Bobbies getting beats if thinktank has its way

We don't live in an era where that's safe any more. Of course we don't. If coppers were to leave the house in full regalia and get the train, most people wouldn't bat an eyelid. But there will be the few, the few who see that one of their neighbours or a local man is leaving his house as a policeman, the few who see a lone copper on the train and taunt him as he's not on duty. The elderly and other neighbours would, perhaps, treat them with the respect that matches the respect villagers in Dock Green treated the proverbial Dixon, but only if they knew them. It's not much of a surprise any more that people don't know their neighbours.

Whoever thought this would a good suggestion plainly doesn't understand the awfully-phrased "national feeling" at the moment. In an interview I conducted with ex-Home Secretary Charles Clarke in May, for the student newspaper I was working on at the time, we discussed public sector cuts and the effect they would have on law enforcement. While he advised that more officers patrolling alone would be beneficial, I can't say I agree. A single police officer stumbling across a group of, typically, four or five people who then panic because they've been caught in the act of whatever can't end well, can it? Even teaming them up with a PCSO, the use of which I'm not much of a fan of either given the fact that other than a being a visual deterrant through presence, would be better than sending officers out alone. And that's saying something.

Then again, maybe I'm being far too cynical. I know that while the thinktank have advised this the police have stated they will not be implementing this suggestion, for the reasons I agree with, but perhaps we're both wrong in judging the situation.

For light relief, how adorable is the wee lady copper?(Picture Bimal/Gautum/Demotix/Corbis)

Perhaps they're being cautious. If, for example, a bit of planning was implemented and a sort of "train share" or "travel share" scheme was put in place, where coppers attending the same shift travel in together then there wouldn't necessarily be a problem. Maybe I'm misjudging everything and lone officers would be safe in public, but even if that is true for the majority of the time the first time a single officer gets attacked, robbed or otherwise involved in a confrontation on their commute in the press would rip the scheme to shreds. Hence, I suspect, the caution.

And it's not just police officers being victims. What if they, as I said, get "involved in a confrontation" as an IPCC statement could possibly describe it in a way to keep the piece, and got a little over eager? What powers would they have as off-duty but still visibly a police-officer? Would a third stage of reduced powers, between off- and on-duty, be necessary to protect both the copper and the local police service from criticism as to how they act when technically not on duty?

I think it's probably going to be a long while before this suggestion is put to the police again, and with good reason. It's a hell of complicated thing- perhaps the "travel share" idea could work, though.

And all this on the day that the very same thinktank has announced that almost £150 million is wasted by the police each year in getting officers in offices rather than letting civilians do that while the police actually police. Shocking.

Story on the £150 million per year waste from Yahoo!-here.

Story on the uniform commute idea from The Guardian-here.

Incidentally, this is my 100th post on this blog. If ever there was a time to look back, re-read posts, maybe hit up some you missed or passed over, and comment like crazy, this would be it. 100 posts, people, and three comments so far. Prove you read something by saying "hi" or telling me how wrong I am about something. Ta.