007 Cops given licence to kill?

The Law, Guidance and Training Governing Police Pursuits: Current Position and Proposals for Change


To: The Rt Hon Nick Hurd MP Minister of State for Policing and the Fire Service


The above is a Government released paper in .pdf (portable document format), which can be downloaded at: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/police-pursuits. In my view that document reads as: The Government is seriously considering a proposal to offer Carte Blanche protection to police officers to drive carelessly and dangerously and recklessly in pursuits and responses free from prosecution. And it has the support of an ex Labour MP.



[!!!8230;] A plan to offer greater legal protection to police drivers when pursuing suspects has been welcomed by Merseyside!!!8217;s Police and Crime Commissioner... Jane Kennedy [...] Read the full story in The Challenge, issue 372, June 2018, page 18 - News desk: 0151 706-7411. https://www.thechallenge.co.uk



I feel this to be an ill-conceived and dangerous proposal and I would argue licence of this nature holds constant threats for us and our children; and yet, inconceivably, the UK Government is seriously considering it has merit and there are strong clues that those behind the proposal mean to see it successfully passed in to law*.


Why is this important?



Throughout this instrument I shall offer logical argument for my observations gained by years of experience working as a probation officer on Merseyside, observing the macho attitudes of young males both in and out of uniform supporting my view that the proposal is dangerous and, which convinces me that failure to have it rejected will result in a high probability of injury and death. Therefore, I would implore that you support the petition to reject the proposal before: 12:00 on Monday 13th August 2018, the deadline people have to complete the Likert type (participants can only chose from options provided) questionnaire.



I feel the choice of a *Likert questionnaire has enabled the compilers to manipulate the responses and adds to my belief that the whole document is biased and was constructed to influence and produce a certain view; which skillfully and no doubt was compiled in a manner that was meant to discourages one from taking another view. I feel the questionnaire consists of questions that are for the most part irrelevant and apparently written in Lawyer Double Speak. Please compare your observations and remarks to the 6 questions in the questionnaire, to my responses below:



(1) I think this is asking: should we fix something that isn!!!8217;t broke? I strongly disagree

(2) I think this is asking: if a police offer drives aggressively, causing another to have an accident is the police officer responsible? I strongly agree

(3) I think this is asking: should police drive carefully at all times? I strongly agree
(4) What does this even mean? (5) This, I feel, is a loaded question. A police officer should always drive carefully.
(6) I think this is fairly obvious. No changes are necessary



The way things stand at the moment, a police officer driving a motor vehicle in pursuit of another motor vehicle and a police officer driving a motor vehicle in response to a call to what might be a serious incident is not instructed nor expected to drive carelessly or dangerously or recklessly and takes it upon himself or herself and assumes sole responsibility should he or she choose to drive carelessly or dangerously or recklessly and if that careless, dangerous, reckless driving causes an accident (resulting in damage, death or injury to any member of the public including the driver of the vehicle being pursued) or causes another vehicle to have an accident, regardless of circumstances that might have contributed to the accident, or the severity of the accident, the police officer who caused the accident is fully aware s/he will have no protection in law and will bear alone the consequences of his or her actions.



I feel strongly that the proposed changes to the law will remove the little restraint that exists and encourage dangerous driving, therefore it is imperative that the proposed change to law is successfully challenged and overcome for if not there exists a great probability of loss of life. I say this advisedly with over 20 years of observations of attitudes young macho police officers have displayed when feeling nobody was in earshot.



This proposal appears to naively view police officers as automatons that will keep to the letter of the law and not be tempted to circumvent the law and certainly not brazenly abuse it. Young police officers are subject to the urges of all young people. I am not discounting young female police officers, however, young male police officers like any young men become hyped-up on testosterone in exciting circumstances and talk of: !!!8220;I got a buzz, I was on his tail, pushing the little f**ker hard.!!!8221; !!!8220;I tried to flip the c**t.!!!8221; !!!8220;I!!!8217;d had about five pints that night when we got the shout, f**k me, was I ready for some fun.!!!8221; These remarks made by young male police officers (waiting to be called as witnesses in court) along with many more are not uncommon to my ears.



One of the great failings in any organization that relies on a regimented, structured system is that the ones at the top have no idea what is going on at the bottom. Chief officers might give out with directives and orders, but when, if and how those orders and directives are complied with is another story. The police force, to the public, presents as a service of tolerance and equality, when in effect my experience is that of a male dominated, racist and bullying system where one is intimidated to go along with the status-quo (and women have to be one-of-the boys) because if not !!!8211; they just might find that nobody comes to their rescue the next time they find themselves in danger, alone and needing help.



Although the current way in which officers are used to dealing with !!!8216;chases !!!8216; is less than perfect and still offers dangers to the public it would seem reasonable to assume that any damage resulting from these chases will be relatively minor - compared to a system where all restraints have been removed - as the knowledge that one is on one!!!8217;s own helps to keep excitement in check. Or as Freud might have put it: the Superego ensures the Ego controls the Id; but should the proposed changes be accepted then the equilibrium maintaining Superego will be removed from the equation entirely as the Ego becomes massacred by the enormous Id.