Dear Hasbeen,

I am not convinced that the "no-pursuit" policy should
be changed in Queensland. After all this policy was
introduced in 2012 following a coronial inquest
that investigated the deaths of 10 people during
police pursuits over a 4 year period. That's a high
number of deaths that need not have happened.
And in the case you're talking about here - the guys
were caught - and nobody died as a result of police
pursuit.

So you think it’s just about keeping the bad guys safe, Hasbeen?

<<We need to get back to old world policing. Protect the public by taking out the bad guy, quick time, in the quickest easiest & safest way for the cops concerned. If that means no more bad guy, great, saves a heap of legal aid, & court costs.>>

What about the 87 innocent people who died between 2000-2011 (http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/441-460/tandi452.html)? How did you determine that the benefits of preventing the potential harm caused by the people apprehended in those pursuits outweighed the losses suffered in the deaths of the innocent bystanders? Why, just recently a toddler was killed when a vehicle being pursued crashed into their backyard (http://au.ibtimes.com/police-car-chs-17-month-old-toddler-western-sydney-1409135).

You sound very confused regarding traditional policing strategies versus contemporary policing strategies. You don’t specify which contemporary policing strategy/ies you’re critical of; none suggest that a ‘no pursuit’ policy is a must. If the general public are willing to lose a few innocents here and there, and are capable of maintaining a good, working relationship with the police despite these, then there’s no conflict there.

Apparently you’ve also determined that "protect[ing] the public by taking out the bad guy, quick time, in the quickest, easiest and safest way for the cops concerned" is safer and more effective than crime prevention strategies (still no mention of the safety of the general public). Or is it just some contemporary policing strategies that you’d want to ditch? You need to expand on what you mean here before any constructive or meaningful response could be given. As it stands, I don’t think you’ve thought this through very thoroughly. You just seem to have cobbled together some fragmented, incomplete and cherry-picked data to suit your own worldview.

Don't we all decide things from our own world view AJ Philips. I think it's fair to say I don't think much of yours either.

When my son was bashed by a bunch of Lebs in Sydney, the police who attended tried to talk him out of a complaint. They told him not to expect any result from a complaint, as it was too time consuming trying to track down the thugs. They never got anywhere with Leb valance anyway.

Meanwhile, just half a kilometer the police were protecting the population by hiding in the bushes, with a radar gun, booking motorists for a few kilometers over the speed limit. Revenue raising, the new form of public protection.

Most bashings, & robberies are conducted by people in stolen cars. If they are not caught & apprehended, they are away free & clear. It is only the basically law abiding who can be caught later from their cars number plate. The crims grow bolder by the day.

So we see the academic policing in action. Try not to take a complaint, to keep the records of cleanup high, but avoid any confrontation with criminals, particularly of certain ethnicity, as we don't want to stir up the multiculturalists.

Hasbeen,

Our worldviews and biases may be impossible to eliminate completely, but there are still critical thinking techniques that we can utilise to help reduce their influences. Relying on selective snippets of information that prove convenient, while discarding the rest, was never going to be a good start.

As for the police response to what happened to your son, I would want to know far more than what you’d be able to tell me before I could comment or form an opinion on it. I see too many people forming hasty and uninformed opinions on what should be done, or should have been done, here or there (the classic example being the public’s demand for harsher sentencing despite multiple studies demonstrating that they estimate more lenient sentences than judges when presented with the same facts).

Bashings and robberies may be conducted by people in stolen cars in most cases (I don’t know), but I don’t think either of us has adequate data, or is representative enough of the general public, to make a determination as to whether or not catching these people (and when they’re in their stolen cars specifically) is worth killing a few innocent bystanders every year.

I can only imagine how angry what happened to your son makes you feel. Oh what I would want to do to someone who did that to one of my kids! Lebanese or not. But your problem is not with academics (or “academic policing”, whatever that is). The two traditional policing eras failed us all a lot more than the community policing era (both in different ways), particularly in their later years, and I have already touched on why in other threads.

Continued...

...Continued

Everything you have attributed to “academic policing” is purely in your own mind. Take your claim regarding clean-up records, for example. There are research techniques that can reveal the number of crimes reported but not recorded (it’s how we can know to some degree of certainty that sexual assault was far more prevalent in the good ol’ days when no-one reported it) so why would “academic police” employ such devious and unhelpful practices when (apparently being academic) they’d be fully aware of just how quickly, easily and inevitably their figures would be superseded with more accurate stats? Not to mention how poorly it would reflect on them.

You see, your comments are riddled with little ‘signposts’ like these that expose the fact that you have no idea of what you’re talking about.

"So we see the academic policing in action. Try not to take a complaint, to keep the records of cleanup high, but avoid any confrontation with criminals, particularly of certain ethnicity, as we don't want to stir up the multiculturalists"

As happened in the Rotherham, UK, sex abuse scandal.

"Rotherham Council's leadership resigns following damning child sex abuse report

Rotherham council's ruling Labour cabinet announces its mass resignation following the publication of a damning independent report into child sexual exploitation in the town Rotherham, where around 1,400 children were sexually abused over 16 years

Rotherham Council's entire leadership has resigned following the publication of a damning report into the town's child sexual exploitation scandal.

An independent report, ordered by Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, concluded that the local authority was "not fit for purpose" after finding it has a culture of "bullying, sexism, suppression and misplaced 'political correctness"'.

Following the publication of the report, which was written by Louise Casey, Rotherham Council's ruling Labour cabinet issued a statement announcing the entire leadership was stepping down."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11390001/Rotherham-child-sex-abuse-scandal-council-not-fit-for-purpose.html