funkywingnut

Resident Members
  • Content count

    1,249
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

funkywingnut last won the day on March 4

funkywingnut had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

239 Excellent

5 Followers

About funkywingnut

  • Rank
    Regular User

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Anywhere im sent
  • Interests
    Outdoor stuff - climbing, mountaineering, skiing etc etc
    &
    Irreversibly pestering people into submission.

Previous Fields

  • Police Force
    Plastic Police

Recent Profile Visitors

1,639 profile views
  1. Cant see why they wouldn't. PACE interviews are easy, which given the abysmal interviews I review of long term officers is surprising. If you can talk to someone you can conduct a PACE interview.
  2. Police Station isn't a public place? I am presuming you mean secure areas and not the front office which is a place open to the public and therefore a public place?
  3. First accounts from children at an incident are fine and should be recorded verbatim. Any further accounts should be done utilising the ABE process.
  4. A Police Force recently warned the public that using a phone to pay at a drive thru would constitute an offence and if caught its officers would report the offence. Seems like madness to me.
  5. Public because access is not controlled or restricted, same as the carpark. However, should drivers be prosecuted for using apple pay and the like at a drive thru? Absolutely not, this is not why the law was bolstered and only turns the public against the police. You have to ask yourself what purpose enforcing this at a drive thru serves, I would suggest none.
  6. Thats the conditions of your service, if Police Officers cannot control themselves enough not to take drugs, what chance have they of controlling themselves in other situations. No place for drugs in a uniformed service.
  7. Either its no loss to the Police and even less of a loss to society.
  8. And how much of that is down to this old fashioned notion of unarmed policing and interference from MPs who just view the security measures as an inconvenience. I suspect mostly just that
  9. You simply cannot combat such an attack on an officer unless you make the police totally unapproachable.
  10. No more so than shooting a human. There where suitable backdrops i the form of brick walls so shouldn't be such an issue from what I could see in the video.
  11. I would argue the opposite given the increased risk of trying to hit a moving target with a pistol. Police 5.56 rounds aren't particularly powerful and will not penetrate a brick wall. I would say the increased accuracy of a rifle would have been far better for humane dispatch. But on a positive note one of the officers drew his pistol, made the assessment and hit the target very quickly which was pretty impressive. I suppose we don't know how the officers where called in and what info they had at the time.
  12. Seems like a risky strategy, shooting dogs with pistols for a few feet away in a street. Got the job done I suppose.
  13. Is this opinion formed form your comprehensive policing experience and recognised training? More fights break out because of football tops than any weapon ever has in the UK. Don't believe me, nip to the next premier league football match wearing a team shirt and go to a rival pub. Be sure to post your injury pictures afterwards.
  14. This entire post is based on what you watch on TV surely. 1 interaction with a prosecution lawyer and this post will be proven wrong every day of the week.
  15. What data has the officer accessed or what surveillance has he conducted? This is similar to using a phone of a person injured in an RTC to ascertain their ID or inform their relatives. This Officer has at worst ensured his friends are not concerned for his welfare. Good work, Policing lacks the human touch for to often.