NZ Police public image

[scumdog]

Hey WINJA when you have been there, done that then you can mouth off all you like.

Good point but see my post (#559) on why he can't!

[Ixion]

ah the sweet sound of reasoned discourse.... seriously, if you are looking to convince people of the rightness of your position and the soundness of your arguments, this is not the way. If on the other hand you are trolling to provoke replies and annoy people, I apologize to others on the forum for feeding the troll.

winja, are you trying to make a point? please explain a little bit more clearly what you are attempting to tell us....

Well, it is polemic rather than discourse. But there are three points in Mr WINJA's statement which are at least arguable.

His implicit objection to the present no-discretion magic number approach to speed enforcement is one that I suspect is shared by a good many on the board.And the counterpoint, that speed enforcement should make allowance for the circumstances is certainly not unreasonable.

Mr WINJA suspects that police policies are overly driven by revenue recognition. In this he is supported by a large section of the public. Although it is doubtless false at the coalface level, it is hard to avoid suspicion that overall strategy in the Commissioner's office at least casts an eye at the numbers (incidentally the oft repeated statement that the Police force derive no benefit from the generated revenue is not quite true). Although Mr WINJA does not expressly make the point, there is a implicit corollary also that the police concentrate over much on easily measurable offences (speed, blood alcohol) at the expense of "judgement" offences.

And Mr WINJA's observation that the road toll this Easter is the highest for some years, despite the efforts of the no-discretion policy, and an admitted reduction in average speed is unarguable. The statistics are not robust, since the numbers involved are small enough that random variation can cause such swings (no, not you Mr jrandom, it's not your fault) . But, I think we can be sure that if the road toll had been lower than previous years , then the no-discretion policy would have been given credit for the good. So it is only reasonable that it should at least be questioned when the reverse happens
.

Hopefully, this will serve to clarify somewhat the gist of Mr WINJA's argument

Strictly speaking , a troll is not one who makes an aggressive statement, even if it be unpopular, but rather one who initiates a provocative thread then disappears and makes no attempt to defend his position. I do not think that is so in Mr WINJA's case . He always hangs around to reiterate his opinion

[RDJ]

Happy to be corrected on the definition of troll...

I think few KBs would disagree that the perceived emphasis on collecting cash from speeders is driven from the top of the police / political hierarchy - all the more reason IMO for us not to abuse the people on the ground.

And yes every time the toll falls the politicos in police and Govt circles claim credit for their policies... and when it rises they insist more of the same are needed.

And, 1 car crash alone with a self-confessed speed addict is responsible for the statistical bump upwards.

Trouble is the signal-to-noise ratio in the way these arguments have previously been presented.

regards

[scumdog]

Well, it is polemic rather than discourse. But there are three points in Mr WINJA's statement which are at least arguable.

Mr WINJA suspects that police policies are overly driven by revenue recognition. In this he is supported by a large section of the public. Although it is doubtless false at the coalface level, it is hard to avoid suspicion that overall strategy in the Commissioner's office at least casts an eye at the numbers (incidentally the oft repeated statement that the Police force derive no benefit from the generated revenue is not quite true).

Hopefully, this will serve to clarify somewhat the gist of Mr WINJA's argument

Not defending Govt policy but if revenue gathering was the ONLY reason tickets are given out then how come the Govt. lets us away with issuing "compliance" tickets for worn tyres, non-funtional head/tail lights, recently expired WOFs etc?? - THEY sure as hell don't raise ANY revenue (unless the ticket recipient is too slack to rectify the fault).

[MSTRS:Me]

Not defending Govt policy but if revenue gathering was the ONLY reason tickets are given out then how come the Govt. lets us away with issuing "compliance" tickets for worn tyres, non-funtional head/tail lights, recently expired WOFs etc?? - THEY sure as hell don't raise ANY revenue (unless the ticket recipient is too slack to rectify the fault).

I take that to mean 'proof of repair or else a fine' since I've never had one of these. If so, it could be to moderate the image derived from other ticketing activities

[Ixion]

Not defending Govt policy but if revenue gathering was the ONLY reason tickets are given out then how come the Govt. lets us away with issuing "compliance" tickets for worn tyres, non-funtional head/tail lights, recently expired WOFs etc?? - THEY sure as hell don't raise ANY revenue (unless the ticket recipient is too slack to rectify the fault).

Perhaps because such matters are (a) not worth much revenue in total (b) in some cases at least not easily "measurable" - eg worn tyres. Don't talk too loudly about it though you you may get a directive !

I don't think anyone has ever suggested that revenue is the ONLY reason that tickets are issued. Only that the revenue implications skew the strategic direction (not the decisions you guys make, but the way resources are allocated etc). I find it hard to believe that the decision of how many manhours (ie how many people assigned) to spend on speeding enforcement versus how many to burglary is not skewed by the fact that one generates a revenue stream and the other does not . The revenue stream doesn't go directly to the Police , but it does follow back through the LTSA and eventually wind up as extra budget for the Police department.

[Krusti]

The main driving force for alocation of man hours in certain areas, ie seatbelt hours etc is Local Govt funding. Each area is funded to supply X number of hours for seatbelt ,Excess breath alcohol etc traffic duties. No proof of hours...no funding.

[Ixion]

The main driving force for alocation of man hours in certain areas, ie seatbelt hours etc is Local Govt funding. Each area is funded to supply X number of hours for seatbelt ,Excess breath alcohol etc traffic duties. No proof of hours...no funding.

See, this is where , from a public perception point of view, the problem arises.

Police funding is driven by external agencies (LTSA, Local bodies etc). So cops get told "Spend X hours on seatbelts (or whatever)" . Because as you note, if they don't then the police lose out on funding. So the word comes down from on high.

But PC Blogs, who is told to spend all those hours, also has to justify to his immediate superiors what he is doing. If it appears that he is just bumming around they'll come down on him. So, while he's putting in those hours on seatbelts (or whatever) he has to generate some tickets . Otherwise Sergeant will be saying "Just what the hell were you doing all day yesterday Blogs" . So PC Blogs must ticket away , which is where the public see "revenue generation" He's not really doing because it raises money, but it is still the revenue issue that is driving the tickets.

What doesn't enter the picture is whether FROM THE PUBLICS POINT OF VIEW those hours would be better spent , say, in chasing up shoplifters and maybe getting some young guy straightened out before it's too late. LTSA , local council just say (logically enough) "we're not responsible for that"

Effectively the decisions on policing resource have been allowed to migrate outside the police force, and are being taken by people who are not publically accountable for them.

And since the traffic operations do indeed generate a big net profit, LTSA/Local bodies etc have no difficulty getting central government to fund more of it. Which in turns means that central governemnt screws down the amount that it funds direct to the police, since it can (truthfully) claim that police funding has (overall) increased. Unfortunately catching burglars doesn't generate any revenue to justify more resources

Net result is that the public get told that there is no police resource to protect them from burglers, shoplifters, bashers. And then see all the police cars parked up at the road side. Justifiably they think something's wrong.

[Pixie]

Happy to be corrected on the definition of troll...

I think few KBs would disagree that the perceived emphasis on collecting cash from speeders is driven from the top of the police / political hierarchy - all the more reason IMO for us not to abuse the people on the ground.

I vas chust followink orders

[vifferman]

Probably not - but then again it might just be an otherwise honourable member of the site trolling (lot of buggers out there) - in which case he IS an arsehole for trolling so well!.

Like me for instance?

its good being able to be someone else sometimes so you can be ruder than you normally are or whatever.

OR TYPE IN CAPITALS AND PRETENT THERES SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR EYES, AYE WINJA?
THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH WINJAS EYES IS BLINDNESS CAUSED BY TOO MUCH MONKEY SPANKING, SAME WITH HIS HAIRY PALMS.

[Lou Girardin]

I'd respect the rank and file cops a lot more if they publicly disagreed with current policies. Just like several UK Police Associations have done. The fact that they don't seems to indicate that they agree with them.

[outlawtorn]

Like me for instance?

its good being able to be someone else sometimes so you can be ruder than you normally are or whatever.

OR TYPE IN CAPITALS AND PRETENT THERES SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR EYES, AYE WINJA?
THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH WINJAS EYES IS BLINDNESS CAUSED BY TOO MUCH MONKEY SPANKING, SAME WITH HIS HAIRY PALMS.

Is that what winja claims?
I wonder if he's heard of screen resolution adjustment? Or maybe it is from too many nights spent in front of the PC doing some one handed surfing!

[RDJ]

I vas chust followink orders

mmm... unusual moral equivalence alert. Police ticketing speeders according to the law of the land (not singling us out on the basis of race, not putting us against the wall and shooting us, not 'concentrating' us in 'camps') being - if I understand the accented phrase above - equated with Nazi tactics? I don't see the connection / equivalence at all.

Actually, I obey orders at work myself, a lot. I obey my professional association's orders regarding my work practice, a lot. I better continue to do so if I want to keep my job.

Don't you obey orders as well, Pixie? I'm sure you do.

[Ixion]

mmm... unusual moral equivalence alert. Police ticketing speeders according to the law of the land (not singling us out on the basis of race, not putting us against the wall and shooting us, not 'concentrating' us in 'camps') being - if I understand the accented phrase above - equated with Nazi tactics? I don't see the connection / equivalence at all.

Uhh. I think it was actually a Sgt Schultz take off

A humorous or ironic reference to the necessity we are all under at times of doing that which we may disagree with, or think unwise, because "the boss" says to.

Although the legendary Sgt was a member of the Wehrmacht, I think that few would regard him as a "Nazi" .

[RDJ]

Ah! Hogans Heroes - "Colonel Klink, I know nuffink! NUFFINK!"

My apologies Pixie if that was the intent. I thought I was seeing an example of Godwin's Law in action.

As they say "paranoia is its own reward..."