Police interaction with moped gangs

[spondonchris]

of course they should and the snowflake doogooders should shut the f*** up

[pookie]

Makes me want to join the Police force

[fossie]

Of course they should, lets extend it to the little fuc***s on non insured off road bikes with no plates or helmets while we are at it.
Once they realised there was a real penalty they would stop and respect the law.......or it wouldn't matter anymore anyway cos they wouldn't be riding again, either way result.
I come across these moped gangs daily , often get threatened by them as I advise people at bus stops to step back from the edge or loose their phones etc....also followed an off road scrote a few months go who was riding , pulling wheelies no lights , on pavement off pavement , stopped when he went down a cul de sac though, No telling who was there. Smand just avoided one head on the other night same again no lights in the rain no helmet squeezing through moving traffic . How do the parents not f******g know?

[katmarch]

Can we issue them with one of these, should stop the mopeds OK

download.jpg (3.95 KiB) Viewed 5983 times

[lomsavage]

OK
IF I am allowed to express an opinion, without being abused and "slated" (as I have been elsewhere)
I will give you the real world outlook on this topic
This is a dangerous precedent, but not for the reasons you think
Lom

[johnr]

i agree, this is a dangerous precedent, not because im in any way concerned for the brainless chav scum blighting the roads, but because it tackles the wrong problem and creates a precedent for pc plod to weaponise their vehicles to crack down on crime on mopeds and bikes. whilst you are cheering the grainy in car videos of scallys being unceremoniously dumped of nicked scooters by police cars, remember this. police are being given consent to knock people from bikes to prevent crimes. nowhere does it state that the bikes are stolen, uninsured, used in street crime, theyre just using cars to knock folks off bikes, the precedent is set, there is 'a police training policy' for it. so when moped crime falls from the front page, how long till the same tactic is used on anyone on a bike, the precedent is set, and the law doesnt recognise the difference between criminals and innocent. police are knocking people from bikes at some risk, in persuit of an arrest. what if someone is mistakenly rammed and seriously hurt? whos responsible? or are we suddenly implying police infalability. sure they never fuck up. ask the de menezes family. this all is an easy populist fix that skillfully avoids mentioning that the reason for the upsurge in crime is most probably due to the slashing of police manpower. lets not investigate, patrol or police anything, we will wait till someone reports a crime in progress and send in the heavy mob. as i say, i have zero fucks to give for the moped criminals, but this tactic is dangerous, and we will all shout down anyone against it as soft on criminality, right upto the moment that some guy in a patrol car misidentifies you as the guy in front on a bike and punts you into the undergrowth.

[lomsavage]

OK here is my opinion,
Please, if you disagree, do me the courtesy of being polite and reading the whole post. (and not insulting me if you disagree)
Firstly, this (despite what the media are touting) is not a change in the LAW, it is a change of Met police policy.
Why have they done this ? Maybe they are just trying to gain public support against the rising tide of crime in London (I couldn't possibly comment), lower officer numbers, more pressures on them etc
While I appreciate and understand Johnr's comments, that is not my main objection,
My problem is that it is the individual officer that will be responsible (and answerable) to a coroners court should things go wrong.
All police action has to be proportionate, asking/instructing officers to ram scoots off the road ad hoc is not, HOWEVER, if thing go wrong (which is easily envisable) when a high powered "skorpion" car hits a moped the individual officer would be responsible/answerable. I have no doubt that his senior management would hang him out to dry
I have been on the "wrong side" of the IOPC and know they are not concerned with policy, they focus on the individual,
I am concerned that good police officers will be put in between a "rock and a hard place" management telling them to do and coroner destroying their careers and I certainly don't want the media and a growing vigilante culture of public opinion forcing them into (potentially losing there livelihood/career/future)
I realise some folk may see this as unrealistic (police look after own), but that is NOT the case between senior management/rank and file
If this policy is allowed to continue, good/experienced officers will be "hung out to dry" for the populist policy of management
H

[fossie]

Both points of view valid, I have agree that my concern is that the 'system ' won't back up the officer , it never does when politicians get involved. This is why we have soldiers facing hostorical charges from conflicts 40 years ago... They were doing what they were trained to do within the letter of the law , protecting the very people who are now chasing the wonga! No politician has the bottle to stand up for the servant of the people in case they lose their votes and job.
The police lost respect when pcso's were introduced, in a cost saving excersise by a labour government, that no subsequent government had the courage to address.
As dangerous precendent yes it could be seen as such , but just the fear of it will stop the moped crime while they suss another modus operandi, in the meantime yes it is a pr stunt with the Police in the middle To use a line from "The soldier " by Harvey Andrews a pawn to the cause.