Just who is training these poltroons?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jul/21/police-search-mobile-phone-court

Time was when we used to live in a free country, the police where the servants of the people, and we had rights.
No longer, I wonder how filming a police officer can be a terrorist act.
Sad realy, we have lost so much over the last few years.

There was also a case this week of an actor from Harry Potter who was arrested for taking a photo of a passing Police Patrol and then would up on drugs charges because of other pictures on his mobile.

OK So he deserves it for the drugs charges but being arrested under the guise of the prevention of terrorism act for photographing the Police is rediculous.

Cameras everywhere watching us... but when we use our cameras on them, it seems they get a bit tetchy...

They can't actually do a great deal if we are in a public place...

I've actually got a photo of a Police car and bike!

The thing is they can now. Or at least they can the way they use anti-terrorism laws. That is the problem. I have taken pictures of Police vehicles, and have a handful of shots of riot police on Flickr from when they were policing a local match. I took those a year ago, with no hassle. It would be interesting to see what would happen if I did similar now.

Only if they reasonably suspect your are doing something wrong or taking photographs in a security sensitive area without pernmission...

They cannot actually stop you taking photo's of them or incidents they are involved in, in public areas.

There are no actual laws that they can use to stop you with the exception of Section 44 of the terror act. I know I was stopped at Manchester airport on my way down to the viewing enclosure and all I did was get my camera out of my rucksack!

Surprise surprise, laws to protect from terrorism used to curtail freedom... Were have I not seen this before...

In days gone by it was a Police Force but now to soften the blow it is a Police Service I generally feel that many of the younger bobbys are really the ex school bully in a uniform who feel that they can do what they like when they like. I am not a criminal by the way and close to being 70 year old but there is no way that many of todays coppers would I respect. They do forget thay respect is earnt, not demanded and will only come when they start to respect the public at large. The sad thing is that those I would and do respect are getting more and more outnumbered by the rabble and I suspect they realise this but are unable to do much about it. Lucky for me I live in a small town where crime is of a low level in the main and our local bobby is great but when he is on holiday it all goes to the dogs. Sorry Police officers but that is the way it is.

My sentiments exactly!

I hope this woman does well in her challenge against the Police.

I still get angry over what the Police did at the G20 protest, it really did annoy and enrage me, I was there. Its all comin' out in the 'wash' now, so to speak.

I really feel sorry for you guys having to put up with such crap. It makes me appreciate Canada a lot more, after reading so many accounts of police abusing photographers' rights.

This is the third attempt I've made to respond to this thread - the first two kicked me off and lost my post. However, I'm tenacious enough to have another go.

This is true of all public service occupations, because they are a cross-section of society as a whole. As standards within society decline, there will be a knock-on effect, accelerated by the comparatively recent cost-cutting impositions on police training.

For many years, instruction was carried out at 6 Regional Training Centres throughout the country (although the Metropolitan Police trained at Hendon, as they still do today). The students were residents for 10 - 14 weeks and the Centres were staffed by officers from the Forces that sent their recruits to that Regional Centre, on a pro-rata basis. My Force usually had between six or eight officers working on two-year secondments and paid for by the Home Office.

In the late 1980s, the first major change in training saw the introduction of "student-centred learning," leading to a change in terminology from "instruction and weekly examination" to "make aware and holistically assess." Examinations still ran weekly, but the results so swiftly declined under the new regime that something needed doing about it. The result was simple - the examinations were scrapped. Students had no concept of failure to achieve, or the satisfaction of doing well.

Eventually, it became clear that we were impinging on the recruits' private lives by requiring them to reside, so that was phased out and students could travel home when they wished, thus removing very useful group learning opportunities and removing a lot of camaraderie too.

The biggest cost-cutting took place only a few years ago, when the Home Office closed down all the regional Centres, requiring that each recruit was to be trained on their local Division. Of course, the burden on staffing this change meant that instead of, in the case of my previous Force, having 6 to 8 officers in total, there became a need to have 6 or 8 officers on each Division - a five-fold increase in the number of officers off the street and a budgetary demand that could not have been included in the required five-year forecast.

No Police Station, especially Divisional HQs, had classrooms waiting for this demand either, so hasty deals were done with other educational establishments to use their premises, especially Universities. This was an uneasy mix from the start, but the Audit Commission and the Home Office were able to state that "the police are now being trained at University."

Promotion went the same route, the decline beginning in 1992, when written examinations, followed by an interview board in-Force, were replaced by an objective (tick-the-box) screening test, followed by role-playing assessment centres for those who passed. These were assessed from a generic script by officers from other Forces.

In the last five years, this has been diluted further and current candidates are assessed on their Division by their own supervisors (on top of their normal full-time duties). It's actually more work to deal with a candidate who struggles, so a surprising number don't have many problems on busy Divisions.

Given that today's supervisors are the result of an already watered-down training method, the Service is on a really slippery slope. The number of subjects in the syllabus has reduced, Government targets lead all decisions on resources and there are many in the Service who are de-motivated and horrified at the current situation.

However, the public neither know or care about this situation but are quite happy to carp on about it when it affects them personally - that's human nature. Perhaps the above might give you a different perspective and I hope that I've answered the OP's question somewhat.

I'm hoping that the OP didn't look up the meaning of "poltroon" before he chose to include it in his thread title, because to brand all officers as "abject cowards; craven, recreant cowards - persons who show fear or timidity; characterised by complete cowardliness, cowardly, fearful - lacking courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted," is not only unacceptable, but shows a complete lack of understanding about the Service as a whole and the job it's trying to do.

RG

You're quite right about the public being unaware of this - I certainly wasn't and it does sound like a recipe for declining standards.

Depressing for us all.

Mike

That`s very true Argee, I have read your post twice but can still see no justification why police officers can treat people with such disrepect. If as you say they are de-motivated they have an option, leave. This is one of the few areas that makes me angry. I loathe the Police Force in this country, and please note: I am not some 25 yr old drug pusher, I am actually a 49 year old factory manager with a mortgage + wife etc,etc. If I have become alienated then things must be bad.

Davex.

*cough* Police state *cough cough*
I didn't say that

What was the number of surveillance cameras, I believe it was 1 for every 14 persons in Britian or are this old numbers?