Friday, 8 October 2010

The day British coppers surpassed Harry Enfield’s Dutch police




You will no doubt remember Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse’s derangedly liberal Dutch police from Harry Enfield and Chums in the 1990s. How we all laughed at the concept of a society so topsy-turvy that the burglary problem had been solved by decriminalizing the act itself, and where the police, when called to a disturbance in an Amsterdam park after old people had complained about homosexual activities, arrest the old people. Those crazy Hollanders!

Last week, according to the Telegraph one part of the United Kingdom finally turned Enfield and Whitehouse’s fantasy into reality. The Association of Chief Police Officers has issued a new Hate Crime Guidance Manual north of the border which orders officers to protect “doggers” and “cottagers” (which, I am informed, are the official terms for those who commit the illegal act of indulging in sex in public places – one assumes the choice of term depends on the sexual orientation of the participants).

Now, I was young once, and I do realise that we sometimes lose control, or that the lure of experimentation occasionally proves irresistible. But if you choose to experiment at a time and in a place where other - decent -  people might happen upon you unawares, you deserve a volley of abuse - even a kick up the backside. Tough!

As for those people for whom the danger of discovery has become a sort of aid to gratification, why do they need protection from the rest of us? Isn’t the danger of discovery - for them - the whole point? 

While the manual is generous enough to admit that such acts are illegal, it stresses that these sexually-incontinent degenerates  have rights too, and that anyone suspected of committing a hate crime against them should be arrested. This includes “abusing” them (which I would have imagined they’d rather enjoy) and “verbally taunting” them (as opposed, one presumes, to poking them with sticks – which they might already be doing to one another in any case).

The reason for taking this zero-tolerance approach to law-abiding citizens is, obviously, that the “victims” might very well suffer “post traumatic stress”. (No, it isn’t April 1st – I checked). As the manual helpfully explains: "Research has shown that any victim of crime can suffer symptoms of depression, anger, anxiety and post traumatic stress. Victims of non-biased crime can experience a decrease in these symptoms within two years (but) victims of bias, or hate crime, may need as long as five years to overcome their ordeal."

Unlike our senior police, I’m biased against criminals. If, while expressing this bias, my language becomes a trifle immoderate, does that constitute  a hate crime?  

And exactly when did the “victims” of a hate crime move above the victims of other crimes in the pecking order of suffering? I’m sure it’s a great relief to those who have been mugged or raped or run over by a drunk motorist to learn that they’ll get over their somewhat inconvenient experience so much quicker than someone who’s been called a nasty name.

The other aim of this new policy (apart from protecting criminals), is apparently to 'improve our effectiveness and the quality of service provided by the police service when policing public sex environments'. 

What in the name of all that’s Holy is a “public sex environment”? There should be no such thing. What are we? Rutting, mindless animals without any concept of shame or propriety or respect for anyone else? (Actually, don’t answer that!) I’m told that parts of Hampstead Heath and Wimbledon are regularly used for sexual shenanigans. Why is this allowed? Homosexuality was made legal in 1968, and, as far as I’m aware, sex between consenting heterosexual adults has been legal for quite a while now. Do we generally set aside public spaces where people can commit acts of violence, muggings or dog-fights without any fear of police intervention (apart, of course, from those council estates which the cops are too scared to visit, and where the law-abiding are left to fend for themselves)?

The chairman of the Scottish Police Federation, Les Gray, responded, "It's getting to the stage that people who break the law have more rights than the normal man or woman on the street, and as for them suffering from post traumatic stress, what about the people who witness these exhibitions and are shocked by it? What about their rights?" (With that sort of ridiculous attitude, one can only assume that Les’s prospects of promotion are severely limited. And, by the way, Les, it isn’t “getting to the stage” – it’s gone way beyond it.)

Exactly when and where does this utterly grotesque bullshit end? (And please don’t say “when you stop writing it”.)

Is a Scotsman, strolling with his family in a local park, who sees two males “committing a sexual act” (or “celebrating their sexuality” as I presume Plod would now term it)  not allowed to shout “Get a room, you dirty wee poofs!”? Would that in itself be a hate crime in the demented looking- glass world inhabited by our senior police? 

Where did these ludicrous nincompoops come from? Who brought them up? What were they taught at school? Do they ever meet any of the normal people who pay their ridiculously inflated salaries? How can they have progressed to the top of their profession without sharing any of society’s accepted values? (There was once a truly horrible French writer called Jean Genet, a rampantly promiscuous homosexual thief, who wrote a series of nasty little books in which, endlessly and tediously, “normal” moral values were turned on their head, as, indeed, were many of his characters. Naturally, French intellectuals loved the rancid, demoniacal little creep – one presumes he’s now required reading for Top Cops.)

And why wouldn’t the Home Office, in particular the bit which has the inestimable pleasure of dealing with the Socialist Republic of Scotland, start an investigation to discover which blithering idiots came up with this appalling policy and authorized the publication of these repellent guidelines, and fire them instantly, pausing only long enough to rescind all their pension rights? And then give the most senior position made available by turfing out these libtards to Les Gray, who, whatever his qualities as a copper, enjoys the great advantage of possessing a lick of common sense.

We really must start sending the aliens in charge of so much of our public life back to Alpha Centauri -  or wherever the hell they came from.

No comments:

Post a comment