Priorities For Policing In Shetland

[unlinkedstudent]

Ghostie.  Behave.  The comment on bestality was on another thread some time ago.  Now one respectfully suggests you stop monkeying about and leave others to make an ass of themselves.

[Doodle]

 

Chief Inspector,

 

As a parent, I am concerned about how much training and knowledge your officers (indeed the Police in general) have on cyber-bullying, online grooming etc, and how Police Scotland, perhaps with the help of other agencies, education etc, hopes to tackle this worrying new fast moving problem. 

 

Kind regards. 

 

Do we really need the Police to teach parents how to operate the 'off' button on a PC?

 

 

I would imagine that the sort of training referred to would start with an introduction stating that this sort of statement is completely outdated, not to mention very naive...

[muggins]

Am only airing my personal bug bears here , but , the ingress of drugs is alarming , its no a big place and its a very captive audience . Reckless and witless overtaking seems to be left to the will of the gods and insurance companies , and whoever can lie most convincingly has given the correct statement

[unlinkedstudent]

 

 

Chief Inspector,

 

As a parent, I am concerned about how much training and knowledge your officers (indeed the Police in general) have on cyber-bullying, online grooming etc, and how Police Scotland, perhaps with the help of other agencies, education etc, hopes to tackle this worrying new fast moving problem. 

 

Kind regards. 

 

Do we really need the Police to teach parents how to operate the 'off' button on a PC?

 

 

I would imagine that the sort of training referred to would start with an introduction stating that this sort of statement is completely outdated, not to mention very naive...

 

 

I'm well aware that teenagers will use the internet.  I'm well aware that at the end of the day, the parents chose to let their offspring have PCs in their bedrooms out of sight of parents' prying eyes.  What is even more naive is the latest attempt at curtailing adult rights by the introduction of legislation forcing adults to opt into the proposed ISP filter scheme thereby meaning we all have the kid version of the internet until we politely ask our ISP that we want to opt out and have access to adult content, a typical Government knee jerk reaction because some kid got killed in Wales (?) and the scumbag had photographs of hard porn.

 

Flirt with someone using foul language in a chatroom?  It's already illegal, even though taking place between two consensual adults.

 

But what is hard porn?  So they're introducing in England & Wales legislation whereby adults can't look at a photograph "depicting rape" or say of "fisting".  In Scotland, the legislation already exists but there are guidelines under the Scottish legislation allowing for the poster to state that the photograph was taken with two models involved who consented.  Read 50 Shades of Grey and loved it?  Look at a photograph of many of the scenes on your PC in England & Wales OR in Scotland (if said photograph doesn't have an explanation) and you can end up facing a 3-5 year prison term, DESPITE doing (certain) said acts in real life being perfectly legal.

 

So you go to the public library in some places where such Google searches are already curtailed and find you can't search the word "gay", yet being gay isn't illegal.  Where will it stop?

 

So how will such legislation protect those under 18 and stop grooming?  Adult websites already work closely with the authorities and anyone mentioning underage gets dealt with, any severely dodgy postings get tipped off to the authorities.  The Police already have trained staff monitoring chat rooms.  But no, parents want more to "protect" their offspring.  Curtailing adult material on the web won't lead to a decrease in rape and assaults against women - the research on which they rely relates to a very small survey done back in the 1960s - none has been done since.

 

No, I'm not being naive and ignorant.  If anything, it is certain parents who fail to recognise that it STARTS with their own behaviour as to how to protect their offspring and that they have responsibilities.  It shouldn't be a case that knee-jerk reaction laws get brought in affecting all our freedom on the internet (are we sure this isn't China?) simply because some 14 year old wants to google something and their parents aren't monitoring their internet usage.

Edited October 6, 2013 by unlinkedstudent

[kl250]

What worries me is the amount of times you see hgv and psv vehicles around town with the driver on a mobile phone, turning corners,changing gears ( presumably)braking ,indicating etc all with one hand . As a psv license holder myself i would be terrified to answer a call on the move, you just cannot divide your attention when driving any larger vehicles.

[PoliceScotlandShetland]

Hi,

 

It has been interesting reading the various comments / discussions that have taken place over the past week or so - certainly some strong opinions out there, though I'm not sure "anarchy" will really make anyone's life any better.

 

From what I have read I'm gauging that the main issues are linked to substance misuse and road safety.

 

Illegal drugs are deemed so by those that make the laws we live buy. Any debate about changes to these laws is at a totally different level than deciding what the police in Shetland should be addressing. We will, as we have over the past year, look at the issues around illegal drugs, synthetic highs and alcohol - under the heading "Substance Misuse". 

- 67% of the "serious crime" in Shetland has alcohol somewhere in the equation.

- many of the assaults / breaches of the peace / domestic incidents / vandalism, etc have alcohol in the equation.

- synthetic highs have resulted in some crime and more seriously, hospital admissions. Their use has caused such concern amongst some young people that they approached us to form and young people / police group called StYPP. We are jointly working on a peer education programme.

- Illegal drugs are exactly that, illegal and their use has fuelled some crimes in Shetland.

- Dogs Against Drugs are paid for by a charity set up by people who wanted to do something to address the issues that affected their community / them personally. This was in the same way that other people have set up charities to address issues affecting them. The use of the dogs has made a positive impact and we will continue to use them as long as they are available. I must confess I've never before heard the argument that the use of drugs dogs may have led to people using "harder" drugs. Drugs dogs are used the world over and  were used long before they were ever deployed in Shetland. I have yet to see any structured evidence that their use encourages the use of harder drugs. (There used to be one police funded dog & one charity funded dog, now there are 2 charity funded dogs and we're able to deploy the police officer to deal with Offender Management work. As the Area Commander I really appreciate and value this community funded support. Shetland should be proud of what it can & does do to support charities that work to make it a better place to live. Thank you)

- Drugs education will continue. Yes, some young people still take drugs, but the number may have been higher if they hadn't received that training in the first place. It is interesting that this argument is applied to drugs education, I wonder what we'd all be saying if the same point was made in relation to other forms of 'safety' training.

 

Road Safety - we have been addressing that over the past year and will continue to do so. The speeds detected last week, when the three offending driver's were all Shetland residents (as opposed to tourists or transient work force) shows me that we have a bit more work to do.

 - We will also look at cyclists. As a keen cyclist, I'm all for cyclists being allowed to use the road, legally, as any other road user is entitled. However, I agree that cycling offences are serious (a local resident was recently charged in relation to "careless" cycling) and the fact that a number of people have relayed experiences where they've been hit by cyclists is unacceptable. We will look at it.

- In relation to the "opinions" of officers in court cases. The case you're referring to is before my time here and as such I don't know the detail. If an officer is asked a question in court, including one where they are asked for their "professional opinion", then they will answer it. It is up to the court to decide what they do with the evidence / opinion or any answer given in court by any witness. 

- The suggestion that we stop enforcing seatbelt and crash helmet legislation is thankfully just a suggestion. As a keen mountain biker I would never think of doing a down hill run without a helmet, so why would I get on a motor cycle and not wear one, or drive my car without a seatbelt. Anyone that has ever been in a collision or witnessed the aftermath of one would be able to testify to the benefits of seat belts and airbags. The fact we need to "enforce" the law to keep people safe says a lot about our society. You'd think we'd be doing all we could to stay safe without anyone having to tell us, and certainly without suggesting we stop educating / legislating to keep people safe. (I'm not advocating we all stay inside and never take any risks, but equally there are speed limits, seat belt / crash helmet & mobile phone laws because their use makes every other road user safer)

 

Please keep up the discussion / suggestions, it is interesting.

 

Thanks

Angus

 

[Colin]

Well, PoliceScotlandShetland,

 

As someone in the know and, as a cyclist yourself, could you tell us what happened to the police bicycle (or was it two?) that was/were purchased a year or two back..  Saw one once. 

 

Also, why are Fork Lifts, Dumpers and even heavily laden HGV's allowed to run through Lerwick during the rush(?) hours.  Nothing worse than being in a queue of vehicles behind one of these as it chugs along.

[JustMe]

Also, why are Fork Lifts, Dumpers and even heavily laden HGV's allowed to run through Lerwick during the rush(?) hours.  Nothing worse than being in a queue of vehicles behind one of these as it chugs along.

Simple, they are public roads and any vehicle that is taxed, tested and insured can drive along any road that is not subject to some sort of prohibition at any time.  Exception might be abnormal loads needing escorts.

[unlinkedstudent]

The Home Office has introduced temporary banning orders that outlaw the supply and sale but not possession of the drugs, pending an examination of their harmful effects. (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/16/legal-highs-risk-overdose-drugs-tsar?INTCMP=SRCH)

 

So what is the legal status of "synthetic highs" in Scotland?  Are they legal or illegal?

 

OP, with regard to your comment about crash helmets:  I sustained injuries as a result of wearing a crash helmet.  If I hadn't worn a crash helmet, I wouldn't have sustained the injuries I did (and there has been a marked increase in the amount of these types of injuries since the introduction of it being compulsory to wear a crash helmet).  I'm rather peeved that had I been a male Sikh wearing a turban, I wouldn't have needed to wear a crash helmet. However, I realise it is your job to uphold the law ... but don't try to convince me that I'd be safer wearing a crash helmet when I have injuries as a result of doing so. But don't worry, I have no intention of riding around Shetland lidless.

 

I still await the statistics regarding drugs I requested on 24th September 2013 ... or do I need to write in officially to get that info?

 

Your comment is interesting about a police officer in Court being asked their "professional opinion" - the police officers I've previously worked with never gave such comments in Court, knowing that the judicial system relies heavily on FACTS and not someone's opinion.

 

As for anarchy?  I think we've more or less got it already.  

[shetlandpeat]

If you want specific information, a FOI is normal practice.

[Rachel B]

Also, I'm wondering why taxi drivers don't have to wear seat belts? If there is a road traffic accident, they can become a "human torpedo", just the same as anyone else. It poses a risk to their passengers.

[MuckleJoannie]

I've just googled the subject of taxi drivers and seat belts. The consensus seems it's safer for the taxi driver eg someone could use the belt to strangle them.

 

The law is here

 

https://www.gov.uk/seat-belts-law/when-you-dont-need-to-wear-a-seat-belt

[shetlandpeat]

There is no law either to force the use of baby car seats in Taxis either, so, best provide your own.

 

Plying for Hire would indicate that this law should only apply firstly to Hackney Carriages as private hire cars cannot ply for hire. In theory, a private hire can only not wear a seat belts with a P.O.B.

[PoliceScotlandShetland]

 

Without them, how much would the Police cost to cover these areas?

 

If the Police weren't so heavily burdened with trying to enforce IMHO un-necessary (unjustifiable/illegal?) and pointless/ineffectual laws and could concentrate on the rest which do maybe protect folk's right and make for a better quality of life, their current budget would cover it with ease.

 

Hi,

 

Not sure what point, in relation to the local priorities or issues is being made here. If people are unhappy with the laws of the land they need to raise their issues / points with elected members. Police action, in Shetland, over the past year has been in direct response to the issues identified in the previous plans. A report is submitted to each Shetland Community Safety Board where we detail the work we've done.

 

Angus

[PoliceScotlandShetland]

The Home Office has introduced temporary banning orders that outlaw the supply and sale but not possession of the drugs, pending an examination of their harmful effects. (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/16/legal-highs-risk-overdose-drugs-tsar?INTCMP=SRCH)

 

So what is the legal status of "synthetic highs" in Scotland?  Are they legal or illegal?

 

OP, with regard to your comment about crash helmets:  I sustained injuries as a result of wearing a crash helmet.  If I hadn't worn a crash helmet, I wouldn't have sustained the injuries I did (and there has been a marked increase in the amount of these types of injuries since the introduction of it being compulsory to wear a crash helmet).  I'm rather peeved that had I been a male Sikh wearing a turban, I wouldn't have needed to wear a crash helmet. However, I realise it is your job to uphold the law ... but don't try to convince me that I'd be safer wearing a crash helmet when I have injuries as a result of doing so. But don't worry, I have no intention of riding around Shetland lidless.

 

I still await the statistics regarding drugs I requested on 24th September 2013 ... or do I need to write in officially to get that info?

 

Your comment is interesting about a police officer in Court being asked their "professional opinion" - the police officers I've previously worked with never gave such comments in Court, knowing that the judicial system relies heavily on FACTS and not someone's opinion.

 

As for anarchy?  I think we've more or less got it already.  

Hi,

 

I've not forgotten about the stats request from 24.09.2013 - a response will follow in due course. The Shetland Alcohol & Drug Partnership coordinate work in relation to substance misuse and I will speak with the coordinator help draw together a full response.

 

As for "synthetic highs" - there is no blanket piece of legislation that says they are legal / illegal. Some of these substances contain elements which would be classed "illegal" under the misuse of drugs legislation and others don't. As opposed to getting embroiled in a lengthy discussion regarding whether or not something is legal / illegal I'd rather focus on the impact the misuse of any substance can have on a community. When a group of young people approach the police looking to work with us to develop a peer education programme on the dangers of "synthetic highs" I believe there is a real need to do something before someone else becomes seriously ill or dies. I'd be interested to hear other people's views on this?

 

Angus