If demand exceeds supply you have to ration resources. You can’t reduce police resources & then criticise them for not doing everything. For same reason, frontline officers are being prevented from delivering the service they want to give & then they’re being criticised. Unfair.
-
-
That's an anecdote. Takes you to Brexit: "Well your evidence might say... But in my area, I've seen... Those People doing / not doing... You must do something". Not good politics or policing. Too many variables in working out how to cure disease too? Hard graft evidence matters.
-
What evidence do you have that increase in violent crime is not due to a reduction in police resources?
-
I'm slightly incredulous to be asked that question in return from a serving politician and Liberal Democrat. Progress is made on hypotheses, study, numbers, evidence - not on hunches and anecdote. Good governance, science, use of resources. This isn't a tit for tat conversation.
-
A reasonable hypothesis is one that provides a strong & simple explanation for the observation. It stands unless & until there is evidence to disprove it or there is a stronger or simpler hypothesis. In the absence of an alternative or evidence, my hypothesis stands. Your move.
-
Wow. I think it's best left there if you have no evidence. Disappointed in standards of our democracy. Not against fair resourcing. Far from it. Against polarised debate and spending based on anecdote without statistical causation evidence . "Your move" I'd expect from Trump.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There are not too many variables. That is a red herring. Properly designed and analysed studies can control for the many independent variables. It is not too complicated.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.