Thursday, 27 June 2013

Yeah, I’ll Believe The Police Claims Of ‘Lack Of Resources’…

…when they start actually showing a lack of resources:
Richmond Bridge was closed for more than an hour today after it was believed two girls were attempting to jump off the bridge.
Witnesses said the girls “appeared drunk” and were “messing about” near the edge of the bridge.
One witness said: “Two girls were on the outside of the bridge and two local police got them to come back on to the bridge.
“They were just laughing and screaming. People were telling them to get off of the bridge and two PCSOs arrived, swiftly followed by three fire engines, two ambulances, four police cars and a police van and the bridge was blocked off at both ends.
“We have sat there and watched the local resources for two drunk girls.”
Ah, if only they’d had access to a bus full of schoolchildren as well! Or is that sort of drastic action only reserved for certain sections of the ‘community’?

The Fire Brigade is in full ‘Not us, guv, it was the fault of the other lot!’ mode:
A London Fire Brigade spokeswoman said: “We were called at 2.17pm to reports that some people were threatening to jump off the bridge.
“We sent three fire engines and a couple of fire rescue units. The police led on the incident.”
I think both of you can be safely ignored next time you complain about lack of resources…

10 comments:

  1. I agree,we pander far to much to idiots like these.Close one lane and let the public get on with their lives.
    Then charge the idiots to the fullest extent.
    Jaded

    ReplyDelete
  2. If I was inconvenienced by drunken idiots for that long, I'd be tempted to throw the buggers in.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's probably because they didn't have a procedure to cope with two drunk girls on a bridge so they called up all the other services to see if they had one. Services are run by check lists and procedure without any common sense or intelligence.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Given that the fire service won't go in the water with out a risk assessment and a river launch - probably a good idea in this case - why did they send them at all?

    The most they'd have been able to do was wash them off the parapet with the hose. Were the girls smouldering or summat?

    ReplyDelete
  5. WC Jaded remains loyal to her radiator and is never lured out on profligate jollies. Not unless full backup includes catering marquee with cordon bleu chef for cordoned-off areas.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I believe in free will. What if they jump or fall in? Self inflicted and nothing to do with the police or anyone else.

    It's like bankers, the more you rescue them the worse they get.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree we pander to the low lives, but why shouldn't the cops or any other person cover their arses from the expected flack/sack/jail when these drunk girls do jump to their doom and the public cry "Why didn't the cops do anything about it?"

    ReplyDelete
  8. Swansea jock is spot on and anonymous Melvin is still a tedious cock.
    Jaded

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Then charge the idiots to the fullest extent."

    Or, in this case, their patents.

    "Services are run by check lists and procedure without any common sense or intelligence."

    Spot on! Driven by a morbid terror of ambulance chasing lawyers.

    "The most they'd have been able to do was wash them off the parapet with the hose."

    Oooh, I bet they could have sold tickets for that!

    "It's like bankers, the more you rescue them the worse they get."

    :D

    ReplyDelete
  10. "...but why shouldn't the cops or any other person cover their arses from the expected flack/sack/jail when these drunk girls do jump to their doom and the public cry "Why didn't the cops do anything about it?""

    The cops seem perfectly able to ignore the public when it suits them.

    ReplyDelete