Blog powered by Typepad

April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Blogs I read

Websites to check out

« figuring out salvation | Main | plumbing »

Comments

Wood Street Girl

It's probably a question of perspective, and you were there not me, but a 15 minute response time for a non-emergency sounds pretty good to me.
What do others in the blogosphere think?

lynn

About a year ago I walked past a knife with what looked like encrusted blood on it lying outside the high flats at the back of where we study, Nick. I called the police then and there, thinking it could be evidence of some crime that had been committed. I was surprised that the despatcher didn't take that much information from me. And the next day, and the next day, and.....the knife was still there.....

Coxy

I'm sorry but I disagree, Wood Street Girl - as my post makes clear. I think that two drunks and a knife in city centre Glasgow should qualify as urgent!

Paul Ede

Hi Nick, Paul Ede here. Could you email me your email address on edepaulf(at)yahoo.co.uk? Have a question for you!

Cheers

Paul

Beat Attitude

Nah, 15 minutes is good. I've reported crimes (e.g. breakin and theft from a car) and waited for around an hour for the coppers to get 500 yards along the road...from the largest police station in Scotland!

They tend to assess the danger of a situation. If someone's being attacked, then they should get there sooner, but a knife sitting around not being weilded is as dangerous as a rock sitting around not being weilded.

The comments to this entry are closed.