Possibly stupid question about police...

killerkebab · 15-01-2008, 14:47

A policeman is there to uphold/enforce the law, right? (Question 1: Is there a difference between uphold and enforce? I've heard both terms used)

Does that imply that part of the training is exactly that, law? I always wondered if a policeman would be expected to know laws like a lawyer would, and since I know at least one person on here would know the answer, I decided to bite the bullet and ask

If the question is retarded, I do apologise and I expect a torrent of 'NOOB'

Dr. Z · 15-01-2008, 15:00

They need to know the basics of what is illegal and what isn't but they don't need to know the whole statute book inside and out. Obviously I would imagine a working knowledge of the law would be needed but if every officer needed to know all of the law it would be pretty impossible to be a cop!

As for upholding/enforcing the law, I see the two as separate but linked. Upholding the law to me means that they are there to provide some kind of deterrent to make sure that the law doesn't get broken. Enforcing the law is what happens when someone breaks the law (or attempts to break a law).

Mark · 15-01-2008, 15:22

I'd agree with DRZ. Given the difference in length of training to be a lawyer against being a PC, it's pretty obvious. They need the basics of things they're likely to come across day to day - public order, assault, theft, that sort of stuff, how to use the kit they're provided, how to make an arrest, etc. The fine detail is left to prosecution lawyers, the CPS, etc.

iCraig · 15-01-2008, 17:36

Different types of policeman need different knowledge I'd guess at. A beat officer for example wouldn't need to know the in-depth legality of internet-crimes.

killerkebab · 15-01-2008, 17:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark

I'd agree with DRZ. Given the difference in length of training to be a lawyer against being a PC, it's pretty obvious.

Oh that much is obvious, I only wondered just how much training is given in this area, if any

Del Lardo · 15-01-2008, 18:29

The chap driving the Panda car that pulled me over on Sunday night clearly didn't know anything about the law covering the road but I soon put him straight

It's actually a rather interesting question, how do the Police know that what you are doing is illegal? I suppose most of the crimes they have to deal with it's fairly obvious but for the less obvious I suppose that's where experience comes into effect.

Pebs · 15-01-2008, 19:01

I've done a shedload of legislation covering definitions of offences such as theft, robbery, making off without payment, fraud etc. I can tell you the definitions of those offences and the points you have to prove to say those offences have been commited, we really do learn it to death but the finer intricacies are left to the lowyers I'd imagine. There are a million and one crimes I don't know the first thing about and probably never will but I think essentially if a police officer thinks an offence has been commited then its game on

Von will know far more.

Del Lardo · 15-01-2008, 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pebs

if a police officer thinks an offence has been commited then its game on

That's where a good moral compass comes in.

I could never be a Police officer

Von Smallhausen · 17-01-2008, 17:37

DRZ sums it up nicely.

There will not be one cop in the UK who will know the statute books inside out as there is simply too much to take in.

The Police And Crininal Evidence Act of 1984 is basically the cops bible as to how detainees rights, how they should be treated, how stop searches should be conducted and many other things yet it is in excess of 100 sections and you have further and numerous codes of practice A-H that cover the likes of identification, searching, information on arrest, interviewing etc and that is just one of hundreds of Acts on the statute book.

A lawyer will have a far more in depth knowledge of the law than your average police officer as they will be aware of stated cases / caselaw etc.

Wossi · 17-01-2008, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Von Smallhausen

DRZ sums it up nicely.

There will not be one cop in the UK who will know the statute books inside out as there is simply too much to take in.

The Police And Crininal Evidence Act of 1984 is basically the cops bible as to how detainees rights, how they should be treated, how stop searches should be conducted and many other things yet it is in excess of 100 sections and you have further and numerous codes of practice A-H that cover the likes of identification, searching, information on arrest, interviewing etc and that is just one of hundreds of Acts on the statute book.

A lawyer will have a far more in depth knowledge of the law than your average police officer as they will be aware of stated cases / caselaw etc.

Would getting hold of that book and having a quick flick through help someone who was joining the Police? Or would it be a waste of time?

15-01-2008, 14:47	#1
killerkebab Vodka Martini Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bristol/Reading Posts: 656	Possibly stupid question about police... A policeman is there to uphold/enforce the law, right? (Question 1: Is there a difference between uphold and enforce? I've heard both terms used) Does that imply that part of the training is exactly that, law? I always wondered if a policeman would be expected to know laws like a lawyer would, and since I know at least one person on here would know the answer, I decided to bite the bullet and ask If the question is retarded, I do apologise and I expect a torrent of 'NOOB' __________________

15-01-2008, 15:00	#2
Dr. Z I'm going for a scuttle... Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,021	They need to know the basics of what is illegal and what isn't but they don't need to know the whole statute book inside and out. Obviously I would imagine a working knowledge of the law would be needed but if every officer needed to know all of the law it would be pretty impossible to be a cop! As for upholding/enforcing the law, I see the two as separate but linked. Upholding the law to me means that they are there to provide some kind of deterrent to make sure that the law doesn't get broken. Enforcing the law is what happens when someone breaks the law (or attempts to break a law). __________________

15-01-2008, 17:36	#4
iCraig iCustom User Title Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,250	Different types of policeman need different knowledge I'd guess at. A beat officer for example wouldn't need to know the in-depth legality of internet-crimes. __________________

15-01-2008, 19:01	#7
Pebs Easymouth Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 6,716	I've done a shedload of legislation covering definitions of offences such as theft, robbery, making off without payment, fraud etc. I can tell you the definitions of those offences and the points you have to prove to say those offences have been commited, we really do learn it to death but the finer intricacies are left to the lowyers I'd imagine. There are a million and one crimes I don't know the first thing about and probably never will but I think essentially if a police officer thinks an offence has been commited then its game on Von will know far more. __________________ ...faster you naughty little monkey! Running through hell, heaven can wait! Last edited by Pebs; 15-01-2008 at 19:04.

17-01-2008, 17:37	#9
Von Smallhausen I'm Free Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Tyneside Posts: 3,061	DRZ sums it up nicely. There will not be one cop in the UK who will know the statute books inside out as there is simply too much to take in. The Police And Crininal Evidence Act of 1984 is basically the cops bible as to how detainees rights, how they should be treated, how stop searches should be conducted and many other things yet it is in excess of 100 sections and you have further and numerous codes of practice A-H that cover the likes of identification, searching, information on arrest, interviewing etc and that is just one of hundreds of Acts on the statute book. A lawyer will have a far more in depth knowledge of the law than your average police officer as they will be aware of stated cases / caselaw etc. __________________ " Well, old bean, life is really so bloody awful that I feel it’s my absolute duty to be chirpy and try and make everybody else happy too." David Niven, 1910-1983.

15-01-2008, 15:22	#3
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	I'd agree with DRZ. Given the difference in length of training to be a lawyer against being a PC, it's pretty obvious. They need the basics of things they're likely to come across day to day - public order, assault, theft, that sort of stuff, how to use the kit they're provided, how to make an arrest, etc. The fine detail is left to prosecution lawyers, the CPS, etc.

15-01-2008, 18:29	#6
Del Lardo Absinthe Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cambridge Posts: 2,539	The chap driving the Panda car that pulled me over on Sunday night clearly didn't know anything about the law covering the road but I soon put him straight It's actually a rather interesting question, how do the Police know that what you are doing is illegal? I suppose most of the crimes they have to deal with it's fairly obvious but for the less obvious I suppose that's where experience comes into effect.