Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Why? If someone commits an offence aged 20, or younger, serves their sentence, whatever it is, they they are viewed as dishonest permanently? They cannot be given a job in the CS even 25 years later?
"1,000 serving police officers in Britain have criminal convictions"
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Why? If someone commits an offence aged 20, or younger, serves their sentence, whatever it is, they they are viewed as dishonest permanently? They cannot be given a job in the CS even 25 years later?
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
winjer
holocene death beat
Choking on exhaust fumes?
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
The 'defending the indefensible' fuckwit brigade are out in force I see.
En masse.
Personally I don't trust a copper who hasn't killed at least three people with his bare hands.
Well, if a presumption of permanent dishonesty should apply to police officers then why should others be regarded as different.
No. Looking out for cameras, police, speed limit signs, looking at your speedo all the time, making sure you have your belt on, making sure your tax is up-to-date, making sure it's in the right place on the windscreen, making sure you haven't got bald tyres, making sure, making sure, making sure...
The 'defending the indefensible' fuckwit brigade are out in force I see.
I'm personally not defending them, i'm having a pop at the insanity of the millions of laws and rules and stuff that modern britain is run under. I think it's difficult to not become a criminal, even though one is essentially causing no harm to others. So it doesn't surprise me that coppers are criminals too. After all, our leaders are, our churchmen are, our judges are, our business leaders are, anybody who likes to use drugs is, most drivers are.
I left 18 years ago. My visits back to britain used to be a pleasure in terms of the driving experience i have compared to where i live. But last year it was very different with all those cameras everywhere, fines coming through the post with huge penalties to pay, always looking at the speedo to make sure you're not doing 31mph, having real parking problems, and so on.
And it's not really about safety is it. It's all about having a state that pokes its nose into your every affair in life. I'd like to see how many ways there are to die more easily than the 3000 on the roads.
Not true.
Dangerous drivers are not those who go 2 or 3 mph above the speed limit, but they will be fined and penalised.
Anyway, you're in tabloid territory: what do you mean by dangerous? And if you think britain's roads are dangerous compared to the vast majority of other countries, you're living in cloud cuckoo land.
But britain loves its security and safety at the expense of most other things these days. Funny, having coppers exposed as criminals. Let's see a similar expose on MPs, judges, lawyers, and all those other legal sorts. Then we might just realise that it's bloody difficult remaining lawful in the modern britain.
Oh, a car is a weapon? Well, just about anything by the same token could be a weapon. What's your point?
8ball
As seen on TikTok
winjer
holocene death beat
That killer drivers get off easy, and that loonies like you - who talk about not being able to breathe while driving - encourage this culture of impunity.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
More tabloid babble.
Culture of impunity??? You're having a big laugh mate. It's the bloody opposite. It's the culture of the nanny state, so much so that coppers can't avoid being criminals.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
I think you've been out of the country too long and so got it totally arse about face.
Check out this particular line of character assasination :-
http://news.google.co.uk/archivesearch?q=brunstrom+speed+camera+drugs&hl=en&ned=uk&sa=N&start=10
sorry mate, not quite sure what you're meaning here. It's not that serious for me to be wading through loads of websites.
I could easily have things wrong. It's normal. But i've not been away too long. Not long enough yet.
Dillinger4
Es gibt Zeit
Life is better in sunny Thailand.
For me it is dillinger. I can't recall you saying anything so emphatically correct. What on earth have you been eating today mate?
Dillinger4
Es gibt Zeit
A bacon butty.
It isn't as good or correct as a bacon butty can be in sunny Thailand, though.
It isn't as good or correct as a bacon butty can be in sunny Thailand, though.
winjer
holocene death beat
You're the one repeating tabloid babble. Culture of impunity:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8697784&postcount=95
Dillinger4
Es gibt Zeit
I couldn't really understand my bacon butty because it was in Britain.
One case equals a 'culture'... no, i don't think so.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
This is nonsense.
As for the OP, as has been said already there are two questions that arise from it:
i) whether those offences took place before or after the individual joined the police;
ii) the nature of those offences.
Personally, I think there should be good reason why someone employed by the police who has committed a criminal offence is not sacked as a result - as has been said, we do have to uphold the law and must not be seen to accept the same in our own ranks - but there will always be instances where sacking someone is not appropriate.
As for the nature of the offences, people who are convicted of dishonesty-based offences should always be dismissed because they will inevitably be tainted in all subsquent criminal enquiries as a result. Offences of assault should result in dismissal depending on the circumstances of the assault, as should motoring offences. Other stuff should be dealt with on its own merits.
One also, as a final thought, wonders what the proportion of MPs who have a criminal record is. I would guess its rather higher than the proportion of police officers with one.
winjer
holocene death beat
A fine retort. Any comment on the sentence?
Similar threads
- Poll
