Upload a photo Upload a video Upload an mp3 Upload an event

News » WAB Debate


Less Police On Streets - How Would You Tackle Crime?

Thursday October 6 2011


jail crime behind bars jail crime behind bars


FEWER police and council support workers will be patrolling our streets from this time next year thanks to swathing budget cuts.

Already, 20 per cent of the council's neighbourhood safety service has been cut - meaning projects like the Neighbourhood Warden scheme in Bolton-On-Dearne and Thurnscoe have been axed.

The council funded 21 Police Community Support Officers when the scheme began in 2005, that is now down to 16, funded by the Home Office. But it is unsure whether that grant funding will be available next year. And South Yorkshire Police have a reduced budget which will mean less bobbies on the beat.

Now, Paul Brannan - the assistant director in charge of neighbourhood safety - is appealing for help from the public for ideas in how to bridge the gap.

He said: "It has been a challenging time because I have seen some of the services that have built up around me taken away - it's nobody's fault, it's just that just the money is not there.

"We need to develop new schemes and I think most of the best ideas come from the public themselves. We are paid officers that try to do the best we can on behalf of the public but the public knows better than we do what would work on their street.

"I would welcome any sort of ideas to how we can move forward - we aren't always going to be able to act on everything and we aren't always going to get a consensus but we have to decide how collectively we might move forward and prevent some of the problems we anticipate due to budget restrictions."

What do you think could be done to tackle crime in Barnsley? What would make you feel safer? Comment in the box below and we will pass your comments on.

Leave a comment
comments powered by Disqus
5 Showing 5 comments

Reply Posted by Mick on Thursday October 6 2011 at 12:55
I would:

Have a big push on encouraging communities to set up neighbourhood watch areas. I'm sure lots of people would want to be involved if they were asked, but actually getting round to looking into the practicalities & talking to other residents is a big thing. If police & council started the ball rolling i'm sure lots of communities would get involved.

A big crack down on underage drinking is needed. You can see it going on everywhere yet we always read that shops pass when tested on underage sales. I'm sure in most cases older people are buying it for the youngsters. Clamp down on this & have a 'whistleblower hotline' where people  can name those buying it & passing on. On the same point, I would come down much harder on retailers failing tests, no warnings - big fines first time, temporary loss of license second time, permanent loss of license third time.

More use of community penalties for young people drinking, being anti-social, dropping litter. We don't want to criminalise people when they are young & silly, but make them attend education classes when they would rather be out with there mates & get them litter picking etc. I don't know what the legal requirements are but first take them to their parents & get agreement from them if possible.

Reply Posted by Klaus Behringer on Monday January 2 2012 at 06:05
In the USA since about 2007-2008 we have seen a massive decline in most counties/cities in regards to the number of police on staff. I live in the state of Ohio and the county known as Ashtabula County is the largest in terms of land area/size, at approximately 3,500 km^2 of total area (land and water)- with the land being approximately 1800 km^2 with a total of approximately 110,000 people in the county. At the present time there are only local police departments in a few of the incorporated cities (the two largest cities in the county have approx 18,000 people and 11,000, with police forces of approximately 20-30 officers each), and two Ohio State Highway Patrol officers to patrol the county at any given time.
 
The sheriff's department (the main law enforcement agency for patrolling outside of city areas, i.e. the unincorporated portions of the county) has recently laid off most of their deputies (they have gone from around 100 deputies to about 4 or 5 deputies).
 
A county judge recommended that citizens arm themselves with weapons for home-defense and personal defense outside of the home, while remembering to obtain the necessary permits required to carry concealed pistols outside of their own property.
 
Across the United States most states have normalized concealed carry, either adopting shall issue (where the police/issuing authorities MUST issue a permit to anybody who is not legally disqualified, with no discretion or “state a need” requirement), may issue (where police/issuing authorities MAY at their discretion issue a permit if they deem fit), or “no permit required” to carry a firearm whereby any law-abiding citizen who is lawfully in possession of a weapon may lawfully carry it.
 
To date in the USA there are a few states- New York, New Jersey, California, Maryland, Hawaii, and Massachusetts, where concealed carry is officially “may issue” but is severely restricted in practice, to the point of being de facto banned in New Jersey, most of New York, and most of California, and virtually all of Maryland. Illinois is the only state in the USA that has no provision for concealed carry of pistols, they have no system in place to issue permits and they have no provision for lawful concealed carry, in addition to refusing to recognize permits issued by other states.
 
However, almost every single state in the USA, somewhere around 38 states are undisputed shall issue states where concealed carry is normalized, accepted, and permits must be issued to those who are not legally disqualified.
 
In the last four years gun sales have been at record high levels in the USA while police have been laid off in record numbers, yet ALL categories of crime from burglary and car theft, to rape, robbery, and murder, are down, having gone down each year.
 
The BBC reports on this and attempts to talk about the “Obama effect” in regards to how black men have been inspired by Obama not to enter into the gang life, while the US press simply states “the FBI will not speculate on why crime has dropped, all experts remain baffled!”
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13799616
 
The answer is simple, crime is down because more Americans are well-armed, attitudes towards handguns have matured (in the 1950s approximately 80% of Americans favored a ban on handguns except for military and police, while the present figure is somewhere below 30%), concealed carry has become normalized and gained mainstream acceptance, and self-defense laws now favor citizens.
 
In my state I have no duty to retreat from my own home or my own vehicle, and I may use lethal force to stop an illegal/forced entry/assault into my vehicle/home. In some states, such as Texas, one may use lethal force to prevent/stop the theft of his property. Only a few states have draconian laws requiring citizens to attempt to flee from their own vehicle or their own home, these tend to be states such as Illinois and New York, states that typically have the highest crime rates in the nation.
 
The highest crime rates will be found in states such as California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, or the big cities of states such as Alabama (think Birmingham and Mobile), Ohio (think Cleveland, Toledo, and Cincinnati), Louisiana (think New Orleans and Shreveport), etc, where gun laws are restrictive on the state/local level.
 
Police have a very negligible impact on crime as by their very nature they are reactive, they investigate after crimes have been committed and they attempt to solve them, seldom do they prevent crimes. Multiple studies have indicated that increasing police numbers/presence on the street will decrease certain crimes such as street muggings, break-ins against parked vehicles, etc, but that it has absolutely no impact on burglary of homes, rapes, murders, domestic violence, kidnapping, bank robbery, etc.
 
The present recession/depression in the USA, which has seen a massive reduction in police numbers across the nation, which incidentally happened around the same time as the spread and normalization of concealed carry of pistols, with the resulting massive decrease in crime (we’re talking 10% decreases in some crime categories) is all the evidence that is needed to demonstrate and indeed prove that WELL ARMED CITIZENS DETER AND PREVENT CRIME!
 
 
 
 
Many foreigners talk about how America has an “immature” attitude in regards to firearms due to the refusal of Americans to adopt draconian European or Australian style gun laws where even keeping an unloaded shotgun under the bed with shells next to it is unacceptable and often illegal, to say nothing of raising the idea of legalized concealed carry of pistols for self-defense. America has essentially proven that the Second Amendment and the accompanying normalization of legal concealed carry of weapons for self-defense is the primary way in which crime is prevented, deterred, and stopped.
 
Britain and Australia could learn a tremendously important lesson from the American model, but the leaders in most Western/Anglophone nations have no room for armed citizens and they will not tolerate armed citizens. Armed citizens would be a direct threat to the British nanny/surveillance/Government-is-God state that the British government has forced on the populace.
 
Whenever a Canadian or Australian tells me that they will simply “call the police” I ask them why, what is that the police have that they do not? Do the police bring harsh language and use convincing arguments to make the criminal/offender modify his behavior and surrender peacefully? Police bring guns and the implicit understanding of “stop what you’re doing and submit to justice or else you’ll be shot!”
 
Armed citizens don’t need the police for anything other than filling out paperwork. Nanny state and police state types don’t like to be told, “you’re not needed, I can take care of myself, thank you very much.”
 
 
If Britain wants to get serious about reducing crime, they should legalize and normalize handgun ownership and the carry (concealed or open) of handguns for self-defense by decent/lawful/honest citizens. However, it is my view that the British public is far too addicted to big government, they are hooked on the nanny state, to the point where 95% of Britons would lobby vigorously to make sure that the 5% who might be interested in having weapons for defense would never be able to have them.

Reply Posted by christine scamp on Saturday January 28 2012 at 21:02
i agree involve the communities..i believe this is the way forward..every area has its own problems, and yes i agree with your recommendations

Reply Posted by christine scamp on Saturday January 28 2012 at 21:02
i agree involve the communities..i believe this is the way forward..every area has its own problems, and yes i agree with your recommendations

Reply Posted by rainbow on Thursday February 21 2013 at 12:39
The police abandoned our streets years ago and no wonder. Kids have a right to abuse everyone with no chance of any come-backs. Courts let em off lightly and comes down harshly on anyone who dare raise a finger to em in defense of there property or well being. Were reaping what wooly minded leberals have sown since the abolition of corporal punishment and hanging.