audi-ya-do

Well said, Brochbuilder, and with dignity too. I always like to see both sides of an argument laid down. We should never be closed off to other opinions and ideas. It is up to us, as individuals, to read and hear others arguments and decide whether we feel them relevant or indeed logical. Only two things in Human existence have created change... ...Talking and conflict, unfortunately most change has been created through conflict. I'd always prefer talking, personally with fighting as a very last resort. I personally don't see the need to arm ALL police officers, but agree that a few well trained, and well vetted officers should carry firearms. I said that in my first post on this subject. I have personally seen too many police officers acting brutishly toward members of the public, to believe that the majority are trustworthy enough to be given such powers. However I welcome your views.

Brochbuilder you seem to live in a lovely insulated little world, I hope it continues that way for you. However those who live in the real world can vouch that MOST police treat those their meant to defend with contempt. When a simple warning would suffice, these officers bring the full weight of the law down on people, talk and treat them like dirt. This just makes people turn against the police, not just the people directly involved but family and friends too. This in turn looses the respect of the public and erodes our faith in the system set up to "Help us". I will concede that there are some very, very good officers. I've had dealings with some and this few certainly help make up for the many. We just need more good officers and weed out the bad. In my findings, however, if we disposed of all the bad officers in one go there wouldn't be enough good ones left to guard a palace pisspot! You also make your points over and over again as in your last post. I spent some time in the forces and saw action a few times. I don't complain or make a big deal of it - IT'S WHAT I SIGNED UP FOR!!! Just as those who serve in the police. If that part of the job is too much for them THEY ARE IN THE WRONG JOB. It's like your justifying how they treat people and are perceived by many (read other articles and there are more against the police than for them.) because of the lower, base tasks they have to perform. To me that just proves that type of officer is not mentally suited to the career they've chosen. When you join the police you should already understand a few things, you'll have long periods of boredom, the very people you want to help sometimes won't want it, sometimes you'll see and experience things civvies tucked up at home won't ever comprehend, and it's a thankless job most of the time. If that's not for you or after joining you feel the urge to take these things out on others find another job! Every time someone says something against the police you say " he seems to despise the law for some reason. Seems to think everything is the fault of the state." or something similar. People who have weak arguments usually fall back on this type of narrative. It's a mildly clever way of trying to make one feel guilty for comments they make so they back off.

I have always believed in recycling. Growing up, in the Midlands, most people were into the oldest form of recycling- scrap metal. There was also the bottle deposits, take a pop bottle back and you got 10p. I remember me and my mates going along the canals and parks etc picking up empty pop bottles to get the deposits on them. The point being we were rewarded for recycling not punished for not recycling. A lot of the environmentalist attitude is just smug people wanting to feel like they are doing something to save the planet. Years ago there was a program on channel 4 or 5 about this whole issue. They took 3 families from three tiers of society Working class, middle class and upper class. Then looked at their lifestyles and worked out how ecological they were. The surprise was that the working class family were the most eco friendly, even though they didn't recycle or take part in any overt eco activities. However they had a cheap car with a smaller engine, kept it longer (82% of pollution from any car over a 20 year average lifespan is in it's manufacture!) and worked closer to home. Mainly stayed in the UK for holidays etc, etc. The worst was the middle class family who jetted off on holiday 3 times a year, owned two huge cars (any typically commuted further to work than the low class'). However they recycled everything but again often travelled miles in a big car to recycle just a small amount of stuff. My point is storing paper and card releases methane (which is a lot worse than CO2 for the atmosphere) Then they plan to put it onto boats south, these use huge amounts of fuel just to go to Aberdeen. Transport off the other end. Even then it takes energy to recycle the product at the end of it's journey. How can this all be more ecologically friendly than disposing of it here at the incinerator? If we want to recycle we need to follow the German examples, make all plastic bottles and packaging recyclable and put deposits on them so people get something back when returning them. Same with glass (Most bottles in Germany go back to the companies that supplied them to be inspected washed and refilled, if damaged to be recycled) Last point when we say "Saving the planet" we mean saving ourselves! Even if nuclear Armageddon happened today and killed every living thing on Earth- the Planet will Still revolve around the sun, the Solar system will still swirl in the Milky way. The Universe couldn't care less if there is life here or not.

I remember my friends in the late seventies early eighties being beaten up by the Polices' "special units" and suppose as such always feel uncomfortable with armed police. Also, growing up in run down areas, remember the hostility of police towards us and their sheer lack of interest if a crime had been committed. Life's experiences have great bearing on how we view things. However I fully support specially trained and vetted police officers carrying arms of any type required to level the playing field with those they may face. On saying that I know of several times police officers have "illegally" deployed pepper spray (mace). Even one instance of a prosecution brought against an officer who covered my friends three children, all under 5 at the time, when it transpired it wasn't even my friend who had committed the offence they came to investigate! Most (and I'll stick to that) police officers are not psychologically or morally fit to carry arms of any type. As such any item that can cause harm or distress must ONLY be put in the hands of officers who are mentally suitable and licensed to carry such items with regular checks to see if they remain suitable. I wonder how many officers in the police would be granted a firearms licence if they were not in the force? I have no doubt there are a minority of good, honest, upstanding officers in the police (I've met some of them, and some of my friends are amongst them). These are the people to carry weapons that hurt or are harmful.

The Police hate anyone showing them up to be the useless, redundant item they have become, as this gent has done. No doubt if the burglars had got away the police wouldn't have even tried to find them. On the flip side the police do an extremely good job of prosecuting motorists for petty offences. Where is this countries priorities? If ANYONE enters your house without invite or just reason then they should accept the potential outcomes! Once again the police arrest and persecute those who only defend themselves or are in the right morally.

Spoken like people who've never been to court. The simple fact is lots of people take the guilty plea rather than face the possibility of a more severe penalty even if they know they're innocent. Forget what you were told in the eyes of the law your guilty unless you can prove your innocent, a difficult task at best of times. As for solicitors all they want is there fee for appearing in court, I'd guess most couldn't care less if your innocent or guilty.

The other point I'll make is that people usually plead guilty, not because they are, but that the "justice system" is set up in such a way as to get you to plead that way. If you plead guilty early you get a lighter sentence, and that sentence increases dramatically if you go not guilty but are found so later on. Even then be under no illusion that all the Sheriffs court is there for is to make money, NOT justice, and your sentence is made before you even walk into court. If you don't believe that you can find the PF and Sheriff regularly together discussing cases before they even enter the court. Quite frankly there is usually no justice but that you make yourself. If you have an individual who appears to be well known for his abusiveness then surely the police were aware of him, but they seemed to wait till someone stood their ground. Then go after that person for showing that the police were incapable of keeping people safe to the point where the provoked have to take action. The police always act harshly against vigilantly type acts, but if they did their jobs properly people wouldn't feel like they have no choice but to do something in the first place. I wonder how many people would plead not guilty all the way if the sentence was fixed from the beginning (i.e. £1000 fine if you go guilty straight away, but still a £1000 if you go not guilty and were found guilty by the court.) to make it fair. But then the courts may start costing money and not making it...

Posted by windwalker: Would it be ok for police officers to shove annoying or drunk people over resulting in broken wrists? Somehow I don’t think so, and I’m sure the police have to deal with as many awkward individuals. Whilst it is regrettable that the wrong person ended in court, the law is there to protect us all. Like the officer who pushed over an innocent newspaper seller causing his death? Like the several officers who, illegally, used a restraint belt around a mentally disturbed suspect- leading to his death? There are many more cases like this and these are real instances of the police overstepping the line. However no officer has yet been prosecuted for these offences (Or probably will be) or even Hillsbourgh yet!!! Maybe a blue uniform is a get out of trouble free card.

Take it you're the person who owns the van? Yes people like this are the reason I got these accursed dash cams, people who drive like pilticks and then won't accept that they were driving bad-then make on that everyone else is at fault except them. And no I have never been a nark and don't particularly like the police, why do you think I posted this rather than go to the fuzz?! Be honest police or post, which would you prefer that I did? Me I'd rather someone post something, and if I was in the wrong, I could at least apologise and try to make right what I had done- learn from it even, rather than get police involved. I'm done now, put what you like in return, I don't care. If people can't admit even to themselves that they were too close, then I won't waste time with a fools.

I wasn't the one driving like a tw*!t. Think you'll find I was at a safe distance from the car in front and driving correctly for the conditions and traffic. If someone is so close you can read their front number plate in the semi-gloom of the pre-dawn I'd say that's too close even at 30mph let alone 50. By the way I'd rather place these antics on here, than be like the spineless goons who report everything to the cops. Mind you if being named and shamed hurts peoples sensibilities, then maybe reporting these things to the police with the dash cam footage is the other option.

To the driver of OY64 BNE silver Caddy van, Thanks for driving so close to me at 0725 through Whiteness. Even in the gloom of early morning you were so close to me that I could read your number plate!!! Although the traffic in front was only doing 50mph, up Wormadale hill, what did you think you'd achieve by being so close? Even at 50mph you are still covering 22 meters per second. At the distance you were from me, if something had happened i.e. a car coming the other way on our side of the road, you wouldn't even have had time to process that something was wrong before going into the back of me. But don't worry I'm sure if something happened our useless police force in Shetland would find some reason for the car you hit to be in the wrong!!!

There is an organisation in America that extract money off business owners for little or no return. It's called the Mafia!!!

I can only give answers to why I don't go to the street too often. These are: -Parking and driving around Da Street can be a nightmare. -All there seems to be are eateries and empty shops with a few shops in between. -Prices and choice e.g. Christmas went to get a weather station, for my meteorological mad wife, only found one shop with them in stock. However their price was £90 for a basic setup, got exactly the same make from sooth, but top of the range, for £70 delivered! On another note I know of two shops who shut their doors and I quote "Because of paying fees to a useless town centre committee was hurting them." I would question the legitimacy of living Lerwick to levy fees if you do not want to be a member. Just an idea why doesn't some community body put out a couple of online surveys. one for shoppers and a separate one for retailers/ex-retailers off the street. Find out confidentially why the street is failing. STOP guessing at the reasons and then you may have a chance to fix the problem.

I feel for you town. The last nine months found me unable to sleep properly, eat properly and think clearly. Like I said in an earlier post this has probably been my worst year in my life. All because two useless, dishonest police wanted to get Brownie points against the "bad man". Just like you I feel this isn't the polices' decision to make, they should approach all cases in an unbiased manner and merely pass that collected, truthful, evidence on to the PF. Hang in there though, I know it's tough. My suggestion is what I am thinking of, take all your hurt and pain then, be constructive. I shall be watching both of the police officers and accusers movements closely and legally, the minute they slip up no matter how small I shall be all over it like stink on do-do. I also intend to get dash cams and hope to capture them that way too. To me two can play the game I've been through. I know you are hurting, I really do, but there are other ways to do things. Bet you won't ever look at the police the same way will you? My advice to everyone is to withdraw community support for the police until they get to the bottom of corruption and dishonesty that seems so prevalent, they are OUR servants after all and paid for by us.

How do you do a "Subject data request"? Suffererof1crankymofo. I'd be very interested in seeing the original paperwork of my case. Ghostrider is right, my one experience of a bad copper shouldn't jade my view of the numerous good ones. I have friends and relatives in the police force and hope and trust they behave better. But it does cause how do you know who you are dealing with until it's too late. So I simply have to mistrust them all, to try to be safe. Sukibind, I don't want to pick on you and appreciate someone inputting another side to the discussion, but you obviously have never had dealings with the police against you. Also the way the justice system works is very slanted against those who feel innocent. If you go guilty early, even if you feel you are not, you get a lighter sentence. If you go not guilty and are then found guilty you tend to get the maximum sentence available. Try this, made up scenario: You are driving on your own and approach a traffic island, you look right- no traffic, you look left nothing of concern, look right again still no traffic. You enter onto the the roundabout and just as you do a car drives at speed onto the island from the next entrance. Your car hits them broadside. The police are called. By the time the police arrive both the driver of the other vehicle and their passenger are saying you raced onto the island and hit them. The police agree with them and you are charged with "driving without due care and attention". Do you 1) Take a guilty plea straight away, even though you know you aren't. Or 2) Go not guilty and are found guilty at trial (Even though you are innocent) 1) Will probably land you 3 points and a couple hundred pound fine. 2) Will likely result in 7 to 9 points and and over a thousand pound fine. What would you choose? Like I said before, if you don't think you could land on the wrong side of the police, it's as easy as the scenario above and totally outwith your control.