dieseldog999:
BossHogg:
Oh no he isn’t.^^^^^^^
you dont mean to imply that he is telling porkies and is just another over qualified ex whatever fanny with a good imagination related to truck driving passing the time between counting his stocks and shares■■?
could always ask angus, he stalks this forum too allegedly 
no thanks,im quite happy not to have angus and his ilk sharing the same airspace with myself directly or indirectly. 
dieseldog999:
BossHogg:
Oh no he isn’t.^^^^^^^
you dont mean to imply that he is telling porkies and is just another over qualified ex whatever fanny with a good imagination related to truck driving passing the time between counting his stocks and shares■■?
Oh he’s definitely a traffic cop, I can vouch for that, the ■■■■■■ nearly took me out on a lane closure when he was in the area training. 
jakethesnake:
Roads Rat you talk a lot of sense and seem to know your stuff. Refreshing.
Thanks.
kcrussell25:
RoadsRat:
robroy:
Wtf are the lols about exactly.
Say what you like mate the Police’s priority is all about making money’ revenue raising, uniformed tax collectors.The lols are regarding your “money making” suggestion. Making money for who? All fines go to HM treasury and it’s definitely not going back into the police budget. It does however help pay for public services, the NHS and all the other things the government spends money on.
Why are they money making? There is no financial benefit to the police on how many fines are issued, they aren’t running a business. There are no financial incentives or benefits for issuing fines.
Fines aren’t taxes either.
robroy:
They bleat on about lack of resources after taking 2 days to turn up with their crime number after your house has been blagged, but those resources are miraculously plentiful with their 3 to a tractor unit and 2 to the following car when they are out to nick you eating your sarnies, or 30 or so stood at a weighbridge on ‘operation whatever’.
The argument on here when anyone points that out is just like yours, chucking stats at me, or the classic…‘‘They are traffic, different department’’
So sort out some proper traffic issues then ffs, this thread subject for example, and leave me alone to drink my coffee with both eyes on the road concentrating.You only have to look at any number of roads policing twitter accounts to see that proper traffic issues are being dealt with. However you can only do so much with the resources you have available.
These operations you speak of pool resources from multiple forces in an effort to catch those in the wrong.
robroy:
Ok if the numbers have dwindled prioritise those numbers on to real crime and serious traffic offences.That’s up to the forces crime commissioner and senior officers to decide. Nothing to do with the officers on the frontline.
I am sure it’s the bosses decision what to target but the point remains they target what raises money. Quite probably under instruction from the politicians but all the same a lot gets ignored that also coincidentally doesn’t raise money
If motor offences raise money, why are you lot complaining that there aren’t enough police officers on the motorway?
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
good_friend:
Where’s Euro Truck Spotter when you need him?..
Wasn’t he on truckersworld
robroy:
I never said the money was going back to you did I ?
I said ‘‘revenue raising’’ and as you say yourself it’s going to The Treasury, so loosely speaking a stealth tax of sorts.
The definition of tax according to the Cambridge dictionary is:
(an amount of) money paid to the government that is based on your income or the cost of goods or services you have bought.
I don’t see the correlation with a fine paid as a punishment for a motoring offence?
robroy:
Quote…‘‘Why are they money making’’?
That is the remit set by your superiors via The Government…or are you going to refute that also.
It’s not the remit of police officers that’s been set by the government. Why would it be when this government has destroyed the police service through budget cuts, pay and pension cuts?
robroy:
You are doing what I said, playing the lack of resources card, backed up by chucking around stats.
The public are heart sick of hearing all this as an excuse not to investigate or take action on crimes like burglarly, muggings, theft etc.
It’s the reality whether you want to believe it or not. More officers are leaving the job than are joining the job.
Crimes like burglary, muggings and thefts are indeed investigated. I don’t see the courts being quiet, do you?
robroy:
I’ve mentioned before about my boy getting assaulted in his car, no Police to be seen on the street, but exactly 5 mins later they appeared and pulled him for a noisy exhaust.
I had 2 scrotes in the back of my trailer one night, I went into the MSA across the road, saw a copper to report it, but he was too busy checking a driver’s card, the next week I parked there (empty).the [zb] s gave me a ticket.
I can’t comment on your examples, I wasn’t there. You always have the option to complain if you aren’t happy with the response or service you’ve received from the police.
robroy:
We all have examples like this of ■■■■ poor policing mate, the public perception of the Police is at an all time low (possibly with the exception of our old mate and your evident fan Jakethesnake)
So to get back on thread let’s see you lot sorting the lane discipline out on M.ways, starting with a hi visual Police presence instead of sitting there making [zb] excuses.
Hang on a minute. You’re saying police are just there to raise money for the government but you’re saying you want to see more of them? You want them to raise even more funds for the government? You can’t have it both ways.
waddy640:
There will always be a certain element in the police who aren’t interested in the job itself but like wearing the uniform and exerting their authority when it suits them.
They don’t last long in the job.
BossHogg:
dieseldog999:
BossHogg:
Oh no he isn’t.^^^^^^^
you dont mean to imply that he is telling porkies and is just another over qualified ex whatever fanny with a good imagination related to truck driving passing the time between counting his stocks and shares■■?Oh he’s definitely a traffic cop, I can vouch for that, the [zb] nearly took me out on a lane closure when he was in the area training.
joeyd:
RoadsRat:
joeyd:
RoadsRat:
“Total police officer strength in the United Kingdom increased year on year between 2003, when there were 155,000 officers, and 2010, when there were just over 171,600. Since 2010 the number of police officers has fallen each year. At 31 March 2018 there were just under 150,000 police officers operating within the United Kingdom. This was a reduction of 3.7% compared to 2003 and a decrease of 12.8% from 2010.”
So if they managed to patrol mways back in 2003 why cant they now with roughly the same manpower ? Maybe they are too busy checking the internet in case someone makes an “offensive” tweet instead
Because there are actually fewer officers physically on the front line today. There may be the same number of officers today as in 2003 but a lot less of them are actually in frontline roles.
“At 31 March 2018 there were 103,836 police officers in frontline roles - this was the lowest level under the new framework. The number of police officers in frontline roles fell by 16% between 2010 and 2018, and by 1.6% between 2017 and 2018.”
Unlike in 2003, today you have additional units such as ■■■■■■ offences, domestic abuse and cybercrime. Where do you think these officers have come from?
Then there is also the threat from terrorism and additional officers required to trained to carry firearms.
So while we might have the same number of officers as 2003, they are based used in roles today that didn’t exist back then.
But they still investigated ■■■■■■ offences, domestic abuse, and terrorism prior to 2003 (i’ll give you the cyber crime one
Yes those sorts of crimes existed in 2003. But the way they are investigated today is a lot different to 2003. In addition, there are a lot more of these offences today so a larger workload for fewer officers to deal with. As I said already, there are fewer officers on the frontline today than in 2003.
Terrorism is a bigger threat today than in 2003. Just think of all the terrorism incidents that have happened since 2003. We now have many more armed police today, they have been recruited from within the police. That armed role means that where they were previously investigating crimes like theft and burglary etc are investigated by a smaller amount of officers.
There is most certainly fewer police officers on the frontline. 100% fact.
robroy:
jakethesnake:
Roads Rat you talk a lot of sense and seem to know your stuff. Refreshing.Ffs mate
You come on here at every opportunity (like a one man crusade
Unbe [zb] lievable.
Unlike youre good self.
RoadsRat:
Yes those sorts of crimes existed in 2003. But the way they are investigated today is a lot different to 2003. In addition, there are a lot more of these offences today so a larger workload for fewer officers to deal with. As I said already, there are fewer officers on the frontline today than in 2003.Terrorism is a bigger threat today than in 2003. Just think of all the terrorism incidents that have happened since 2003. We now have many more armed police today, they have been recruited from within the police. That armed role means that where they were previously investigating crimes like theft and burglary etc are investigated by a smaller amount of officers.
There is most certainly fewer police officers on the frontline. 100% fact.
So terrorism never existed before 2003? I’m guessing all those Irish guys in prison were innocent then. That explains why they all got released and became politicians.
If you take this forum as a cross section of society, a bunch of people working hard to earn money, then it’s fair to say that the public have lost faith in the police. We’re sick of high profile, resource intensive initiatives designed to make roads safer by fineing us but having a leaflet campaign to warn us about burglaries. How many on here have had our loads/diesel stolen and what was the police response? I’m guessing the answers would be “many” and “nothing”.
Make all the excuses you want about resources and different departments, we the public have no faith in the police any more.
RoadsRat:
Yes those sorts of crimes existed in 2003. But the way they are investigated today is a lot different to 2003. In addition, there are a lot more of these offences today so a larger workload for fewer officers to deal with. As I said already, there are fewer officers on the frontline today than in 2003.Terrorism is a bigger threat today than in 2003. Just think of all the terrorism incidents that have happened since 2003. We now have many more armed police today, they have been recruited from within the police. That armed role means that where they were previously investigating crimes like theft and burglary etc are investigated by a smaller amount of officers.
There is most certainly fewer police officers on the frontline. 100% fact.
I’m not disputing your figures on the number of frontline officers, in fact going by the number I see walking the streets or on the motorway it would be understandable if you assumed they had been disbanded entirely.
dieseldog999:
no thanks,im quite happy not to have angus and his ilk sharing the same airspace with myself directly or indirectly.
I’m quite sure they wouldn’t want to waste their time interacting with a fantasist.
idrive:
Police priorities have changed somewhat
That’s funny. Some nutjob ranting about LGBT people and saying trans people are mentally ill. 
Suedehead:
robroy:
jakethesnake:
Roads Rat you talk a lot of sense and seem to know your stuff. Refreshing.Ffs mate
You come on here at every opportunity (like a one man crusade
Unbe [zb] lievable.Unlike youre good self.
Go on then, I’ll humour you.
Which particular one man crusade would that be exactly ■■ 
Can’t wait for your answer…so try your (not youre) best eh.
Nite Owl:
So terrorism never existed before 2003? I’m guessing all those Irish guys in prison were innocent then. That explains why they all got released and became politicians.
Who said there was no terrorism prior to 2003 because I haven’t said it. 
The IRA was a different type of terrorism. That was a small scale war which primarily involved the military.
Between 1971 and 2001, there were 430 terrorist-related deaths in Great Britain. Of these, 125 deaths were linked to the Northern Ireland conflict. Since 2001, there have been almost 100 terrorist-related deaths in Great Britain, the vast majority linked to Islamic jihad and religious extremism.
Last year alone we had attacks at Westminster Bridge, Manchester Arena, London Bridge and Finsbury Park. The director general of MI5 Andrew Parker recently said that the tempo of counter-terrorism operations was the highest he had seen in his 34-year career. MI5 is running approximately 500 live operations involving 3,000 “subjects of interest”. There were 400 arrests on suspicion of terrorism-related offences in the year to the end of September 2017. That’s the highest recorded figure, up more than 50% on the previous year.
The latest official figures from December 2017, show nine Islamist plots had been foiled since March 2017 - and 22 since 2013.
So yes, I’d say the police are quite busy with terrorism.
Nite Owl:
If you take this forum as a cross section of society, a bunch of people working hard to earn money, then it’s fair to say that the public have lost faith in the police. We’re sick of high profile, resource intensive initiatives designed to make roads safer by fineing us but having a leaflet campaign to warn us about burglaries. How many on here have had our loads/diesel stolen and what was the police response? I’m guessing the answers would be “many” and “nothing”.
It’s not really a cross section of society though, is it? You’re all males aged 35-65 who all do the same job in the same industry. In reality, the vast majority of the public have support and respect for the police. Those that don’t tend to be individuals that want to please themselves and don’t like it when they get caught.
As supposed “professional drivers”, isn’t it right that you’re held more accountable for your actions than a car driver?
Nite Owl:
Make all the excuses you want about resources and different departments, we the public have no faith in the police any more.
You don’t speak for the public, just for a small section of middle aged men who drive trucks for a living. You are entitled to your opinion.
RoadsRat:
robroy:
I never said the money was going back to you did I ?
I said ‘‘revenue raising’’ and as you say yourself it’s going to The Treasury, so loosely speaking a stealth tax of sorts.The definition of tax according to the Cambridge dictionary is:
(an amount of) money paid to the government that is based on your income or the cost of goods or services you have bought.
I don’t see the correlation with a fine paid as a punishment for a motoring offence?
robroy:
Quote…‘‘Why are they money making’’?
That is the remit set by your superiors via The Government…or are you going to refute that also.It’s not the remit of police officers that’s been set by the government. Why would it be when this government has destroyed the police service through budget cuts, pay and pension cuts?
robroy:
You are doing what I said, playing the lack of resources card, backed up by chucking around stats.
The public are heart sick of hearing all this as an excuse not to investigate or take action on crimes like burglarly, muggings, theft etc.It’s the reality whether you want to believe it or not. More officers are leaving the job than are joining the job.
Crimes like burglary, muggings and thefts are indeed investigated. I don’t see the courts being quiet, do you?
robroy:
I’ve mentioned before about my boy getting assaulted in his car, no Police to be seen on the street, but exactly 5 mins later they appeared and pulled him for a noisy exhaust.
I had 2 scrotes in the back of my trailer one night, I went into the MSA across the road, saw a copper to report it, but he was too busy checking a driver’s card, the next week I parked there (empty).the [zb] s gave me a ticket.I can’t comment on your examples, I wasn’t there. You always have the option to complain if you aren’t happy with the response or service you’ve received from the police.
robroy:
We all have examples like this of ■■■■ poor policing mate, the public perception of the Police is at an all time low (possibly with the exception of our old mate and your evident fan JakethesnakeSo to get back on thread let’s see you lot sorting the lane discipline out on M.ways, starting with a hi visual Police presence instead of sitting there making [zb] excuses.
Hang on a minute. You’re saying police are just there to raise money for the government but you’re saying you want to see more of them? You want them to raise even more funds for the government? You can’t have it both ways.
No I don’t want to see more of them ■■■■■■■ about prioritising on raising money/revenue/taxes …or anything else you care to call it (although it all goes in the same pot whatever tf you lable it as )
I want to see the Police doing what they are there to do, their raison d’etre Rodney… fight crime, and on the traffic side, sort out the d/heads on our roads. 
Is that too much to ask?
RoadsRat:
It’s not really a cross section of society though, is it? You’re all males aged 35-65 who all do the same job in the same industry. In reality, the vast majority of the public have support and respect for the police. .You don’t speak for the public, just for a small section of middle aged men who drive trucks for a living. You are entitled to your opinion.
Typical Police cop out (no pun intended)
You need to undergo a reality check mate, seriously if that is what you really believe .
The public opinion and respect for the Police is at an all time low.
But if you think you know different then all is rosy as far as you are concerned. .
