Zero tolerance policing.

Harry Bosch.

Discretion in An Garda Siochana is a great trait ingrained in its members.It's a great tool used often, maybe too often. It has its place, but in todays environment is it outdated, Do the public who interact with members, whether through traffic stops or daily interaction and get the courtesy of discretion appreciate the discretion given and then abuse it.The contact/advice/education given can be misconstrued as members having nothing else to do, and the person thinking he's got away with it,getting one over on the member so to speak and never learning his or her lesson. Is it a waste of time. I ask you this, would a zero tolerance policy work in Ireland,Would members be in favour and implement it, would public perception then change and would you care. Should we change tack and be more than guardians of the peace...

Harry Bosch.

Harry Bosch. wrote: »

Discretion in An Garda Siochana is a great trait ingrained in its members.It's a great tool used often, maybe too often. It has its place, but in todays environment is it outdated, Do the public who interact with members, whether through traffic stops or daily interaction and get the courtesy of discretion appreciate the discretion given and then abuse it.The contact/advice/education given can be misconstrued as members having nothing else to do, and the person thinking he's got away with it,getting one over on the member so to speak and never learning his or her lesson. Is it a waste of time. I ask you this, would a zero tolerance policy work in Ireland,Would members be in favour and implement it, would public perception then change and would you care. Should we change tack and be more than guardians of the peace...

Keep it. It's a great thing to have. Some people make mistakes and don't need to be punished.

source

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Keep it. It's a great thing to have. Some people make mistakes and don't need to be punished.

Also under a zero tolerance policy the man breaking the red light to get his unconscious child to the hospital would be treated the same as the asshat who just doesn't want to wait.

Discretion is a great tool for the type of job police do. It allows police to apply the spirit of the law and not just the letter of the law.

Zambia

Having listened to members reflect over the years Ireland has neither the proper legislation, court facilities or prison space to make this work.

Iwannahurl

source wrote: »

Also under a zero tolerance policy the man breaking the red light to get his unconscious child to the hospital would be treated the same as the asshat who just doesn't want to wait.

Discretion is a great tool for the type of job police do. It allows police to apply the spirit of the law and not just the letter of the law.

The power of discretion (which a senior Garda once described as possibly a member's greatest power) can also be used in the opposite way, i.e. in the asshat's favour.


In other words a Garda can refuse to deal with certain offences, or certain recurring issues, simply by using their power of discretion.


That has been my repeated experience. Incidents reported to Garda officers are ignored, and they justify their inaction with reference to their power of discretion. I have been told "complain all you like" to senior officers but that it will make no difference because of the discretion aspect.


Roll on the establishment of an independent Garda authority. Finally we might see some accountability, at all levels of the police service.


I'm not in favour of blanket zero tolerance, by the way. Prisons are already full of minor offenders, many of them with addiction and mental health problems, low levels of education and social isolation issues. It was recently reported, for example, that 60% of inmates in Cork Prison are there for non-payment of fines.

Iwannahurl

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The power of discretion (which a senior Garda once described as possibly a member's greatest power) can also be used in the opposite way, i.e. in the asshat's favour.


In other words a Garda can refuse to deal with certain offences, or certain recurring issues, simply by using their power of discretion.


That has been my repeated experience. Incidents reported to Garda officers are ignored, and they justify their inaction with reference to their power of discretion. I have been told "complain all you like" to senior officers but that it will make no difference because of the discretion aspect.


Roll on the establishment of an independent Garda authority. Finally we might see some accountability, at all levels of the police service.


I'm not in favour of blanket zero tolerance, by the way. Prisons are already full of minor offenders, many of them with addiction and mental health problems, low levels of education and social isolation issues. It was recently reported, for example, that 60% of inmates in Cork Prison are there for non-payment of fines.

Have you actually taken your complaints to the senior officers? Or maybe GSOC? The Gardaí have been calling for an independent authority for years.

And 're people in prison for non payment of fines, where should they go? They have clearly made no effort to pay the court imposed fine so should we leave them wander the streets giving two fingers to the law if the land?

Little CuChulainn

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The power of discretion (which a senior Garda once described as possibly a member's greatest power) can also be used in the opposite way, i.e. in the asshat's favour.


In other words a Garda can refuse to deal with certain offences, or certain recurring issues, simply by using their power of discretion.


That has been my repeated experience. Incidents reported to Garda officers are ignored, and they justify their inaction with reference to their power of discretion. I have been told "complain all you like" to senior officers but that it will make no difference because of the discretion aspect.


Roll on the establishment of an independent Garda authority. Finally we might see some accountability, at all levels of the police service.


I'm not in favour of blanket zero tolerance, by the way. Prisons are already full of minor offenders, many of them with addiction and mental health problems, low levels of education and social isolation issues. It was recently reported, for example, that 60% of inmates in Cork Prison are there for non-payment of fines.

That's non-payment of court fines. As in, you get convicted in court and are given 60 days to pay a fine but don't. Are you suggesting people should be allowed ignore court fines with no consequence? Or perhaps you are afraid you might go to jail for not paying a tv licence. The people kept in there are the serious cases. Everyone else gets booted out within 24 hours.

Dan_Solo

TBH I think Garda discretion is a disgrace the way it is practised in this country. Just look at the penalty points scandal. The only discretion I've ever encountered in the Gardai was whether to bother responding to or even logging your call.
Zero tolerance would be impossible here due to the laissez faire policing culture.

foggy_lad

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm not in favour of blanket zero tolerance, by the way. Prisons are already full of minor offenders, many of them with addiction and mental health problems, low levels of education and social isolation issues. It was recently reported, for example, that 60% of inmates in Cork Prison are there for non-payment of fines.

Without going too off topic the whole issue of people being imprisoned for minor offences and non payment of fines etc is very important as more often than not it is only after all other avenues have been exhausted that the person gets sent to prison and in most cases of non payment it is to do with non-payment of court ordered maintenance or other court ordered fines. If these people are let away with showing utter contempt for the courts where does that leave law and order in the country?

Iwannahurl

foreign wrote: »

Have you actually taken your complaints to the senior officers? Or maybe GSOC? The Gardaí have been calling for an independent authority for years.

And 're people in prison for non payment of fines, where should they go? They have clearly made no effort to pay the court imposed fine so should we leave them wander the streets giving two fingers to the law if the land?

The GSOC has enough serious issues to be dealing with. The problem I have encountered is that rank and file Gardaí are uninterested in certain issues and their senior officers back them up. You know the usual response: the Inspector is "satisfied" with the action of the Garda, given the "exigencies of the service". A waste of everyone's time really. What's needed is a major culture change, in my view. The GSOC really should be for serious complaints against individual Gardaí, not for attempting to raise awareness or change attitudes.


With regard to the jailing of people for non-payment of fines etc, the reality is that there are already numerous people wandering the streets giving two fingers to the law. Some of them are Garda officers, because by using their discretion to ignore high-visibility law-breaking (such as ubiquitous motoring offences) they reinforce the general impression that nothing abnormal is going on and people can pretty much do as they please, within certain limits.


My other problem with discretion is that it is not applied in an even-handed way. Some people get away with casual law-breaking or minor offences, whereas others (if their minor offence is in the 'wrong' category or they are not in the class of persons known as "ordinary decent people") may get much closer attention.

Iwannahurl

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The GSOC has enough serious issues to be dealing with. The problem I have encountered is that rank and file Gardaí are uninterested in certain issues and their senior officers back them up. You know the usual response: the Inspector is "satisfied" with the action of the Garda, given the "exigencies of the service". A waste of everyone's time really. What's needed is a major culture change, in my view. The GSOC really should be for serious complaints against individual Gardaí, not for attempting to raise awareness or change attitudes.


With regard to the jailing of people for non-payment of fines etc, the reality is that there are already numerous people wandering the streets giving two fingers to the law. Some of them are Garda officers, because by using their discretion to ignore high-visibility law-breaking (such as ubiquitous motoring offences) they reinforce the general impression that nothing abnormal is going on and people can pretty much do as they please, within certain limits.


My other problem with discretion is that it is not applied in an even-handed way. Some people get away with casual law-breaking or minor offences, whereas others (if their minor offence is in the 'wrong' category or they are not in the class of persons known as "ordinary decent people") may get much closer attention.

GSOC are there to deal with complaints about the service. Sorry to be blunt but complain to them or shut up. It's something that annoys me about people in general, they'll give out about something to everybody but the ones who gave the bad service. How will they improve if nobody complains.

Do you have specific complaints or are they ones you've heard about.

Also, it's not as easy to stop a motorist who has committed an offence. On foot and practically no chance. In the car, you could be going to a call, court, meeting, etc. Even if free if the car is going against you sometimes it's hard to turn safely and even if you do you may lose the car. And is it worth speeding on lights and sirens to catch up with someone who went past inn their phone?

Also, 're discretion, what crimes are people getting away with? Again, specific examples or ones you heard about?

Little CuChulainn

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The GSOC has enough serious issues to be dealing with. The problem I have encountered is that rank and file Gardaí are uninterested in certain issues and their senior officers back them up. You know the usual response: the Inspector is "satisfied" with the action of the Garda, given the "exigencies of the service". A waste of everyone's time really. What's needed is a major culture change, in my view. The GSOC really should be for serious complaints against individual Gardaí, not for attempting to raise awareness or change attitudes.


With regard to the jailing of people for non-payment of fines etc, the reality is that there are already numerous people wandering the streets giving two fingers to the law. Some of them are Garda officers, because by using their discretion to ignore high-visibility law-breaking (such as ubiquitous motoring offences) they reinforce the general impression that nothing abnormal is going on and people can pretty much do as they please, within certain limits.


My other problem with discretion is that it is not applied in an even-handed way. Some people get away with casual law-breaking or minor offences, whereas others (if their minor offence is in the 'wrong' category or they are not in the class of persons known as "ordinary decent people") may get much closer attention.

What is the "wrong category"? Discretion is there to be used when it's deserved. A well known criminal doesn't deserve it full stop. A decent citizen does, not for who he is but for what he hasn't done.

Dan_Solo

foreign wrote: »

Also, it's not as easy to stop a motorist who has committed an offence. On foot and practically no chance. In the car, you could be going to a call, court, meeting, etc. Even if free if the car is going against you sometimes it's hard to turn safely and even if you do you may lose the car. And is it worth speeding on lights and sirens to catch up with someone who went past inn their phone?

Wow. Are there any possible circumstances where you will arrest somebody for dangerous driving? If they come over, knock on your windows and ask you to arrest them do you still tell them to move along?

Dan_Solo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Wow. Are there any possible circumstances where you will arrest somebody for dangerous driving? If they come over, knock on your windows and ask you to arrest them do you still tell them to move along?

Wasn't referring to dangerous driving. I took iwannahurls post as being about run of the mill offences.

Dan_Solo

foreign wrote: »

Wasn't referring to dangerous driving. I took iwannahurls post as being about run of the mill offences.

Someone using their phone while driving isn't dangerous driving? That was the specific example you gave that you said you would be unlikely to bother with.
It's about to be an automatic summons and you couldn't be bothered with arresting anybody over it 'cos you might have to pull a u-ey?

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Someone using their phone while driving isn't dangerous driving?

No. Dangerous driving is a specific offence under Section 53 of the Road Traffic Act. You should look it up.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

That was the specific example you gave that you said you would be unlikely to bother with.
It's about to be an automatic summons and you couldn't be bothered with arresting anybody over it 'cos you might have to pull a u-ey?

You can't arrest someone for holding a mobile or dangerous driving unless they refuse to give you their details. This is all covered in the Road Traffic Acts. You should look them up.

Dan_Solo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Someone using their phone while driving isn't dangerous driving? That was the specific example you gave that you said you would be unlikely to bother with.
It's about to be an automatic summons and you couldn't be bothered with arresting anybody over it 'cos you might have to pull a u-ey?

It's a summons for sending a text or reading. Holding is still an fcps. If I can safely stop a vehicle I will.

And for your information, you can't arrest for that offence. And for section 53 dangerous driving you would only do so to charge someone and their driving would have to be very bad.

Dan_Solo

foreign wrote: »

It's a summons for sending a text or reading. Holding is still an fcps. If I can safely stop a vehicle I will.

And for your information, you can't arrest for that offence. And for section 53 dangerous driving you would only do so to charge someone and their driving would have to be very bad.

Whatever. End result is you'll let the guy off.
You have a list of excuses longer than Alan Shatter.

You see why zero tolerance won't work here now guys? It's somewhere north of 99% tolerance at the moment.

Dan_Solo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Whatever. End result is you'll let the guy off.
You have a list of excuses longer than Alan Shatter.

You see why zero tolerance won't work here now guys? It's somewhere north of 99% tolerance at the moment.

If we had zero tolerance you'd want discretion.

Dan_Solo

foreign wrote: »

If we had zero tolerance you'd want discretion.

Don't assume to be able to guess what I want, thanks all the same.

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Whatever. End result is you'll let the guy off.
You have a list of excuses longer than Alan Shatter.

You see why zero tolerance won't work here now guys? It's somewhere north of 99% tolerance at the moment.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Don't assume to be able to guess what I want, thanks all the same.

I'd say it's pretty clear you don't know what you want as you don't even know the law that you think you want enforced.

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'd say it's pretty clear you don't know what you want as you don't even know the law that you think you want enforced.

Well sorry Matlock, are you contesting that driving while on the phone isn't illegal? Or just talking pedantic nonsense about which actual law is broken as yet another excuse for ignoring crime because you couldn't be bothered?

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Well sorry Matlock, are you contesting that driving while on the phone isn't illegal? Or just talking pedantic nonsense about which actual law is broken as yet another excuse for ignoring crime because you couldn't be bothered?

No I'm saying you haven't a notion what you are talking about. I've recently taken a zero tolerance approach on bull**** and I felt it necessary to point out to you that your understanding of the law and policing procedure is lacking which in turn makes your comments and opinions uninformed.

Don't feel bad though, most people who comment, or report, on the Gardaí these days fall in the same category.

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

No I'm saying you haven't a notion what you are talking about. I've recently taken a zero tolerance approach on bull**** and I felt it necessary to point out to you that your understanding of the law and policing procedure is lacking which in turn makes your comments and opinions uninformed.

Don't feel bad though, most people who comment, or report, on the Gardaí these days fall in the same category.

Your BS detector appears to need recalibration. Does it go off every time you open your mouth by any chance?
So basically what you are saying is, yes, you are Matlock, and precisely because it's article 23 subsection 4a and NOT article 31 subsection 12b, you don't have to bother your royal h0le enforcing the law. Until you've finished off your box of donuts or woken up from your kip or whatever.
Loud and clear, sergeant!

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Your BS detector appears to need recalibration. Does it go off every time you open your mouth by any chance?
So basically what you are saying is, yes, you are Matlock, and precisely because it's article 23 subsection 4a and NOT article 31 subsection 12b, you don't have to bother your royal h0le enforcing the law.

Don't think I said any of that. But I am glad You have read up on the road traffic acts a little. Hopefully more commenters will take your example.

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Until you've finished off your box of donuts or woken up from your kip or whatever.
Loud and clear, sergeant!

I see the issue here. You watch a lot of American tv where cops and donuts go hand in hand. It's not really a thing in Ireland.

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Don't think I said any of that. But I am glad You have read up on the road traffic acts a little. Hopefully more commenters will take your example.

I see the issue here. You watch a lot of American tv where cops and donuts go hand in hand. It's not really a thing in Ireland.

This must be some variation of the Bruce Lee "art of fighting without fighting". Arguing without actually contesting anything that was said.
So we can just take it you've accepted everything I've said and move on then? Good.

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

This must be some variation of the Bruce Lee "art of fighting without fighting". Arguing without actually contesting anything that was said.
So we can just take it you've accepted everything I've said and move on then? Good.

You can believe whatever you want if it makes you feel good. Evidently this won't be the first falsehood you've convinced yourself is true to suit your agenda.

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You can believe whatever you want if it makes you feel good. Evidently this won't be the first falsehood you've convinced yourself is true to suit your agenda.

Whatever. I guess you've also convinced yourself that you've won an argument by ignoring it. Which is funny because you probably think the same way about all the crime you ignore because "the car was going against you."
What's my agenda again? Asking why Gardai couldn't be arsed enforcing the law? Is that an arrest or a summons officer?

Zambia

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Someone using their phone while driving isn't dangerous driving? That was the specific example you gave that you said you would be unlikely to bother with.
It's about to be an automatic summons and you couldn't be bothered with arresting anybody over it 'cos you might have to pull a u-ey?

Do you believe a Garda has to go after every offence regardless of risk to public or distraction from the primary task they are assigned
.

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Whatever. I guess you've also convinced yourself that you've won an argument by ignoring it. Which is funny because you probably think the same way about all the crime you ignore because "the car was going against you."
What's my agenda again? Asking why Gardai couldn't be arsed enforcing the law? Is that an arrest or a summons officer?

There is no "winning" an argument with some people. Fighting crime is not something you can "win". This isn't a Batman movie. You do what you can when you can with what you have.

Zambia wrote: »

Do you believe a Garda has to go after every offence regardless of risk to public or distraction from the primary task they are assigned
.

A speeding ticket? There's people being murdered out there.

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

Do you believe a Garda has to go after every offence regardless of risk to public or distraction from the primary task they are assigned
.

Who said that? Oh, nobody, you just totally made it up.
I believe a Garda should make an attempt to uphold the law even if (as we were told) he's in a bit of traffic and his car, OMG! is facing the wrong way!!!

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

There is no "winning" an argument with some people. Fighting crime is not something you can "win". This isn't a Batman movie. You do what you can when you can with what you have.

Or your car might be facing the wrong way so you don't have to bother. It's that kind of attitude that has Irish criminals living in such fear, isn't it.

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

A speeding ticket? There's people being murdered out there.

It's OK, we heard this lame excuse the first time! All law enforcement is "discretionary" if you couldn't be bothered.
Now only murders get investigated? Better make sure you get killed then if you are assaulted!

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

Do you believe a Garda has to go after every offence regardless of risk to public or distraction from the primary task they are assigned
.

I was told here they don't bother if the traffic is a bit heavy. Note to criminals: rush hour has just been declared crime AOK hour by the Gardai.

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Fighting crime is not something you can "win".

What a pity I wasn't talking about all crime eh?
I was talking about the crime you are ignoring, i.e. you are aware of and not doing nothing. Ah well, maybe you'll say something relevant next time.

Zambia

Dan_Solo wrote: »

I was told here they don't bother if the traffic is a bit heavy. Note to criminals: rush hour has just been declared crime AOK hour by the Gardai.

That's not what your were told.

All Gardai are held to account for their actions. It's up to them who they stop and who they don't so deal with it.

Old diesel

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Wow. Are there any possible circumstances where you will arrest somebody for dangerous driving? If they come over, knock on your windows and ask you to arrest them do you still tell them to move along?

What the poster is telling you - I think - and apologies to the poster if im wrong - is that situations are not as black and white as normal members of the public like you and I would consider them.

There is a reality - that sometimes - trying to chase the dangerous driver ACTUALLY raises the danger to a higher level then the original dangerous driver

Sad - but this is the reality - and who gets the blame if things go wrong - yes that's right the normal member of An Garda Siochana trying his or her best to do a difficult job.

Obviously if you just go by the media - then the Gardaí are in crisis and sure we might as well just shut the whole thing down.

Meanwhile back in the real world - everyday there are Men and Women of An Garda Siochana doing their best to do a difficult job - with very poor resources behind them - understaffed, lack of vehicles and so many other issues WHICH GARDAI did not cause

Sorry for ranting on

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

That's not what your were told.

All Gardai are held to account for their actions. It's up to them who they stop and who they don't so deal with it.

Deal with it? LOL. Gardai do what they like so deal with it. :rolleyes:
That's kind of the problem, the law-abiding Irish public DO have to deal with it.
And you said it mate, Gardai are held to account for their ACTIONS. Not their INACTIONS. Couldn't put it better myself.

Dan_Solo

Old diesel wrote: »

What the poster is telling you - I think - and apologies to the poster if im wrong - is that situations are not as black and white as normal members of the public like you and I would consider them.

There is a reality - that sometimes - trying to chase the dangerous driver ACTUALLY raises the danger to a higher level then the original dangerous driver

Sad - but this is the reality - and who gets the blame if things go wrong - yes that's right the normal member of An Garda Siochana trying his or her best to do a difficult job.

Obviously if you just go by the media - then the Gardaí are in crisis and sure we might as well just shut the whole thing down.

Meanwhile back in the real world - everyday there are Men and Women of An Garda Siochana doing their best to do a difficult job - with very poor resources behind them - understaffed, lack of vehicles and so many other issues WHICH GARDAI did not cause

Sorry for ranting on

That's fair enough. I agree 100% they are not adequately resourced. This "discretion" is marvellous if you're the one being let off sure. Try asking outside the force though and you won't get the same response as you're getting here from an Emergency Services crowd.

Zambia

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Deal with it? LOL. Gardai do what they like so deal with it. :rolleyes:
That's kind of the problem, the law-abiding Irish public DO have to deal with it.
And you said it mate, Gardai are held to account for their ACTIONS. Not their INACTIONS. Couldn't put it better myself.

How do you know they are not held to account for inaction?

Little CuChulainn

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Deal with it? LOL. Gardai do what they like so deal with it. :rolleyes:
That's kind of the problem, the law-abiding Irish public DO have to deal with it.
And you said it mate, Gardai are held to account for their ACTIONS. Not their INACTIONS. Couldn't put it better myself.

Let me ask you a simple question. If a Garda is stopped on the side of the road giving someone a speeding ticket and spots a person going by on the phone what should they do? Abandon the original ticket or leave off the guy on the phone? Which of those two options make them not bothered?

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

How do you know they are not held to account for inaction?

So when they ignore a crime they are later investigated for the crime they refused to admit existed? How does that work now?

Dan_Solo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Let me ask you a simple question. If a Garda is stopped on the side of the road giving someone a speeding ticket and spots a person going by on the phone what should they do? Abandon the original ticket or leave off the guy on the phone? Which of those two options make them not bothered?

The scenario we were presented with was the Garda not bothering as he might have to turn the car around. Do keep up. He wasn't making another intervention.

Zambia

Dan_Solo wrote: »

So when they ignore a crime they are later investigated for the crime they refused to admit existed? How does that work now?

I asked you how you knew? The fact you don't know does not mean they don't monitor inaction.

meathstevie

Dan_Solo wrote: »

The scenario we were presented with was the Garda not bothering as he might have to turn the car around. Do keep up. He wasn't making another intervention.

You've clearly never been in a patrol car driving at let's say 80km/h when from the other direction a car with a mucky licence plate approaches also at 80km/h. If this is in rather busy traffic and the driving Garda decides to do a u-turn there and then stick on the lights and siren and race up the road after the car with the mucky numberplate I'd wonder about his/her sound judgement.

The cars are effectively getting away from eachother at 160km/h thus covering more than a mile in minute. Now calculate the time to do a safe U-turn and get going again in busy traffic, if you can do it in about 40 seconds you're doing grand. Now the mucky number plate is at least a mile up the road, a mile that has to be gained while both cars are still moving.

This will require the type of driving that can only be justified to pursue/prevent or respond to serious incidents/crime with substantial risk to propery or persons involved.

Would you for example deem it justifiable to drive at the limit of one's capacity to go to a €10 shoplifting incident where the thief has left, the goods are recovered and CCTV is available ? Didn't think so.....well minor traffic offences in my book fall into a similar category; not worth putting anyone at even more risk on the road as there already is.

Dan_Solo

Wow. Just wow. Prepare to make the jump to hyperbole captain.
So you are really going to compare Garda in a bit of traffic who's car is "going against him" ignoring a guy driving on the phone to two cars doing 80 in opposite directions neither of which have any issues with the actual quality of driving, just the dirty number plate?
LOL is the only sane reply to your nonsense totally unrelated scenario.

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

I asked you how you knew? The fact you don't know does not mean they don't monitor inaction.

The suspense is killing me. Are you going to tell us or not?
Is this inaction over reported crimes they bothered to log or all reported crimes, before you astound us?

Zambia

Dan_Solo wrote: »

The suspense is killing me. Are you going to tell us or not?
Is this inaction over reported crimes they bothered to log or all reported crimes, before you astound us?

So you don't know. If you don't know why prattle on like you do.

You know nothing about what crimes are acted on or not. You fart on claiming some great malaise in the force when you have no clue of accountability. Within it.

I'm not a garda never have been but simple common sense would back up the posters trying to enlighten you.

You have no clue what you are talking about and no amount of capitals and sighs of despair can hide it.

Dermot Illogical

Harry Bosch. wrote: »

I ask you this, would a zero tolerance policy work in Ireland,

Discretion may be overused, but with zero tolerance you'd never get to your beat or wherever it is you're supposed to be going. Most members would have the notebook out for the yellow box junction at the station entrance. In general you would make very slow progress if you were applying the letter of the law.

That said, I'd very much like to see a less tolerant approach to minor offences. The whole idea of not hounding people over minor offences in order to retain "respect of the public" has led to a culture of entitlement among some members of the public and has failed miserably as a policy. I'd be all for a complete clamp-down.
There are a lot of people out there who don't realise that they have benefited from discretion who would get a wake-up call, and not before time.

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

So you don't know. If you don't know why prattle on like you do.

You know nothing about what crimes are acted on or not. You fart on claiming some great malaise in the force when you have no clue of accountability. Within it.

I'm not a garda never have been but simple common sense would back up the posters trying to enlighten you.

You have no clue what you are talking about and no amount of capitals and sighs of despair can hide it.

Ah, so you know loads and loads about this but, what a coincidence, have no information whatsoever to provide to us on it. Almost as if you're just talking waffle there. Wait, no doubt about that really.
Have you ever even accidentally used facts, data or evidence to back up your opinions? Because that's all you have. Opinions.

PS: This is what "evidence" (look it up, it's in the dictionary) would look like.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-massaging-crime-statistics-for-years-new-cso-report-shows-26441540.html

Zambia

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Ah, so you know loads and loads about this but, what a coincidence, have no information whatsoever to provide to us on it. Almost as if you're just talking waffle there. Wait, no doubt about that really.
Have you ever even accidentally used facts, data or evidence to back up your opinions? Because that's all you have. Opinions.

PS: This is what "evidence" (look it up, it's in the dictionary) would look like.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-massaging-crime-statistics-for-years-new-cso-report-shows-26441540.html

Luckily I am playing the role of defender here. So I don't need to have evidence to prove my case.

You need to prove yours. The article you provided proves convictions are occurring. Now I contend that to achieve those figures individual garda are flat out working.

There may be a few members with their feet up but no job is exempt from those individuals.

So please continue with your assumptions

Dan_Solo

Zambia wrote: »

Luckily I am playing the role of defender here. So I don't need to have evidence to prove my case.

You don't have a case. Otherwise you would have to prove it. Pretty basic stuff. Glad you're not on my court team.

Zambia wrote: »

You need to prove yours. The article you provided proves convictions are occurring. Now I contend that to achieve those figures individual garda are flat out working.

OMG he didn't. That's like those Telegraph readers who say the Birmingham Six or second Hillsborough enquiry are proof of how good the British justice system is. Justice delayed is justice denied ring a bell? Any evidence that Gardai are "flat out"? You know you have to prove this, right? (PS. you just said so yourself two lines ago!)

Zambia wrote: »

There may be a few members with their feet up but no job is exempt from those individuals.

Prove it. Remember you were saying earlier something about making a claim and providing evidence? You have thus far provided zero evidence of Garda competence or application to duty.
Here's another example of "evidence". (did you look that word up yet?)
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/rural-gardai-taking-twice-as-many-sick-days-as-city-officers-26630039.html
Good on ye Dublin Gardai. Some of those rural Gardai pull more sickies in one year than I've had in ten.