danny wrote:Tyranus wrote:Jeez danny you've really started something here! lol but it has lead into an interesting discussion.
That was the point, for a interesting discussion
I think alot of people forget TEGS already attend alot of urgent tasks and alot of traffic crashes already. When cars are calling for urgent back up, theres not a officer at the office that wont get there as quick as the car will allow, trust me.
According to that report we attended 700 non traffic jobs last year as it was.
If the TEGS are already attending urgent situations that's technically "not their job", could this move be nothing more sinister than formalising what already happens in reality?
I hate to sound cynical, and I don't really mean it as such, but is it an arse-covering exercise for someone, so they don't get in trouble for sending TEGS officers to a non-TEGS job? (And I really don't mean that in an unkind way, but hey - everyone's got to make sure that they're working within "the rules", and if "the rules" aren't working then they might need to be changed...)
To be honest I was disappointed in the Sunday Times for the article, and found it a tad hypocritical that on the same page was also an article criticising the police for being late to P2 jobs. They can't have it both ways (well, actually they can, they're the media, where rules of common sense rarely apply
)
As others have said, the simple answer is more police - but to achieve that, the option of becoming a police officer has to be made more attractive, and more work has to go into improving conditions for police so they don't get fed up and leave.
Just my 2c worth - let the flaming begin