answer. I've observed that once a certain threshhold is reached pay usually only becomes a big issue when there are other problems festering beneath the surface .

If people enjoy their work, are happy with their conditions and respect their workmates and bosses, you won't lure them away for a few thousand more .

I'd suggest we need to fix the job conditions first , then look at the job itself, then the money .I've always found this approach works much better than focusing on the money (both as a boss and as a union delegate) . 'Tis harder , though.

I couldn't agree more. But at the present time our police force are having trouble with recruitment, and that lack of new recruits is part of what is causing many of the work realted issues such as over work, lack of leave etc. Paying more may help with more recruitment.

[spudchucka]

I'd suggest we need to fix the job conditions first , then look at the job itself, then the money .I've always found this approach works much better than focusing on the money (both as a boss and as a union delegate) . 'Tis harder , though.

In my experience most cops love the job but hate the paperwork, think the bosses are idiots who lose touch with the front line the moment they get pips on their shoulders and just want to paid what the believe they are worth.

[Ixion]

In my experience most cops love the job but hate the paperwork, think the bosses are idiots who lose touch with the front line the moment they get pips on their shoulders and just want to paid what the believe they are worth.

I saw somewhere the amount of paperwork that a cop has to fill in if he collars a young shit doing a badness. It was seriously unbelievable. I sort of boggled, reread it it, boggled again, and thought "what a load of crap - that's not what the public pay cops to do" . Truely, it was unbelievable, form after form, and some of them a total wankfest. Forms about this and forms about that, it would have taken hours. And hardly any of it seemed to my lay eye to be worth a shit

EDIT. You sort of think of cops as chasing villains, grabbing same , delivering them to the cop shop and saying " Caught this little shit doing xxxx ", then heading back out onto the streets to catch the next villain, while said little shit gets processed. But it's not like that at all.