Guard’s announcement regarding BTP

[al78]

The problem is, that not dealing with "low-level" anti-social behaviour sends a particular message that you can do anything and get away with it- so it gets worse and scum behaviour develops. Loud music, feet on seats, leaving a pile of nasty litter, smoking in banned areas- that's how it starts, with a lack of consideration of the comfort of others. And when society sends the message back that it's OK to not consider anyone else's needs only your own, then the behaviour carries on- positive feedback.

I agree, but what is the solution? Intervene and get a load of abuse back, or at worst, a beating? There aren't enough figures of authority around to call everyone out all the time who is behaving badly and there never will be, and outside of those figures of authority, no-one has any power over anyone else and cannot force others to comply to a standard of behaviour, so what is the answer? Sometimes I wish anyone engaging in antisocial behaviour had a significant risk of a good beating to the point where it became a real deterrant (and they suffered with significant pain), but that is not going to happen in a civilised society.

Unfortunately if bullies and antagonists are not called out early enough and frequently enough in their life, their behaviour transitions into an entitlement and is then near impossible to change. Sadly in my experience there seems to be a thing in this country about calling someone intolerant whenever they call anyone out, and to an extent I've seen it on this forum with the "it's public transport, if you don't like it use a car" comeback to complaints about irritating individuals on trains, which inevitably contributes to encouraging poor behaviour.

 

[Horizon22]

I agree, but what is the solution? Intervene and get a load of abuse back, or at worst, a beating? There aren't enough figures of authority around to call everyone out all the time who is behaving badly and there never will be, and outside of those figures of authority, no-one has any power over anyone else and cannot force others to comply to a standard of behaviour, so what is the answer? Sometimes I wish anyone engaging in antisocial behaviour had a significant risk of a good beating to the point where it became a real deterrant (and they suffered with significant pain), but that is not going to happen in a civilised society.

Unfortunately if bullies and antagonists are not called out early enough and frequently enough in their life, their behaviour transitions into an entitlement and is then near impossible to change. Sadly in my experience there seems to be a thing in this country about calling someone intolerant whenever they call anyone out, and to an extent I've seen it on this forum with the "it's public transport, if you don't like it use a car" comeback to complaints about irritating individuals on trains, which inevitably contributes to encouraging poor behaviour.

Indeed. Most railway staff are trained at the induction stage to only engage if they believe it is safe to do so, and not to put themselves in harms way; you aren't the police, you can't manhandle people, and if you've tried to de-escalate and failed ensure that yourself - and others - are as safe as possible and call for a response as required.

Unfortunately what you see on public transport is a manifestation of what is happening in wider society with regards to behaviour, somewhat turbo-charged by Covid whereby certain people 'forgot' how to act in public.

 

[faltskog36abba]

Shame that BTP doesn’t have many “boots on the ground” outside London. However Manc Picc had at least 7/8 BTP patrol cars parked outside last time I was there so they must have a large no. of officers in Manchester.

The BBC “Railcops” series from 2004 showed a side to BTP which most people these days would class as heavy handed or old school.

When I worked in Man Victoria 16 years ago in the station buffet/ There was an altercation and our manager was attacked. This was a Saturday evening and the BTP were called at 8pm. They turned up the following Monday to check cctv.

 

[greyman42]

I may be old-fashioned but in majority of cases "old-school"=effective. The heads of the various police forces need to get their heads around the core part of the job- dealing with the bad people who cause harm, not chasing "thought crime" or chasing people up for non-crime such as holding an unpopular (but wholly legal) opinion.

Or chasing after young women up hills in Derbyshire, but they like low hanging fruit that poses no danger to themselves. Obviously there are exceptions, such as London Bridge.

 

[alf]

Didn’t the 2 BTP police allocated to the Manchester Victoria pop concert that was bombed by a lunatic decide to disappear from the site to buy Hamburgers for 55 crucial minutes?

I don’t see why we need a specialist rail police force. There are not specialist forces for countryside theft, football, the air industry or shipping, the roads or shop lifting.

We just need capable motivated people who put their tummies second not first.

 

[Falcon1200]

But why do you need to have a whole separate Police Force, why not have sections within the local forces with railway specialist knowledge who'd be the BTP who've transferred these then assist the general Policeman.

Because that specialist knowledge would inevitably be diluted and eventually lost in a Police force for whom railway incidents would form a small and rare fraction of their duties.

 

[the sniper]

Or chasing after young women up hills in Derbyshire, but they like low hanging fruit that poses no danger to themselves. Obviously there are exceptions, such as London Bridge.

Well, you've obviously given this subject a lot of thought...

 

[ChewChewTrain]

Well, you've obviously given this subject a lot of thought...

Perhaps you could elaborate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Dec 2022 ==

Shame that BTP doesn’t have many “boots on the ground” outside London. However Manc Picc had at least 7/8 BTP patrol cars parked outside last time I was there so they must have a large no. of officers in Manchester.

The BBC “Railcops” series from 2004 showed a side to BTP which most people these days would class as heavy handed or old school.

2004 was about 5 minutes ago wasn’t it? Anyway, my perception is that policing changed a lot more in the couple of decades before that than it has since. Which of those changes have been good or bad is not something I’ll get into here.

For those interested, here’s a documentary about BTP on the Underground from 1989 that I’d never seen before:

 

[the sniper]

Perhaps you could elaborate.

One example given is seemingly supposed to be representative of a hugely broad and varied subject matter, yet they cite one other example, which is alternatively merely supposed to be exceptional. It's a quite ridiculously basic level of analysis in an otherwise fairly sensible discussion. What's anyone suppose to do with that, in terms of having a thoughtful discussion...?

 

[357]

Used to work at a hub station within London, and BTP would never arrive in less than two hours.

Often I said not to bother coming if they refused to pass the situation to the Met Police to attend.

 

[43066]

Very true, although I wonder if Greggs at King’s Cross needs as much protection as it currently has.

Donut rustling is a key focus area for them at the moment, certainly judging by their similar presence in the Greggs over the road….

One example given is seemingly supposed to be representative of a hugely broad and varied subject matter, yet they cite one other example, which is alternatively merely supposed to be exceptional. It's a quite ridiculously basic level of analysis in an otherwise fairly sensible discussion. What's anyone suppose to do with that, in terms of having a thoughtful discussion...?

I think the first example might have been aimed at the police fixed penalty notices issued to two youngish (and attractive enough for the Daily Mail to jump onto the story) female walkers in the Derbyshire hills during Covid lockdown restrictions. London Bridge is presumably referencing the 2017 terrorist attack on Borough Market, where the armed police did a sterling job of neutralising the threat.

Neither had anything to do with BTP, to be fair.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Dec 2022 ==

There has been a recent trend for views/actions not agreed with to be labelled (and treated) as if they were crime- JK Rowling is the obvious high-profile example, but COVID was the main thing that brought a similar attitude out it in spades. During COVID, we saw police going OTT about COVID rules- threatening to check shopping baskets remember? (I acknowledge that that came from the leadership, not the rank and file who were just confused as everyone else was). We saw more of that attitude amongst those in authority in their reaction to persons who expressed reasonable concern about some COVID measures e.g. mandating vaccine for children. There have also been some documented instances of police telling persons to "check their thinking" and recording that intervention as a "non-crime incident" on records.

Note I am not talking about ignoring "hate speech" (which is a crime)- I am pointing out the downsides and inappropriateness (IMO) of over-zealous responses and "wrong thinking" treated as if it were a crime. Irrespective of whether a person has a view we agree with or not, that's rather chilling- as well as taking scarce resource away from things that really are hurting people in real time.


Which was my main thought. After all, if you are a stressed police officer with targets for crimes reported vs crimes solved to reach, which ones do you go for- the soft targets such as the 2 ladies having a coffee on a walk, or the violent person under the influence of drugs who fights back (literally)?

I suppose wanting to look at the nuances, preserve free-speech and promote a level of personal responsibility does make me right-wing in the views of some, as "right wing" has become the go-to insult for shutting down someone who challenges the "accepted" views in any way (see COVID- and note the irony that one of those who challenged the "established" view regarding the COVID health passport proposals was Jeremy Corbyn).

The "guardian" type. The Guardian is aimed at a particular audience; I am not criticizing that per se- all of the newspapers and indeed all media takes a viewpoint and is biased in their own way- but I just wish they'd stop pretending they are not, and there be wider recognition that there would be wider appreciation of there being other valid viewpoints out there. It's the difference between the actual data points and the way the graph is presented.

However, having explained some of the nuances in my thinking, and to come back on topic, I still hold that the underlying need is for a police force focused on dealing with actual harm- people being hurt now, drugs, violent crime- knife crime particularly. A properly funded road/rail police who focused on actual crime on the network (including targeting knife crime and County Lines and being available in the evening hours to support traincrew) would make public transport much more appealing.

TPO

Yet another extremely well observed and thoughtful post, which I entirely agree with.

 

[fgwrich]

London Bridge is presumably referencing the 2017 terrorist attack on Borough Market, where the armed police did a sterling job of neutralising the threat.

Neither had anything to do with BTP, to be fair.

Incorrect on the last point. BTP were one of the first on scene, later but quickly followed by CoLP and the Met.

 

[43066]

Incorrect on the last point. BTP were one of the first on scene, later but quickly followed by CoLP and the Met.

I stand corrected, apologies. An extremely good job was done by all concerned that night.

It’s a great shame the police lack any kind of respect these days, and tend to be vilified, despite the incredibly difficult job they do, often with both hands tied behind their backs.

 

[the sniper]

I think the first example might have been aimed at the police penalty charge notices issued to two youngish (and attractive enough for the Daily Mail to jump onto the story) female walkers in Derbyshire hills during Covid lockdown restrictions. London Bridge is presumably referencing the 2017 terrorist attack on Borough Market, where the armed police did a sterling job of neutralising the threat.

Neither had anything to do with BTP, to be fair.

I am aware of the examples, but with police interactions happening every moment of every day, it's hard to deduce much from two examples from years ago at either end of an extremely broad and varied spectrum of possible examples and outcomes, most of which almost nobody other than those involved would be aware of, the vast majority of which will be entirely uncontroversial. What can you really draw from it, is my point.

 

[Starmill]

It is worth noting that even if there's an issue in an area which would usually be directed to a specific force, such as at a railway station, if the 999 call describes an immediate threat to life, whoever is able to arrive the soonest should respond. Sometimes that would be the local police force.

 

[Cowley]

Evening all

We can’t really split this thread entirely cleanly, but if we could stick to the original discussion in this one and use the new thread below for talking about what the police spend time doing that would be good.

Thanks everyone

Do the police spend too much time investigating the wrong kinds of crime?

I'm not going to labour the point but a response is a response. If it's immediate, or 3 hours, or 3 years it is still a response. Whether it is satisfactory - as I stated - is obviously a different matter. As for your last point, why would police be chasing up people for "non-crime" or "thought...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Jimini]

Evening all

 

[Facing Back]

Definitely not. And, one wonders what would happen if another passenger (or the Guard) took matters into their own hands and physically stopped the assault..... Unfortunately, I suspect that would be a priority in a way that a mere "Guard getting a kicking" is not. Of course, if miscreants did meet with a robust response they would no doubt put video on Tw*tter as the "victim".....

Really not good enough. ALL Railway staff working trains on their own especially in the evening when the anti-socials are about should be able to expect a rapid and robust response- Always. That's about priorities, as well as how many police officers we have.



I may be old-fashioned but in majority of cases "old-school"=effective. The heads of the various police forces need to get their heads around the core part of the job- dealing with the bad people who cause harm, not chasing "thought crime" or chasing people up for non-crime such as holding an unpopular (but wholly legal) opinion. It's often said that 80% of crime is carried out by a small number of people- and the police know who they are. But proving it to the satisfaction of the CPS is another thing.



I don't have an issue with a "revenue" operation which is in fact a cover for a "County Lines" operation. Also, a proportion of those persons fare-jumping may well be committing other offences...... as with uninsured drivers of cars (see below!). So it's an easy way to catch them without trailing around the neighborhood.



Aye, but then the "transport" section would go the way of the Traffic Police who in recent years have been cut to the bone. Which is a bad move from many angles (including crime prevention) as more traffic police means catching more criminals..... as a traffic cop on a TV series a few years ago opined, "criminality is a lifestyle choice- the drug dealer/professional thief typically doesn't bother taxing or insuring the car they are driving around in, so when we stop someone for an uninsured vehicle, most of the time we find they have committed a bunch of other offenses." Better to have a National Transport Police to cover road and rail, and fund them properly.

We need police who are not necessarily graduates, but rather are street-smart, have some life experience and are allowed to exercise discretion. They also should not be picking up the pieces of a failed social care/mental health system, or having to deal with drunks when the bars kick out (ditto A&E, anyone ending up in A&E because they were drunk and incapable needs to be sent the full bill, again it's not on that drunken "patients" are abusive to front-line emergency workers of any type).

I have sympathy for front-line officers- I am sure they would much rather have the staff and (lack of) targets regime that meant that they were able to respond properly to incidents such as a Guard being assaulted.

The other element is the courts. I watched a very well produced documentary last year following CID on Tyneside. They had worked meticulously to prepare good evidence (including decent quality CCTV) where a person was set upon and beaten in the street, being badly injured. They arrested the suspected culprit..... but CPS decided not to prosecute. The victim or their family might have blamed police when nothing happened, but the police their job- it was the CPS that didn't bother.

I am coming to think that there's too much "Guardian" idealism out there and not enough in the way of boundaries on behaviour. It's not OK to tantrum and beat up a Guard because they ask for a ticket and you don't have one. Similarly, it's not OK to spit in the face of the nurse who is trying to clean that gash in your head. That is scum behaviour.

The problem is, that not dealing with "low-level" anti-social behaviour sends a particular message that you can do anything and get away with it- so it gets worse and scum behaviour develops. Loud music, feet on seats, leaving a pile of nasty litter, smoking in banned areas- that's how it starts, with a lack of consideration of the comfort of others. And when society sends the message back that it's OK to not consider anyone else's needs only your own, then the behaviour carries on- positive feedback.

TPO

I agree with that

 

[winks]

This thread reminds of the BTP officers that went for a 2hr kebab break whilst Salman Abedi (the Manchester Arena bomber) was free to walk through the area and carry out the attack.

Words really do fail me.

Bomb cops who went for a kebab in two-hour dinner break swerve watchdog probe

The Independent Office for Police conduct has handed the case back to British Transport Police for an internal probe

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

 

[[.n]]

I had need of the BTP once on a Weymouth train from Waterloo. They passed the job on to the locals who met the train at Winchester. The offenders were given a VERY brief chat and told to not continue. Or course as soon as the train moved on the antisocial behaviour continued. Completely useless. I filed a complaint and they agreed they hadn't handled the situation properly and apologised.

I've needed to have interactions with BTP a few times over the years (mainly on this line) - and IME (as a passenger), they've been mostly good, the interaction with local forces has worked. Where it falls down is too many of the travelling public (IMHO) causing trouble - and guards not being given enough management (and BTP) backing in how / what options they have in dealing with "customers".

I've been in plenty of scenarios whereby a guard has had to rely on passengers taking appropriate action because they weren't in a position to do so

 

[markymark2000]

In my experience, BTP aren't that useful either. The instance that always sticks into my mind was hearing station staff alerting BTP to a trespass in the station, to which BTP replied 'What do you want us to do about it? That's not our job'. I've had other poor experiences too. The common thing that I do find though is that if there is trouble, BTP are nowhere to be seen. In some areas, I do fully appreciate that they may be understaffed but at the same time, when they do respond, however long that may be, I find them generally useless. I think that there are some good BTP out there and I've come across some but sadly the good are overshadowed by the bad. Adding to that, I feel that if they had some more regular roles within train operators, they wouldn't be as poor as they would be more experienced in dealing with incidents rather than sitting in the office waiting for a call and only seeing the outside world when called.

For example, TFW pay Surrilian Security for staff to work on Valleys trains some nights to curb anti social behaviour. While police will cost more than security, I'd argue in many cases, 6 police officers across the line are more useful than 10 jacket filler security. TFW pay out absolutely shed loads for security from both Surrilian and Sword for security purposes, reduce anti social behaviour and "crowd control". Why is this money spent on so many temporary contract staff from outside agencies when they could go to providing proper police who can deal with more situations, quicker. And have a bigger impact with fewer staff. Especially when around 70% of security employed by the agencies which the train operators use, are jacket fillers. Often there for a bit of easy extra money through uni. They don't know anything about the railways, can't help anyone with any enquiry. Just there to look like they will protect people.


I used TFW purely as an example. For full disclaimer, because I know what people are like, I am not saying that any or all of the staff from these firms are jacket fillers but in my personal experience, a good majority are. There are some excellent ones but again, like BTP, they are overshadowed by the dismal ones.

 

[Falcon1200]

In my experience, BTP aren't that useful either. The instance that always sticks into my mind was hearing station staff alerting BTP to a trespass in the station, to which BTP replied 'What do you want us to do about it? That's not our job'.

I'm very surprised by that, in my experience BTP most certainly would regard trespass on the railway as their job, and would respond if able to, which was not always possible of course due to being thinly spread.

 

[Edsmith]

I've needed to have interactions with BTP a few times over the years (mainly on this line) - and IME (as a passenger), they've been mostly good, the interaction with local forces has worked. Where it falls down is too many of the travelling public (IMHO) causing trouble - and guards not being given enough management (and BTP) backing in how / what options they have in dealing with "customers".

I've been in plenty of scenarios whereby a guard has had to rely on passengers taking appropriate action because they weren't in a position to do so

I was told by a Southeastern guard that some guards have 'cried wolf' too many times, calling the police over petty arguments and such like and now BTP are often reluctant to attend.

 

[[.n]]

I was told by a Southeastern guard that some guards have 'cried wolf' too many times, calling the police over petty arguments and such like and now BTP are often reluctant to attend.

My interactions are mainly based on London-Weymouth and London-Norwich routes. If that's true shame that a few have spoiled it for the majority

 

[fgwrich]

I was told by a Southeastern guard that some guards have 'cried wolf' too many times, calling the police over petty arguments and such like and now BTP are often reluctant to attend.

I can fully understand that, some RPI's in one TOC's area I know where quite often good at doing similar, including trying to grip people for the sake of 50p difference in tickets - with the member of public standing there with 50p in their hand wanting to make up the difference.

 

[railnut21]

Shame that BTP doesn’t have many “boots on the ground” outside London. However Manc Picc had at least 7/8 BTP patrol cars parked outside last time I was there so they must have a large no. of officers in Manchester.

The BBC “Railcops” series from 2004 showed a side to BTP which most people these days would class as heavy handed or old school.

The cars are not always there but the staff are very thinly stretched out and I have heard that they want issues reporting with 61016.