Policing with caution (From Bucks Free Press)

Send your news, photos and videos by texting bucksfreepress to 80360 or email

Blogs RSS Feed

Policing with caution

7:39pm Thursday 12th January 2012

By ivor »

When someone commits a crime we all think they will be arrested and appear in court and if found guilty sent to prison.

In the modern world in which we live sometimes this is not the case.

As demonstrated by several prominent examples in the news recently more often than not the police will merely issue a caution and the offender will go merrily on their way.

While I don't want to go into the specifics of the recent cases, indeed its best that we avoid them altogether, surely the whole concept of the “caution” needs to be rethought?

What is the point of having laws with custodial sentences if a mere caution will be handed out?

For people without a criminal record the chances are they will only get a caution if they commit a first offence therefore its sending out the signal that everyone could do a little shoplifting and if we are unlucky enough to be caught just end up with a caution.

Surely the “you can commit a crime once” scenario makes a mockery of the law?

Now let's suppose I were to drive past a speed camera while travelling too fast then I would get a fine and possibly points on my licence. So why don't I just get a caution instead? Is there not an inconsistency here?

We are told what the maximum sentence for a crime is so why aren't the minimum sentences made clear too?

Would it not be a good idea to list all the offences with a caution as the lowest penalty so we are clear what they are?

There also seems to be another inconsistency as it seems that if famous people or those in the public eye commit a crime they are more likely to end up with their picture in the media and details of their crime blazoned over the front pages.

If someone unimportant, like yours truly, was to receive a caution the chances are that it would not even make ripples in the papers and the chances of my misdemeanour’s being featured on the television news are nil.

Even famous people have a right to privacy so why should they receive publicity if they get a mere caution?

Maybe the law should be re-written so only those who receive custodial sentences for their crimes, no matter who they are, are put through the ringer of the media?

As far as I am concerned the whole concept of the caution is a waste of time and the police would be better to arrest and prosecute for even the first offence.

Naturally I am as honest as the day is long but at least I know that if I did commit a crime then all that awaits me is a caution at which point I would instantly declare myself a little bit insane which seems to be a valid way of minimising or even justifying the caution.

Let's face it the weight carried by a caution is one step below being hit in the face with a wet lettuce leaf.

Is it any wonder there is so much crime in today society?

What do you think?

*Don't forget to read my regular column in this Friday's edition of the printed version of the Bucks Free Press!

Readers who submit articles must agree to our terms of use. The content is the sole responsibility of the contributor and is unmoderated. But we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention. If you wish to complain about this article, contact us here

Comments(27)

Alberto The Great says...
8:21pm Thu 12 Jan 12

Have you still not been to the Library yet? Maybe it's because you already know that there are no Biguns listed in that muster role, because you're all fiction.

.... awaits yet another avoidance answer