EU Referendum


Those Peelian Principles


09/08/2011



Helen Szamuely put it to me that it's time we asked again what the police are for and what we want them to do. I have always been a fan of the Peelian Principles. So let's have a look shall we?
  1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
FAIL. London is on fire.
  1. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
FAIL. Fat chance. Over zealous policing of quotas has screwed any chance of that.
  1. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
FAIL. When the law is not respectable, how can one respect its enforcers?
  1. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
Errrr. Jean Charles de Menezes?
  1. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
In this instance, it might do some good if they did cater to public opinion and not the liberal elite. That protecting lives and property thing?
  1. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
EPIC FAIL.
  1. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and 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 upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
Yeah. Dressing like paramiliraries and swanning about in 5 Series BMW's helps.
  1. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
In our case it's quite the opposite. The judiciary appears to usurp the powers of the police.
  1. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
Monumental FAIL. Quotas anyone?

COMMENT THREAD