With small crimes it's not that they can't be solved, it's that the UK has decided it would rather have some petty crime than to pay the taxes necessary to catch petty criminals (assuming that catching the criminal would even solve the crime problem). The current state of policing in the UK is that small thefts won't be investigated - so it doesn't matter how easy they are to solve.
There is a checklist with hundreds of items that will appear if a person like this gets picked up. And a hell of a lot of work after that. This is the really dumb pragmatic argument to not being a police state (beyond the other arguments)
I think that there is no economic gains, and there is no efficiency to be had in catching petty criminals. It is a symptom of a bigger social problem which needs to be dealt with .
I don't know that that is actually possible. The police can access the records for any one number, but accessing all the records for a set of towers in a given time window is a different matter. I would actually love to know if this is within their capabilities.
[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/uk-surveillance-regime... [2] https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2016/01/05/some-t...
No such "active" decision has ever been taken by the UK citizens and simply never would be by any democracy I can imagine - and this is probably the next major problem democracy needs to solve.
Did you know the UK is self sufficient in strawberries? Supermarkets saw they had demand, and put strawberries on shelves from global suppliers year round, then started competing amoungst themselves on price which meant air freighted strawberries cost more than locally produced greenhoused food so we expanded our greenhouses - in a good stuff it's likely noone would vote for
I don't know quite how to solve this but I think a "backlog" approach to democracy would work
Is that’s why I can never find sweet strawberries in the UK?
The Met simply have limited funding and more important matters to investigate. They are essentially attempting to politely explain that to you.
Everyone has limited funding
> and more important matters to investigate
Everyone should prioritise what they work on!
Not to be harsh on the OP, but let's compared the total £value of what was stolen vs the potential [opportunity] cost to the police and other relevant authorities which would be required to catch and convict the thief.
If the laptop had something the authorities valued, they'd work significantly harder.
Don’t think for a moment that the theives aren’t watching you. Don’t think that you can just put your bag down while you look through a rack of clothes or leave it at your table while you order another drink from the bar. The theives are brazen, and as the article points out the millions of cameras that will watch it happen are not there to protect you.
The police squad that came around was fairly decent, but they didn’t really seem to be on the lookout for this type of crime; one of the cops confessed that he’d used the same ATM the night before and was genuinely impressed that I’d spotted it. Spending a couple of hours in the police station to give my statement (rather than going to the restaurant as initially planned) sucked, of course. I was shocked at how bad I was at describing the thieves, even though I’d seen them and talked to them.
Following up with the bank was similarly frustrating; the bank director told me he personally checked the ATM at opening and closing time, meaning the thieves installed and removed the card reader every night. I never found out if the other victims were made aware of the fact that their card details were stolen.
So, yes, thieves are brazen and smart; police are nice (sometimes) but helpless or just don’t care about these types of crime; and even though I did all I could to mitigate the situation, I still felt a bit shitty and helpless about the whole experience.
I think it can generally be said that bureaucracies mostly exist to serve other bureaucracies, mere mortals are illegible drains on their resources, to put it candidly, if they helped every sad sack with a sad story that showed up at their doorstep, pretty soon that's going to be all they're doing.
So instead you have to persuade, cajole people into helping you out. You find the one guy with both the spare time and the wherewithal to work the system. Spin a detective story out of it, make it interesting for them. Never lose sight of the fact that they're doing you a favor and send a nice thank-you card after its sorted.
Sure, political forces have driven wedges between institutions that should be public-facing and the public they should be serving. But that doesn't mean that good people don't still work there. You just have to get them interested. Anyone you speak to can be cajoled into doing the right thing. But they won't unless you help them see the light.
Yes we have a lot, but they're mostly privately owned and nobody will look at them for anything less than GBH or murder.
Re The Met - it’s a sad state of affairs with policing in the UK. It comes down to the following: police only ‘care’ to investigate or deal with 3 types of criminals: 1. Terrorists 2. Paedophiles 3. Speeding motorists
If you wish to do any other criminality in the UK then you have pretty much free reign to carry out things with impunity. Government are even talking about abolishing jail sentences for ‘minor’ crimes (not to improve rehabilitation but to save money).
I am emigrating. I can see where things are heading and it’s not good for this country.
4. Steal swords from random motorists[1], find dangerous rusty butter knifes[2]
and 5. and occasionally give lectures about[3] and investigate[4] "hate speech"
[1] https://i.imgur.com/zmZqQFY.jpg
[2] https://i.imgur.com/VhVQqQB.jpg
[3] https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/13/lecturer-reported-police-hate...
[4] https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/south-yorkshire-police...
I completely sympathize with this guy, and hope I don’t wind up in his situation, but how seriously does any big city resident truly expect the police to take relatively small-value nonviolent property crimes?
Mind your belongings. Police will not do anything about it.
We should all be glad that the police don't waste their time on petty crime like this. This guy didn't deserve this, but the rest of us shouldn't have to pay for his naivety.
You may be legally required to carry it with you. In China this is the case. (Or at least, China publishes a lot of documentation for foreigners claiming it is the case. I don't see why they'd be wrong about that.)
I don't carry my passport with me anyway, because that is crazy, but I don't like being placed in the wrong like that either.
They tried to introduce national ID cards a few times and it got voted down each time.
FWIW I have no issue with a national ID card if it's purely that, Identification but the government couldn't leave it at that and wanted to tie the card to everything.
Turning a reasonable idea into a terrible idea.
Given the way they expand everything to compromise peoples privacy I don't trust them not to do it after the fact either so generally I'm on the no to national ID side.
Because I don't trust my government at all.
There is nothing less fun than being arrested, and going through processing (which takes FOREVER) to then talk to someone much later that'll take down details arrange cops to either pick it up for you (by ramsacking your room) or escort you there to pick it up (by ramsacking your room first).
If you are an immigrant in another country, also keep your papers on your person 24x7x365. All it takes is one jerk and bamm your how day or week just got ruined.
Understandably he seems to be personally outraged by his experience, but if he put his emotions aside he'd put it down to experience, make an insurance claim, get his documents and cards reissued and move on.
Even if they wanted to current police forces simply lack the resources, they've (the gov) also juggled the crime stats so it looks like crime has stayed steady or declined (hence they can 'justify' the cuts).
The UK is in a complete shambles at the moment.
Years of unnecessary austerity combined with a government determined to privatise everything no matter what the actual (if any) benefit on ideological grounds has left it that way..but we keep voting for them and so we get the government we deserve* (*which we wouldn't have if we could get rid of our stupid first past the post voting system).
However I hardly think that concerntrating power is a solution nor that this is really a problem that needs to be solved by finding he thieves.
I’d be curious to know by how much incidents of petty crime are reduced for every 1% increase in the wealth of the poorest 5%.
Meanwhile, I think the police are doing the right thing by focusing on organised and serious crime, and society would be doing the right thing if it focused on the causes of crime rather than on expanding the police force.