Blunkett criticises pond officers

[ylris611203]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/7008077.stm


This rasises a lot of questions.

Why was an 8 and a 10 year not being supervised near dangerous water?

Is the mother right to expect someone to "automatically" go into the water to save a drowning child?

Is David Blunkett right?

Or is David Blunkett trying to justify is own actions because he introduced CSOs and had two police officers arrived instead, the boy may have been saved?

Are CSO's a complete waste of time and just another one of Labours quick fixes?

I think the mother is wrong; David Blunkett is wrong and is just trying to jusifty his actions. The CSO's are a complete waste of time, as this has shown.

 

[silverseason]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/7008077.stm
Is the mother right to expect someone to "automatically" go into the water to save a drowning child?

Neither you nor I were there so can hardly judge the situation. The mother is understandably upset and is giving us her first "automatic" reaction. Besides, she may feel a bit guilty. Why wasn't she watching these kids?

 

[ylris611203]

Neither you nor I were there so can hardly judge the situation.

I can regarding Blunket and CSO's

The mother is understandably upset and is giving us her first "automatic" reaction.

Maybe.

 

[SFG75]

The CSO's are a complete waste of time, as this has shown.

From reading this article, I gather that they handle light matters so that the police can focus on matters of greater importance. They weren't intended to handle situations such as the drowning. They did their job in helping police locate the scene. You can't blame them for something that is not within their scope of duty. If anything, perhaps their training and responsibilities should be expanded.

I can regarding Blunket and CSO's

You know the area well? Where you there? Are you a CSO?

Maybe.

Okay, how is she not just reacting to losing her son? What other possible reason might her motive/reason be for her criticism? Seriously, it's obvious.

From another article:

Det Ch Insp Phil Owen, of Greater Manchester Police, reiterated the dangers of playing in water, which in this case was more than 6ft (2m) deep.

"If you wish to enjoy the hot summer weather by cooling off in water then please use the provided paddling pools in parks or public swimming pools where there are people around on duty to ensure you enjoy the water safely," he said.

The word "pond" appears to be deceptive as it is described more as a pit in other articles. Such places aren't so smart to use. I've always avoided them where I live. We always have people get skunk drunk and drown in pits. It happens every year.

 

[ylris611203]

From reading this article, I gather that they handle light matters so that the police can focus on matters of greater importance. They weren't intended to handle situations such as the drowning.

CSO's are used as a way of policing on the cheap

Okay, how is she not just reacting to losing her son? What other possible reason might her motive/reason be for her criticism? Seriously, it's obvious.

It may not be a reaction or criticism, she may have expected a CSO to have gone into the water, as Blunkett did.

 

[Ice]

They weren't intended to handle situations such as the drowning.

So surely, this begs the question as to why the CPO's were sent out if they weren't trained to handle such situations?

The word "pond" appears to be deceptive as it is described more as a pit in other articles. Such places aren't so smart to use. I've always avoided them where I live. We always have people get skunk drunk and drown in pits. It happens every year.

From the various descriptions, it appears that the 'pond' was in fact the size of a football pitch, murky and over 6ft deep.

 

[mehastings]

I don't really know what a CSO is, but I hardly think it is right for them to be blamed for not getting in the water. First responders in the US are always taught not to make themselves into additional victims. By getting into deep water and trying to make an untrained rescue, they risk putting themselves in danger and making an even bigger problem for firefighters (or whoever it is that would do water rescue in the UK) when they arrive. If those men had gone into the water and one of them was in distress when the other responders arrived, they would have been forced to focus their rescue efforts on the struggling CSO. Undoubtedly, this politician would be pointing his judgemental finger at the CSOs saying something along the lines of "they should have waited for trained responders. Their mistake in entering the water caused a loss of time that should have been spent locating the boy".


It seems from the article that other responders were at the wrong location, so perhaps they weren't sent instead, but rather in addition and just managed to get there faster.

I agree in wondering where the mother was and why she wasn't supervising an eight and ten year old in an unguarded pond.

 

[ylris611203]

I don't really know what a CSO is,

They are Community Support Officers. They dress a bit like Police Officers and they have very limited powers. It is a cheap way of policing. What we need is more Police Officers not CSO's. Had the CSO's been Police Officers that arrived at the scene the outcome may have been different.

The CSO's are NOT trained to enter the water, but they ARE trained in what NOT to do, which is enter the water.

We have 16 year old CSO's that can be sent to an incident similar or worst than the above and not be able to do anything when they get there.

It is political correctness gone mad.

When someone dials an emergency number for help, surely the least they should expect is that a fully trained Officer/s attend.

 

[Litany]

There was sod all visibility beneath the water, the child wasn't visible above the surface, they didn't know where the child was and they weren't even sure they'd been sent to the right location. They'd have to be complete morons to jump in and rescue a child they had no chance of finding and that might not even be there anyway.

The way this story was reported in the media was disgusting, and the way people have jumped on the bandwagon to attack the people involved is equally vile. The mother is angry and upset and looking for someone to blame. She at least has grief as her excuse. What's everyone else's?