NZ Police public image

[idb]

...cops, they hold power over the general public, for no special reason other than they applied for it.

That, however is rubbish.

[spudchucka]

I think I've posted this before. Its pretty melow dramatic but quite true.

Regarding your comments about the way cops carried on inside the police station, all I can say is that cops deal with all sorts of stuff on a daily basis that would make most people faint, black humour and silly antics is a legitimate way for cops to handle these experiences. It isn't unique to police, I know quite a few fire fighters that have similar coping mechanisms.


Instead of jumping in to criticise why not try putting yourself in their shoes and see if that changes your opinions, even just a little.

Drummer is really upset! For some reason he felt he had to give me negative rep for this post.

[spudchucka]

Do your job well, if you cant, or you cant handle it find another job where your not in charge of people lives!

No body is in charge of a persons life other than themselves. As for the rest of your post you've missed every point.

[spudchucka]

The black humour is a fact of life. But, you don't take humiliating photos of 'customers' and you don't share that humour with outsiders. That smacks of an arrogant "can't touch me, I'm a cop" attitude. Solomona was hoist with his own petard. Good job, no loss. Now they can hire a decent cop to replace him.

I agree 100% about Solomona, good ridance.

[spudchucka]

Actually, excessive politeness was guaranteed to wind up the odd angry customer.

Nothings changed!

[drummer]

Drummer is really upset! For some reason he felt he had to give me negative rep for this post.

Hmm... now how did I do that? I posted a comment... anyhow someone posted something about me... how do you tell who it is?

[spudchucka]

Boring and predictable... well Spud thats because I have been consistant in my argument. I ask you again to show me where I argue current law.

Post 919

There you go... quoting existing law... but don't you understand that the existing law is an ass...

Post 916

The one that the farmer was charged under. If you haven't got my point, the farmer should NOT HAVE BEEN CHARGED!!!!!

Post 898

Spud... thanks for your long reply earlier, however you are arguing on a different plane... I am not debating what the law is now... I am simply saying that the current law is an ass...

Secondly... you say I am a hard man... yes... I am... against lowlife scum. Let me ask you a simple question.. (assuming you made the law) Do YOU believe that a criminal caught in the act of stealing should be protected or not? If you do then how far would YOU allow the victim to go in preventing the crime from happening?

Post 849

What an absolute load of codswallop. Maybe the farmer broke the existing law... but the existing law is stupid to the max. Why.... WHY do you as a cop justify some piece of scum having any rights when committing an offence against a person. You say... it wasn't against the person... bollocks... the farmer worked hard to afford the Quad.... to steal it IS an offence.

The existing law is an ass! The one the farmer was charged under! The current law is an ass! The existing law is stupid to the max!

What law(s) are you talking about? I don't think you even have any idea and are just ranting generically about "The Law". Try being specific.

[drummer]

Post 919


Post 916


Post 898


Post 849


The existing law is an ass! The one the farmer was charged under! The current law is an ass! The existing law is stupid to the max!

What law(s) are you talking about? I don't think you even have any idea and are just ranting generically about "The Law". Try being specific.

Late nighter as well huh! I have repeatedly said that I believe that in particular the law that allowed the police to charge the farmer in question and yet didn't protect him financially. However there are many laws I feel are an "ass". For example the law that detirmines speed on roads being uniform for different skill levels of drivers and riders.

I am not a lawyer... not a cop... try reading my lengthy post earlier tonight.

[spudchucka]

Spud... that is an invalid agrument. Why would we put ourselves in "their" shoes?

If you are so quick to find fault why not put yourself in the shoes of those you critiscise? What harm can it do. All police officers were civilians before they were cops, they know what it is like to be "the public". The public don't "know" what it is like to be a police officer.

if someone is a cop then they CHOOSE to be one... no-one has forced them chainganged them or bullyed them into becoming a member of the police force.

I agree 100%. If they don't want to do the job they should quit. I love my job! Somethings about it suck, other things about it are great. In that respect its no different to any job.

I had a very interesting chat today with a senior police officer. he totally agreed with my thoughts on standards and said that most of his colleagues were sick and tired of being given laws to police that were either too lenient on the criminals or too harsh on the average man...

I'd be surprised if there were many cops that thought terribly different to this.

The quota system for ticketing speeders was criticised as being one of the reasons for young people dying in high speed crashes. Instead of targeting areas where the ticket ratio would be low but the offences truly dangerous, all too often to meet the quota Officers were directed towards areas with high offenders of far less danger... eg 60 in a 50 area.

You got anything new to tell us?

you carry on defending the police force, defending laws which are an ass, defending the average cop on the street (if there is such a thing as average).

Defending laws that are an ass? I'll ask you again, which laws are you talking about?

The average cop on the street deserves to be defended because he / she is the life blood of any police force. Without them there would be chaos.

I defend the New Zealand Police where I see the organisation being unjustly critiscised. Where critiscism is fair I will also critiscise but not with the over emotional BS that most nay sayers do.

You argue with me over increased police funding...

I do what? Have you been reading the same thread? Give me funding! I want more funding!

defend the police who charged a man and then say the outcome of not-guilty was correct DESPITE the outcome costing the poor bloke tens of thousands.

This appears to be your main issue with me. I'll explain it once more. The farmers quad was stolen in a burglary. The farmer shot one of the burglars. The farmer was charged, correctly, as he had offended against a number of statutes. This was the correct action as it is not the police role to decide on guilt or innocence. Their roll is to prosecute offenders and put the evidence before the Court. The Court is the correct and only appropriate forum to decide whether the farmer could be convicted of those offences. It is my PERSONAL opinion that the outcome of the Court was the correct one as I too believe in the right to defend property. However, putting on my law enforcement hat, I also believe that the farmer was quite lucky to not be convicted as the laws are quite clear. The legal costs faced by the farmer are irrelevant, he put himself in that position when he pulled the triger. The same costs could be faced by anybody speeding or drink driving and subsequently caused a serious injury of fatal crash. Its the legal system we have, its not always fair but thats life for you isn't it.

Even when confronted with the FACT that the official government survey has found a massive increase in the public disatisfation with the poliuce force, you STILL don't waver from the "company line".

On this forum the opinions I express are my own. If people like you want to actively put the police down thats fine but if I dissagree with your arguement then I'm just a brain washed cop towing the company line?

Spud, maybe that attitude is what is fundementally wrong with the police... the ole "she'll be right" attitude... the one that bury's it's head in the sand.

There is very little of that attitude in the police as far as I'm concerned. How do you justify that comment?

Mate, we may have the same interest in our love of bikes, and that is what will see us having a beer togeather sometime. But fundementally you and I are different because I believe that something is amiss with the NZ police. I am not an expert in law, police procedures or "walking in a cops shoes". I am a member of the public... the great unwashed mass out there who's truse in the NZ police has sunk to an all time low.

My suggestion is to listen... and learn what the public need... what the public expect from you and your colleagues... individually we are not all correct... not all experts, but collectively we do have a point.

I've never said you don't have a point. Nor have I said that the public should not be listened to. I do believe the police should be under a constant state of self / peer review. However I don't think that the police should be an organisation that is instantly reactive to any sign of public dissatisfaction. The nature of police work is such that there will always be aspects of the job that gets up the nose of the public.

[spudchucka]

Hmm... now how did I do that? I posted a comment... anyhow someone posted something about me... how do you tell who it is?

You haven't been around long enough to see who gives you rep, either good or bad. When you become a senior member you will be able to see who has blessed you with their good or bad tidings.


It looks something like this....

NZ Police/Police Public... 3rd May 2005 22:14 drummer "shakes head"

Thanks a lot by the way, I hope you didn't shake your head too hard and get a neck strain.

[spudchucka]

Late nighter as well huh! I have repeatedly said that I believe that in particular the law that allowed the police to charge the farmer in question and yet didn't protect him financially. However there are many laws I feel are an "ass". For example the law that detirmines speed on roads being uniform for different skill levels of drivers and riders.

I am not a lawyer... not a cop... try reading my lengthy post earlier tonight.

I did read it. If you are going to have very strong opinions about something shouldn't you at least take the time to become fully informed before lighting up over it?

[drummer]

If you are so quick to find fault why not put yourself in the shoes of those you critiscise? What harm can it do. All police officers were civilians before they were cops, they know what it is like to be "the public". The public don't "know" what it is like to be a police officer..

Nor does the public need to. The police have taken on a job that is known to be difficult. The public will never fully understand... either what it's like or why you choose that job.

I agree 100%. If they don't want to do the job they should quit. I love my job! Somethings about it suck, other things about it are great. In that respect its no different to any job...

Then why does Joe Average need to know what it's like? If it's not forced upon anyone then it is indeed just another job... however, there is a couple of differences... the "power factor"... the one factor the public currently can not control. If a "bad cop" wants to, he or she can make life very hard for someone... Also, the public expect the police to do their job efficiently, honourably and fairly. Unfortunately, the public disatisfation is increasing because the force is becoming inefficient, many officers are dishonourable, and the perception of unfairness is also a factor.

Defending laws that are an ass? I'll ask you again, which laws are you talking about?.

Already answered.

The average cop on the street deserves to be defended because he / she is the life blood of any police force. Without them there would be chaos..

Maybe so... but just who is the "average" cop? Take my experience... every cop (bar two that work in schools nearby) I have met since returning to NZ 3 years ago from oZ has appeared to be arrogant, a couple were outright rude. I have never had a ticket or been issued a warning since returning... I am talking about ringing police to report a crime... talking to them asking for directions and being told to "move along"... things like that... hey I AM THE PUBLIC!! What do you reckon I should think?

I defend the New Zealand Police where I see the organisation being unjustly critiscised. Where critiscism is fair I will also critiscise but not with the over emotional BS that most nay sayers do..

See above!

I do what? Have you been reading the same thread? Give me funding! I want more funding!.

Good agreed on that!

This appears to be your main issue with me. I'll explain it once more. The farmers quad was stolen in a burglary. The farmer shot one of the burglars. The farmer was charged, correctly, as he had offended against a number of statutes. This was the correct action as it is not the police role to decide on guilt or innocence. Their roll is to prosecute offenders and put the evidence before the Court. The Court is the correct and only appropriate forum to decide whether the farmer could be convicted of those offences. It is my PERSONAL opinion that the outcome of the Court was the correct one as I too believe in the right to defend property. However, putting on my law enforcement hat, I also believe that the farmer was quite lucky to not be convicted as the laws are quite clear. The legal costs faced by the farmer are irrelevant, he put himself in that position when he pulled the triger. The same costs could be faced by anybody speeding or drink driving and subsequently caused a serious injury of fatal crash. Its the legal system we have, its not always fair but thats life for you isn't it..

That just does Not stack up... firstly you state that it isn't the roll of the police to decide on guilt or innocence. Maybe so... but there is a little word called discretion... that is used everyday when a police officer may overlook something... if the police have a stated role to prosecute offenders (your words... how can they be offenders until proven guilty?) when statutes are broken then no discretion could be used. The police have a duty to keep the peace by upholding the law. Their prime role must be to keep the peace... not uphold the law... and thats where I believe as a member of the great unwashed mass out there that the NZ police failed in the case of the farmer.

I strongly take issue with you on your comment that the cost to the farmer is irrelevant... ask the farmer if those costs are irrelevant. The farmer has been found to be not guilty... the police LOST...

On this forum the opinions I express are my own. If people like you want to actively put the police down thats fine but if I dissagree with your arguement then I'm just a brain washed cop towing the company line?.

Again.. thats your opinion but not the way I see it as a member of the public

There is very little of that attitude in the police as far as I'm concerned. How do you justify that comment?.

You for example say that the laws regarding the farmers case worked well. You have defended the 111 system... two issues that I find difficult to understand... you say those things are working well while we have a farmer that is almost bankrupt for defending his property from scum and a 111 system that has seen failure after failure.

I've never said you don't have a point. Nor have I said that the public should not be listened to. I do believe the police should be under a constant state of self / peer review. However I don't think that the police should be an organisation that is instantly reactive to any sign of public dissatisfaction. The nature of police work is such that there will always be aspects of the job that gets up the nose of the public.

easy answer Spud... I agree that the police shouldn't be reactive, howver they need to listen... I take issue with the mention of self and peer review... by limiting reviews in this manner the force becomes insular. What about something like Queensland has... the CJC... an independent body reviewing all aspects of policing.

I am off to bed... take care... stay safe from those naughty crims!

[drummer]

You haven't been around long enough to see who gives you rep, either good or bad. When you become a senior member you will be able to see who has blessed you with their good or bad tidings.


It looks something like this....


Thanks a lot by the way, I hope you didn't shake your head too hard and get a neck strain.

Aha... thats what happened!

[drummer]

I did read it. If you are going to have very strong opinions about something shouldn't you at least take the time to become fully informed before lighting up over it?

Are you saying that opinion should only be expressed by "experts"?

[Indoo]

[

Im well aware of what cops have to put up with, its all you seem to rabbit on about, but as ive said before cops are not forced to do this job, in fact they APPLIED for it! whats more they even get paid!.

Wow geez, some people actually 'APPLIED' to suffer daily verbal abuse, the constant threat of being assaulted/killed and whats even more they expected to be paid for it? what effrontery.

I say enuff of this "cops suffer on a daily basis" talk, they asked to do it, any of them are free to leave at anytime, plenty of jobs out there at the moment.

Unfortunately and somewhat stupidly maybe they actually thought that they could help a few people. I've got a degree and all that, i could make twice what i make in the private sector. But why should i expect others to do a job for me i didn't have the balls to do myself?

And whats more, how about taking responsibility, blaming cops bad attitude on the work load or govt law is pathetic, cops have no excuse for a bad attitude, they are paid to uphold the law and serve the public, if they cant handle it quit! At least quit the moaning.

No thats right cops have no right to complain. Just grin and take it on the chin, you don't have the same rights as all those other 9 to 5'ers.

Do your job well, if you cant, or you cant handle it find another job where your not in charge of people lives!

Thats right Funky and I'm sure there are people just like you willing to replace them, if your English was any better I'm sure you would be down there right now. After all how could you turn down a job that offers you average/poor pay, terrible working conditions and none of the rights every single other worker in the country has.

I at least have a smidgen of respect for Lou's opinions, at least he has been in similar shoes and has a degree (dare i say it) of wisdom. But unfortunately you have none of that.