I was pondering over a new computer-controlled router recently. My
brother Bob had purchased the new state-of-the-art machine for his
business. To the untrained, it looked impressive, but its merits were
not immediately apparent. To hear my brother and the workers who use
the machine talk, however, it was the bee’s knees. It could do this
and that without having to move this and meant less handling of heavy
boards and made working safer and more precise. As a tool of the cabinet-making
trade, it was up there.
Now, the purchase wasn’t made on some sudden whim. Bob and his partner
travel annually to a furniture-maker’s fairyland trade show in Sydney.
They work out their needs and talk with others in the industry to
see how their machines have performed. They plan for the redundancy
of the machinery that is critical to the timelines they run to, and
that improve safety and productivity. Given the price of these machines,
not to plan for replacement is business madness.
Policing has its tools of trade. The vehicles, speed-detection
devices and computers are regularly reviewed and upgraded. Now it
is always a balance in who makes a purchasing decision. Take cars,
for example. The Vics have organized a get-together of the main car
manufacturers to look at operational police fleet options a couple
of times. Now some might argue that the people to send to such a review
would be those who use the cars. You know – someone from the operational
field who actually drives the cars at speed or has to put people in
the rear thereof. Others would argue that you send the bean counters
to ensure you get the cheapest car and options available. You can
consider for yourself which group SAPOL might send.
Now, when it comes to the really vexed question of water from the
sky, the purchasing decision is again regularly based on how much
will it cost wrapped up in the mumbo jumbo of “risk assessment”. Needless
to say that, while the notion of personal-issue waterproofs remains
out of the budget reach, the decision of which type of wet-weather/high-visibility
protection remains also one for the bean counters, not for the wearers
of the equipment who actually put themselves on the front line. The
entire uniform issue is interesting. Some states continue to review
new-age materials that create greater safety and comfort in icy or
windy conditions.
Now, one uniform item I think the Commissioner and I agree on not
having is the soft peaked cap (too few of us play baseball). I think
the traditional peaked cap is much nicer looking. Mind you, I have
not worn one on the front line for a very long time. I remember that
the comfort and fit was aligned to the proximity of my last hair cut;
and the caps often blew off. I had one run over once after it fell
off – that didn’t do it a lot of good. On reflection – given that
the soft peaked caps are cheaper – let’s go for them.
Now, weapons as tools of trade are always interesting. Batons come
into and go out of fashion. Capsicum spray is useful and has its place.
I don’t think I’ll see the day when electronic zappers become standard.
I’m not saying they do not work, but they cost heaps. Keep one (or
two at tops) to show that we are keenly interested in non-lethal options.
Now, that old chestnut: the standard-issue firearm. Old is, of course,
the operative term for the current-issue handgun. I thank those who
responded to my inquiry into shrapnel hits. There are a growing number
of cases. I’m sorry to say it, but, at the risk of scaring the bean
counters, the guns are buggered. If they didn’t hit our people when
they were bought 30 years ago, the only reason they hit them now is
they’re buggered. Now, we can debate whether 30-year-old guns are
suitable tools of trade, and whether they have had five, 500, or 5,000
rounds through them. SAPOL cannot tell how much use most guns have
had but, in essence, they’re buggered.
Putting cardboard sheets between those on the firing range or standing
two metres apart doesn’t overcome the simple fact that the guns are
buggered. Defecting those guns – that are known to create friendly-fire
situations – and using them to rebuild enough to keep the numbers
around what is needed, doesn’t change the fact that they are buggered.
I am imagining that, as sensible planners, the Government and SAPOL
bean counters have squirreled away millions of dollars over 30 years
to implement a gun-purchasing programme, just like the other states.
Not planning for replacement would be very bad business or, perhaps
to an old cynic, normal government planning policy.
