Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Incognitas
Michael Howard must be mad!!
|
No, just desperate for some attention grabbing headlines...
However I agree with you that the idea is totally barking.
There's enough political BS getting in the way of the Police doing their jobs without this sort of thing.
Do we really want a system like they have in America where Sheriff, District Attorneys and Judges etc are elected with the result that they go for "populist" actions and prosecutions to make them look good to the voters and the media, even if what they are doing is *not* serve Justice?
My response is *HELL NO*!!
Justice is supposed to be impartial and unbiased, not based on what looks good to the electorate!
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MovedGoalPosts
Hmm, the idea of elected officials to oversee policing, in some form makes sense.
|
We already have those. They're called MPs!
Quote:
|
Why shouldn't communities be able to directly influence the policing priorities for their districts.
|
Communities already can, but those who administer and oversee those policies are not and should not be elected on what looks good in the papers!
We get enough of that nonsense already with the Government artificially skewing Police priorities with all sorts of targets and league tables, the Police should be left alone to do their job of making the streets safer!
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by punky
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Incognitas
Have you seen the mismanagement in the US where they elect their own sherriffs and other law authorities?
|
I can't say I ever heard of all the mismanagement. The good side to it all is if you have two or more candidates for election, you increase competition. Increased competition generally raises the bar, as well as they have to fight to keep their job |
Which means that they go for the policies that play best in the press and the media and if that means some poor sap gets 25 years for stealing a slice of pizza or
http://www.facts1.com/general/news.htm#pizza because of that policy, well, "it's what the people voted for, isn't it"???