Nee Naw, Nee Naw, It's The (Selective) Morality Police!

Officers said it was 'completely unacceptable' after members of the public made offensive remarks as officers tried to help the woman to safety.

Yes, it's another bloody broadside from our moral guardians because someone dared to suggest that maybe they weren't fully behind the police's SoP of 'massively inconvenience all those working stiffs so someone can get some attention'...

Over at Tim Worstall's blog, this prompted the usual suspects to flaunt their sanctimoniousness and heap scorn on the motorists, plus anyone who thought it was a bit overstepping the bounds for a police spokesman to consider morality lectures to be part of her job.

Oddly, this incident got far more coverage than this one, despite the former being both completely understandable and excusable:

In shocking scenes, passers-by who gathered to watch interfered and heckled as the officers' battled to save his life in West Croydon, police said today.

And yet these street scum, who didn't even have the excuse of being inconvenienced in the slightest, drew no such moral condemnation:

Chief Supt Tarrant said: "This was outstanding work in what were extremely difficult circumstances, compounded by the extreme heat.

"Even with a volatile crowd the officers managed to keep their resolve and continue administering first aid to an excellent standard, resulting in the man's life being saved.

"The officers should be very proud of themselves, displaying outstanding professionalism and acting in the best traditions of the Met Police."

'Volatile'..? No moral judgement there, is there? It's almost as if he's afraid to condemn their actions.

Nor here, either:

A spokesman said: 'This man was spoken to by officers with consideration given to relevant legislation and a decision was taken by officers at the time that the man was acting within the law. He was not arrested.'

Hmmm. Seems the police moral compass needs a bit of recalibration.