Disable-Adblock.png

We have detected that your browser is using AdBlock

Police Community is a not for profit organisation and advertising revenue is key to our continued viability.

Please disable your AdBlocker on our site in order to continue using it.
This message will disappear once AdBlock has been disabled.

Thank you for your support - we appreciate it !

If you feel you are getting this message in error please email support@policecommunity.co.uk

Burnie

Resident Members
  • Content Count

    5,336
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Burnie last won the day on March 23 2015

Burnie had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,757 Supreme

6 Followers

About Burnie

  • Rank
    Very Experienced
  • Birthday 16/01/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,764 profile views
  1. Burnie

    The Forum General Chat Thread

    Work for me. Work and be impressed at how quickly BTP got in touch to woo me over to the dark side
  2. 100% of stations will. It's part of the 'agreement' they signed when they started taking strike action - that they wont stop contingency crews having access to the Tenders, that they wont stop contingency crews from responding and that if Life is at risk (Persons reported or firefighter down etc) or any Major Incident is declared then the relevant/required 'on-duty' striking crews will break strike and respond in the appliances not being used by contingency crews.
  3. Burnie

    BTP Transfer thread

    It's tempting. I start with EMAS as a CFR in a couple of weeks (well I have my FPOS-B course in 2 weeks) so it's between transfer and do both or sack in the SC and just do CFR
  4. Burnie

    BTP Transfer thread

    Thank you. Contemplating my options at the moment and a transfer to somewhere more welcoming and accepting of specials where I dont hear anyone saying anything other than praise and who aren't dragging the SC back to the dark ages is definitely under consideration.
  5. Burnie

    BTP Transfer thread

    SBG, how long is that window likely to be open (if it still is) as I'm contemplating jumping ship
  6. Burnie

    Disobeying a lawful order

    Normally when you sign up one of the first lawful orders you are given is that you will obey all lawful orders given by Specials of a higher grade than you.
  7. If they wanted to do it then there are ways to find the money and they know that. The problem is all politics and pandering to their image of what they think public perception is based upon the vocal minority groups, not based upon threat or genuine public perception. After all, the vast majority of public think we already have it, and many think we all already carry a sidearm either on us or in the car... Even my dear old, 60yr old mum (a very anti-weapons, totally anti-firearms [even Anti towards ARV AFOs carrying sidearms when not at firearms jobs] churchwarden who thinks the threat we face is much less than it actually is) thinks we all need TASER.
  8. Burnie

    The Forum General Chat Thread

    POTENTIAL, POSSIBLE, SLIGHT SECOND CHANCE MAYBE!!!! Some other 'At Risk' staff are questioning the recruitment process. The vacancy was advertised internally and externally and the advert closed before the restructure announcement was made. The vacancy has not yet been filled as the recruitment process is ongoing. They are raising the question as to why the vacancy/advert was not re-opened for 'At Risk' staff to be able to apply as, by law, once redundancies are announced any vacant posts previously advertised but not yet filled MUST be put on hold and re-advertised to the 'At Risk' group. If this happens and they readvertise the vacancy to the 'At Risk' group (which I am in) then there is a possibility that I may get a 2nd crack at it OR they could say that I already applied unsuccessfully for this vacancy.
  9. Burnie

    YouTube Thread

    Arrrgh. You can't just watch one and there's soooo many from these guys and others from across the years. Like Ghostbusters from 2011 and many, many more
  10. They wouldn't because they know that if they did strike on the busiest night of the year then lives really would be at risk. The strikes are about making things as awkward as possible, not to put lives at risk. The best part of all this is that the Government got a new Fire Minister. The new minister attended her first FBU consultation talks. She asked what the FBU wanted, the FBU explained and she replied to the effect that 'your concerns are logical, your requests are reasonable and cost effective and I feel should be implemented'. Off she goes to look to implement them then comes back a month later "We will not be implementing any changes, our position will not change".... http://www.fbu.org.uk/news/2014/10/executive-council-interim-statement-23-october-2014-dclg-pension-discussions/
  11. Burnie

    The Forum General Chat Thread

    No, thats not fair on the other guy from my department also at risk of redundancy who passed. Only 1 of us can get the job and he passed. I'm just going to have to face the coming challenges head on, keep going with the fitness and just wait for the next time they advertise a vacancy and hope I can afford it if it means a pay drop.
  12. Burnie

    The Forum General Chat Thread

    Nope, no appeal. The only way I could appeal is if I felt the test was incorrectly administrated (i.e. if I was penalised for incorrect technique but I thought my technique was correct) My performance was just abysmal.
  13. Burnie

    The Forum General Chat Thread

    Nope, no ability to retake. Because this isn't an 'annual' type fitness test. This is a job application fitness test. You only get one chance because, as a Firefighter you have to perform at a moments notice with no warning so you get one chance at the test and only one. If I want another go at it then I have to apply again next time they advertise a vacancy. What annoys me is that the PTIs all know I can do it too as they've seen me do it all as we have free use of the Fire Station gym. As we lined up for the bleep test one of the PTIs even turns to me and says "I've seen you in the gym and on the treadmill, you'll p!£$ this all with no problem. Just relax." But, because I didnt do it when it matters they cant even say anything.
  14. Burnie

    The Forum General Chat Thread

    For those following my recent fitness drive - I failed. My firefighter fitness test was this morning and I failed miserably. Why? Because I ate my breakfast was only 1hr30 before the test. As a result I had to stop short on every exercise to avoid seeing my breakfast again. Annoyingly I went into the fire station gym on the way back home once my stomach had settled and did it again. I smashed out a 'pass' but alas it doesn't count... So here I sit facing potential redundancy whilst seriously annoyed* with myself that I completely and utterly wasted 3 months of preparation because I didn't get up early enough to be able to digest my breakfast before the test started. Because you see now they have 1 Firefighter, 1 internal candidate in the job pool and up to 30 external candidates in the job pool meaning it'll be a long time before the pool is empty again. *there's a harsher word I'm using in my head
  15. Am I the only one thinking that actually investigating this is right? They knew who was going to sell Duggan the gun and when and they knew that Duggan was going to go to the sellers address to collect it and they knew that once he had it he was likely to use it not long after so they could have also known where the sale would take place if they had found out the sellers address. Firearms operations are required to show that they have taken all reasonable actions to avoid having to shoot someone - that they have minimised the risk to life. If they had asked the question "where does Kevin Hutchinson-Foster live?" then they could have put surveillance on him and been in a position to perform the stop when the exchange took place and detain both of them. They would have also known where Duggan was going rather than blindly following him not knowing when and where he was going to make the exchange. By not knowing where the exchange would occur they forced the SCO19 officers into performing a hard stop - a tactic known to have a higher risk of officers being put in a position to shoot than other tactics. By asking the question they could even have potentially taken out the dealer before the sale could occur It's not like arresting someone for possession and being accused of misconduct for not going after the dealer as someone above suggested. It's more like knowing exactly when an habitual drug user is going to buy drugs from a known drug dealer on your patch and that they will go to the dealers house to buy them and being told that you had to stop him using the drugs but not asking "where does the dealer live". When people steal cars, if we know who they are, then we find out where they live so we know where they're going so that rather than having a high-risk pursuit we can just pick them up at home without the risks associated with pursuing. Now don't get me wrong, prosecuting ZZ46 for misconduct probably isn't right BUT investigating whether misconduct has occurred IS right in my opinion. And of course, as soon as you begin investing the actions of a particular officer you have to serve them with notice of that. The IPCC (as the investigators into everything surrounding the duggan shooting) haven't dragged ZZ46 into hearings and interviews they've simply given him a list of questions they would like answers to.