England UK

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:30:47 +0100, "Uno Hoo!"
<kev@dropthisbigfoot.com> wrote:

>
>"AlanG" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>news:1125326332.84957389ea6586aabc36d5c90e6d2177@teranews...
>> On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 12:09:23 +0100, joe
>> <JOEPARKINchinese@BTINTERNET.COM> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What about the minor things the police do, for instance, if they do not
>>>like your attitude, or if you are not happy about them stopping you,
>>>they will charge you, if you fawn all over them, they will let you off
>>>with the sanctimonious waffle they are famous for.
>>
>> You met Kev in his professional capacity then?
>
>Every police officer has the discretion to verbally caution for minor
>offences. If you were a police officer, who would *you* be more likely to
>verbally caution - the speeding motorist who says to you, "I know why you've
>stopped me officer, I was going too fast in the rush to get home. I'm
>sorry." or the speeding motorist who says to you: "I'm f***ing fed up with
>this. The country's over-run with burglars and all you can do is stop
>innocent motorists. Have you f**k all better to do." ??
>

I would give both a penalty. They are both equally guilty and the one
who thinks a grovelling attitude will get him off will do it again.

Police discretion = corrupt policing