Safe Speed Forums

I'd be interested on your views with regard to the Nine Principles of Policing, as laid down by Robert Peel, and how they used with respect to today's policing. They are:

1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and by severity of legal punishment.

2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfill their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.

3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of willing cooperation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.

4. To recognise always that the extent to which the cooperation of the public can be secured diminishes, proportionately, the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.

5. To seek and to preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustices of the substance of individual laws; by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing; by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.

6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public cooperation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order; and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.

7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen, in the interests of community welfare and existence.

8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the state, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.

9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

Source: Reith, Charles. 1948. A Short History of the British Police. London: Oxford University Press.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

In response to item 6 I will say one thing.

The battle of the beanfield.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

You still have the problem that it comes down to the integrity of the police and judicial system to adhere and uphold these values.


For instance, I noticed that West Yorkshire police use an excellent mission statement but like any mission statement, it's just the intension. Not trying to steel your thunder R1 but here it is just for interest...

http://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/sect ... =2&iid=158


"Mission Statement

Statement of Common Purpose and Values

The purpose of West Yorkshire Police is to uphold the law fairly and firmly: to prevent crime; to pursue and bring to justice those who break the law; to keep the Queen's peace; to protect, help and reassure the community: and to be seen to do all this with integrity, common sense and sound judgement.

We must be compassionate, courteous and patient, acting without fear or favour or prejudice to the rights of others. We need to be professional, calm and restrained in the face of violence and apply only that force which is necessary to accomplish our lawful duty.

We must strive to reduce the fears of the public and, so far as we can, to reflect their priorities in the action we take. We must respond to well-founded criticism with a willingness to change."


Sounds good doesn't it? I especially like the last sentence. If it's true then they should be quite interested in SS I would have thought

Cheers bud

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

that was 27? years ago!

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Have you seen any of the news footage of the police 'dealing' with the Heathrow protesters?

(and the principles quoted were writen in 1948)

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.