Police crackdown

[rastuscat]

Outputs versus outcomes, now THERE is a debate.

The cops donut consumption is a number that is measurable, like, say, for example, the number of tickets he writes. This is known as an output, a number of widgets produced i.e. donuts eaten, tickets written.

The outcome is the product of the outputs e.g. expanding waistline, reducing road crash rate.

You want to control the waistline, control the number of donuts eaten.

Now, here is the crux of the debate. It's internationally researched and held that an increase in the tickets written leads to a decrease over time in the crash rate.

For the record, that should be the guts of the debate, not the individual work done on the outputs. Anyway, the current management belief (and I don't disagree) is that an increase in the number of effective, targetted tickets leads to changed driver behaviour, which leads to improved outcomes i.e. less crashes, less trauma, less death.

So, if I want to decrease the crash rate (outcome) I need to get my guys to increase their outputs. I can't just give my team keys, uniforms and tell them to go and reduce the road toll, I actually need to tell them exactly what to do to achieve that.

Seems logical. Only, I'm told I'm not allowed to tell them how many tickets to write (coz that's a quota). Go figure.

What I can do, however, is cajole the troops to work in certain areas, and on specific offences. Red lights, stop signs, seatbelts, cellphones, failing to keep left, THOSE are the things my team works on. I'd rather they wrote 1 red light ticket than 10 tickets for number plate lights that don't work.

Back to my donuts.


Sponsored by

https://www.dunkindonuts.com/

[rastuscat]

Just a thought.

Quota or not, if you wear your seatbelt, you won't get a seatbelt ticket.

If you actually stop at a stop sign, you won't get a stop sign ticket.

Notice the correlation?

No offence = no ticket.

Spooky.

[MSTRS:Me]

... need to tell them exactly what to do to achieve that.

... Go figure.

Go figure, indeed.

To paraphrase...
Objective - Square peg into round hole (peg too big)
Method - Hit peg with hammer
Result - still doesn't drive peg into hole
Solution - Use a bigger hammer
Result 2 - Peg still won't go in
Outcome - No-one happy

See, a smart person would figure out that there must be another way of achieving the desired outcome. Unfortunately, that smart person mustn't work for the police, who need to be told what to do (you said it yourself). So - the not-so-smart people who DO tell the police what to do have come up with a new way of trying to get that pesky peg to do what they want. Unfortunately, because the police brain isn't trained in lateral thinking, what has been come up with still uses that hammer.

See, the problem is that the peg and the hole are the wrong size/shape for each other. Forcing the issue is a hiding to nothing. You have to start with a peg that fits. So stop manufacturing the wrong pegs and the problem of fit is resolved.

[steve_t]

Now, here is the crux of the debate. It's internationally researched and held that an increase in the tickets written leads to a decrease over time in the crash rate.

Does the international research discuss police interaction with the public (contacts) without issuing tickets but giving warnings and its effect on the crash rate?

[rastuscat]

Whoa !!

Okay, advise what I can do to change the driving behaviours that cause and aggravate crashes.

Remember that I am only one rung up from the bottom of the bureaucratic ladder, so I'm a bit limited at what I can do.

Bring it on.

[rastuscat]

Does the international research discuss police interaction with the public (contacts) without issuing tickets but giving warnings and its effect on the crash rate?

Yes. Basically, warnings have far less lasting effect than tickets.

Again, I can't prevent crashes. I can only effect driver behaviour that leads to crashes. It's a subtle difference, but significant.

[rastuscat]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm, deathly silence.

Is the question too hard?

[mashman]

It's internationally researched and held that an increase in the tickets written leads to a decrease over time in the crash rate.

Have the Police been writing tickets for a while? Can you explain why the following FACTS don't really bare out the "international research"?

Deaths No of road deaths
2000 462
2001 455
2002 405
2003 461
2004 435
2005 405
2006 393
2007 421
2008 365
2009 384

How does that correlate to international research?

Or

Reported injuries

2000 10962
2001 12368
2002 13918
2003 14372
2004 13890
2005 14456
2006 15174
2007 16013
2008 15174
2009 14858

How does that correlate to international research?

The figures are up and down like a prossies knicks... There are more factors than the fuckwit behind the wheel...

[MSTRS:Me]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm, deathly silence.

Is the question too hard?

I never said I was one of those great minds...but even I can see that the enforcement method is flawed. And the utterances from the likes of Paula Rose are just laughable.

Perhaps it's time to recognise that deaths are always going to be a part of motoring, and just perhaps the level has reached it's natural equilibrium?

Of course, teaching people how to drive, as opposed to how to get a licence, would be a better way of approaching further reduction.

[Owl]

If you actually stop at a stop sign, you won't get a stop sign ticket.

Not entirely true, as I did!

Only ever infringement I didn't deserve and only one I wrote in about. It failed, I paid and got on with my life.

[rastuscat]

Not entirely true, as I did!

The enforcement conundrum.

Occasionally we video the work we are doing, mainly for quality control.

So we get to watch someone commit an offence, on video, then hear them deny it, honestly believing that they haven't done it.

It's a psychological defence mechanism.

Don't worry, we all suffer from it. It's what makes it so hard for us to admit our mistakes, even in the face of clear evidence to the contrary. Oyur mind tells us that our perceptions are true, even when they aren't.

Donuts donuts dounts

[rastuscat]

There are more factors than the fuckwit behind the wheel...

Yup, and that's the problem with the big picture. Everyone has their own view, which largely excludes the big picture.

I agree, and accept that our view is just that, our view.

Not that I speak for the dept, just for me.

[MSTRS:Me]

Got the video of Owl's case?

Just because a cop said he saw something, doesn't mean he did.
As we all know, they're only human. And humans lie, sometimes even believing what they say is true.

[mashman]

Yup, and that's the problem with the big picture. Everyone has their own view, which largely exculdes the big picture.

I agree, and accept that our view is just that, our view.

Not that I speak for the dept, just for me.

Vewy Twue. But the bigger picture won't get sorted by looking abroad. What other countries, that took part in the research, have roads like ours, have the population size similar to ours, border no other countries such as ours, driving skills similar to ours etc... the idiots making the decisions are doing so without considering NZ life, driving skills etc...

Otherwise it's all have been sorted a while ago. Time for a change

[MSTRS:Me]

Accepted wisdom says that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting to get a different result.