If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
There are only five senses? I guess there are only 4 elements too? And senses at that, which are notorious for deceiving us. Why not add hunger, that must be a sense, and it's a very useful one. surely fear too, and tiredness...
agreements exist, regardless of your basic and irrelevant thinking on senses.
And the structure that unites them.
It is to your example. The police to all intents and purposes cannot protect anybody. All they do is sweep up the mess afterwards in 99.9% of cases.
Damn right they are. If even that which you can definitely sense is suspect, why try and build mountains of certainty out of stuff that has no sensory basis?
They are all feelings, or didn't you notice that?
>sigh<
When and where were these agreements enterd into between which individuals? Wheres the proof, the evidence?
What agreements are you on about anyway, specifically?
Klintock, on agreement, the orthodox view, which is useful, and predictive, and can't be disproved, is a better bet than your view, which is unpopular, useless, meaningless, and is disproved by the fact that agreement exists on the futility of your argument. Agreement exists.
Yes, useful, yes predictive, can't be proven. That's the important bit. You are the one asserting that these "agreements" exist. yet you can't say when they started, who they are between, what the terms are or how long they will last for. You have no evidence for your assertion of an agreement.
It's up to you to prove that what you say is right, or we are looking at one of those tricky theological type debates where you "know" you are right in the face of all the facts, or in this case, lack of facts. Proof please! in other words.
So the world became flat when everyone thought it was so? how useful was it to point out that the earth wasn't the centre of the universe in an age when the bible held everyone back?
Of course it's meaningless, the world is meaningless. Only people hold meanings for things, the world couldn't give a shit.
Proof please.
No, I don't.
Yeah you have.
Sure there is. They are called contracts.
Well, if you could start doing some it might be a help. Any chance of getting to the questions you bypassed?
Yes you did.
No I didn't.
You need to ask them first.
With your mind reading skills, do you think you could come up with some proof for those agreements you were on about?
HE'S BEHIND YOU!!
Panto season is in.
Nope, but I was hoping for that kind of answer. Contracts are indeed, just pieces of paper. So, if even contracts with signatures on them aren't agreements, how are you going to prove that any other kind of agreement exists?
1. I may be wrong, but a crime has already taken place. I would already be a victim. Therefore the police has only prevented a greater crime, not prevented crime completely.
2. Can you guarantee that the Police will turn up?
3. Is it only the Police who would turn up, or could that happenstance you descibe actually be any member of the public?
4. The police represent the enforcement of laws. Their role is not protection or prevention. They are not a pre-emptive service.
The crime had already been committed.
How about the brazillian murdered by the police?
Or maybe I could go for the side of the Guildford 4, Birmingham 6. I am sure that Colin Stagg would like me to side with him to.
How many examples do you want?
Not quite true. They do have an enforcement role, but they do do also have a protection and prevention. Bobbies on the beat are as much there to prevent crime (by being seen as visible deterrent) as they are to enforce the law or deal with it after it has been broken.
The police also spend a lot of time trying to pre-empt crime - police going round to pensioners clubs to give them advice on home security etc.
Which is why the "Beat" numbers have been reduced over time.
There is no point being on the beat if a crime is being committed a mile away and it will take you 15 minutes to walk there or 20 seconds to drive.
As a proportion of their availability, how much do you honestly believe this represents?
As % of time pre-emption is probably relatively small - but its still there. and as % of resources its a lot higher (look at all the posters etc paid for by the Met, leaflets etc)
The role of the police is much more than dealing with crime once committed - even though that is probably to many police officers the 'sexy' bit.
I'm not sure anyone is suggesting that every single policeman goes back to foot patrol and we do away with cars. However, the police are also there to reassure the public - one of the reasons why the British moved from policing by the Army to a civilian police service was to make sure that policing done by people who were part of the communities (and not based in barracks as the army was). That still remains a fundamental part of everyday British policing. Now beat policing may catch less criminals, but they make the public feel safer and there is a deterrent value (in that people - including criminals - feel the police haven't lost control and are less likely to commit crime).
Dealing with the aftermath of crimes is part of the job, so is being out in the community reassuring people - even if not so exciting as zooming down the street sirens blairing.