Raj wrote:
TBH for me its some of the other stuff they are axing from the budget which raises my eyebrows [vulnerable adults protection comm, insurance, youth offending team etc] Some of those cuts will really hurt the organisations relying on them :crazy:
IMO they should divert the anti-rave budget to the Youth Offfending Team – especially as there is a big problem with disaffected youth committing crime (perhaps fuelled by a lack of more positive ways to spend their time such as a local music/arts culture?)
Quote:
160,000 / 52 = 3077 per week [ probably less than 12 people per week working on it…likely in at least 2 shifts and this makes no allowance whatsoever for drafting in other officers…]
I don’t think they put that much resources into monitoring (as thats what they were planning to cut back), in summer there were instances of cops actually staking out likely rave venues at weekends (I think this is the “proactive” policing that is being cut)
I doubt that there are many as 12 people; probably a smaller team of constables and civilian intelligence-gatherers (to read the websites etc) headed by a Detective Sargeant – probably linked with the anti-social behaviour monitoring team.
Most raves here are or were only visited by cops due to locals’ complaints of noise or damage. Suffolk certainly manages to deploy large numbers of TSG units to shut down raves with “all necessary force” and there seems to be little murmur about how much this is all costing…
I suspect the large budget is to pay for these operations of large-ish raids involving 30 or 40 officers which has actually quite succesfully scared away crews from Suffolk.
OTOH I think the damage these incidents cause to community relations probably results in local youths losing any respect for the police and wider society they may have had – and a knock on effect of greater youth offending and anti-social behaviour…
