Talk:Police Scotland

Suggestions for improvement
I've had some ideas for how to make some minor improvements to this article. Firstly, police officer and staff numbers should be provided. Secondly, it would be good to have a line under each chief officer saying what their previous role was. Thirdly, the proposed budget for this organisation should be provided as well. Kookiethebird (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

I've rewritten the section on uniform and equipment. It was a little incoherent and describing every last item of uniform and equipment in detail is not particularly useful to the reader. Given the wide range of uniform still in use across Scotland I thought it best to focus on the basics for now. 94.193.176.250 (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Logo
Police Scotland uses this logo I think. Scottish Police cars use it also. The one recently added appears to be a copy of the logo from the website, which is probably designed for the site specifically, rather then as a universal design. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 13:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)


 * They have four separate designs of the logo you linked. One in colour, the "official, standard version". One in black, one in blue, and one in white. I uploaded the colour version, as that is the "standard", according to the source that I got it from. The others are derived from the colour one. Indeed, the replacement of the the present picture with the recently added one was quite false. RGloucester  — ☎ 20:20, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Uploaded a better version of the Police Scotland logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AProudScotsman (talk • contribs) 15:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Which version should we use? The other would have to be deleted per WP:NONFREE. The blue version can be further refined. Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 12:44, 22 May 2014 (UTC) Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 22:26, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The blue version is now recognised as the standard version and can be seen in various ways as representation of Police Scotland. Most people recognise the organisation by it. So, I think that should be the one used. The default and original logo is barely used at all. AProudScotsman (talk) 02:16, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you have a point, however the blue version is derived from the colour version, so it would make sense to show the original, with the additional detail. Also, a white version is used on Police Scotland's website, Facebook and Twitter; therefore I'm not sure you can say the blue version is the 'standard version'.
 * I've uploaded a vector blue version which could do with further refinement here, but it will be deleted with 6 days if it is not used.
 * Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 09:45, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

National Force
If you would be so kind as to elaborate on your point (Rob984), that would indeed be nice. Scotland is considered as a 'nation' in the nation state sense, not as complete independent sovereign states such as Ireland or Norway. However, technically the same situation that is of the EU and its current set up, can be compared to the UK. There's no consideration about Scotland being a 'nation'; it IS a nation. Just not as independent per se. You say Scotland is a sub-division, a sub-division of what may I ask? I assume the UK or the current structure of British police forces? AProudScotsman (talk) 02:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
 * To clarify, Scotland's not a 'nation state'. It's not a nation, nor a state. The Scottish are a nation, but Scotland is not. There's no states within the United Kingdom. Scotland is a semi-autonomous sub-division of the UK. It's actually 3 levels of sub-division. It's one of three 'jurisdictions' of the UK. It's one of four 'countries' of the UK. And it's one of 12 'regions' of the UK. You'll notice all these terms are in quotations, as they are not necessarily the conventional use of the terms, but rather terms with unique political definitions.
 * The statement in question:
 * 'It is one of a few in the world to be merged into a completely national force.'
 * To start, this statement lacks a reference to a reliable source. Hence, WP:NOR is enough to justify it's removal.
 * Additionally, I don't see how the statement is correct. Many nations have only national forces. For example, the French, Catalans, Irish, Cypriots, Dannish, Dutch, Polish, etc etc. It's mostly only federated states like Germany, or states with autonomous regions such as the UK and Spain that have regional police forces.
 * It's also questionable to what the difference is between multiple divisions of a single police force (Scotland), and multiple police forces under a single command (England and Wales). There are many similarities, such as both jurisdictions have a single aviation unit, operate under a single legislative framework, and have several regional firearms units. Of course, Scotland has it's Specialist Crime Division, however much of this divisions responsibilities overlap with national agencies such as the NCA and NDEDIU.
 * So my issue is, the statement is questionable and subjective.
 * I'm actually surprised the introduction doesn't make clear that Police Scotland operates under separate legislative framework to the other 43 police forces in Great Britain. It's one of the biggest advantages of devolution for Scotland. The legislative framework for police in England and Wales is unsatisfactory and oppressive to say the least (I've had only good encounters with Scottish police).
 * Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 16:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, it depends on the current framework of the United Kingdom and whether it continues or not in its current structure. However, I don't think you can say that Scotland is not considered a nation, as it is a nation since it's a division of a geographical territory marked by boundaries. The "Scottish" are the peoples that inhabit the land and nation of Scotland. The definition of State is: "a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government." And I think that one can be ticked as well. However, it is not a sovereign independent state as I've previously stated. And it can also be called a country. All of these terms clearly define Scotland as being such, except the term 'nation-state'. Other than that I agree with you statement on Scotland being a "semi-autonomous sub-division of the UK." It's moot discussing this as depending on the outcome of the Scottish independence referendum, it could all radically change, and for the better hopefully.

I wasn't aware that everything said had to have a source attached to it. Many nations do in fact have law enforcement agencies that cover nationally, however, most of those countries have always had a national law enforcement agency since their inception into a nation-state. Only a select few have previously had regional police forces (i.e. The Netherlands) and then went through major reform into one national police force. TBF, there isn't must difference and as you said, there are many similarities.

I'm surprised too that it hasn't been mentioned in the introduction that Police Scotland operate under Scots law and that there is a substantial difference between Scots law and England&Wales law. I don't even think it's been brought up in the wiki's of the previous eight territorial police forces. You should add something in about it. Really? Some have been voicing the same up here about the PSOS due to stop and search, armed officers, etc. and have been classing it as Scotland turning into the next North Korea. Couldn't be further from the truth, of course. I may be bias, but I'll agree with you there! AProudScotsman (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2014 (UTC)


 * By the most general definition, a 'state' is a polity under a government. However, 'state' conventionally refers to either a federated state, or a sovereign state. Calling Scotland a 'state' is like calling California a 'country'. Also, in academic language, a nation is defined as a social group and not a division of land.
 * Anyhow, you're right. Sorry, I misread the statement. Everything does actually need to have a source, just nobodies obliged to remove content lacking sources. However, I'll take your word for it and remove the tag.
 * To put it bluntly, I'm not exactly interested in expanding coverage on Scottish police's legislative framework, especially since Scotland may be a foreign country to me in a years time :P I'm only looking through this article because I've been working on List of law enforcement agencies in the United Kingdom, and I'm trying to figure out what UK agencies operate in Scotland, and what responsibilities they have. I'm a little confused because the ACPO only includes English, Welsh and Northern Irish police forces, while some of it's agencies, such as the NWCU and VCIS, claim to operate throughout the UK.
 * I can't say I've had a great deal of encounters with Scottish police, and police in the rural highlands are probably quite different to those in towns and cities. I also don't know a lot about the legislative framework in Scotland, but here in England we have PCSOs, 30 minute detainment with no reason, no accountability, dysfunctional Police Complaints Commission and on and on. That said, many of the issues here are because police officers don't follow the law, and intentionally misinform people of the law.
 * I think the entire UK is more like North Korea then people think. If Scotland gets independence, I hope it lead to a more transparent government, however with wanting NATO membership, and close relations to the United States, I'm not feeling particularly confident. Though I can't imagine a independent Scotland could be more corrupt then the UK. A state with freedoms similar to New Zealand, situated in Europe, and English speaking, would be a very attractive place to live.
 * Regards, Rob (talk &#124; contribs) 20:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Spelling
Regarding the edit comment about using British English, actually, as it says here, "the -ize spelling is often incorrectly seen as an Americanism in Britain".

American and British English spelling differences

Kookiethebird (talk) 23:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

BTP, CNC and MDP potential mergers w/ Police Scotland
Hello User:AProudScotsman. I assume the IPs are yourself also? If not, let me know.

First, let's be clear that the Scottish Government has planned to merge the Scottish BTP division into Police Scotland since before the Smith Commission, and the proposal did not come about "due to the devolution of railway policing".


 * A letter released to the BBC by the Scottish government under freedom of information reveals that former Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill offered to takeover the BTP in 2011.
 * He wrote to the then UK Transport Secretary Philip Hammond on the day that the creation of a single Scottish police force was announced.
 * In the letter, Mr MacAskill wrote: "I would like to explore the potential for the BTP in Scotland to become part of the new Scottish policing landscape".
 * Scottish force to police railways, BBC News

The recommendation for the devolution of the functions of the British Transport Police in Scotland does not in any way endorse the merger of the Scottish BTP division into Police Scotland. The BTPA have outlined how the BTP Scottish division could continue to operate under the BTP while being accountable to the Scottish Parliament, rather then the Home Office. This would be no different to the NCA operating in Northern Ireland. Hence my change of "due the devolution of railway policing" to "following the devolution of railway policing". While the former wording isn't explicitly suggesting the Scottish Government has to merge the Scottish division, it could be interpreted as such.

I'm principally concerned with your removal of this paragraph I added (which is supported by the citations I have provided in this comment):


 * However, the BTP is opposed to the plans due to potential increased costs and the implications on the seamless nature of policing operations across the UK's rail network.

I don't see how this is in any way politicising or breaching WP:NPOV. I am not citing a Conservative MP or the British Government. I'm citing the BTP themselves. Are their views irrelevant? And the BTP is certainly not just concerned with the affects in England and Wales, but also in Scotland.

Please see the views expressed by the BTPA in the consultation and in their own paper:


 * The Integration of the British Transport Police in Scotland into Police Scotland, Response 305736221
 * Options for the devolution of transport policing in Scotland


 * And by the BTP here:
 * Written submission from the British Transport Police Federation

In particular:
 * Our view for the best way to maintain, as far as possible, the current excellent BTP service is by introducing greater accountability to the SPA through the collaborative setting of future policing objectives. In this way we maintain the excellent service delivery of the BTP while acknowledging the Smith recommendations around greater accountability and the transfer of the functions of the British Transport Police in Scotland but not the dismantling of the BTP in Scotland. This most importantly would provide a greater say in the railway policing of Scotland by the Scottish people and the SPA.
 * Written submission from the British Transport Police Federation

So quite clearly, the BTP is against the proposal.

Why exactly do you not want to include the views of the BTP in this article? I think if this is the case, we will need to request outside input, since you are certainly in breach of WP:NPOV.

Rob984 (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi User:Rob984, the most recent IPs were indeed from me.

I was raising the point more about the wording that you assumed to be an issue and indicated that there was a bias when there was no such thing IMO. Otherwise I am in agreement w/ you over the fact that the Scottish Government planned to merge the Scottish BTP division into Police Scotland and has been advocating for it since before the Smith Commission, and the proposal did not come about "due to the devolution of railway policing". The BTP's view on the merger wasn't mentioned and neither was it necessary until you made changes to what was said previously. Now that you have I made the necessary changes to ensure that it was neutral (incl. the criticism, POV of UK Government, etc,) which you then removed. None of the wording suggested that all policing matters be adsorbed by Police Scotland, but you assumed it did which is where I disagree with you on. However, that doesn't deny the fact that the SNP favours further amalgamations into Police Scotland from the CNC and the MDP which needs to be mentioned and sourced. I think we may be misunderstanding each other here.

The Scottish Government supports bringing the BTP, CNC and the MDP into Scotland's national force: https://www.policeoracle.com/news/uniformed_operations/2017/Apr/05/civil-nuclear-constabulary-would-be-better-as-part-of-police-scotland_94552.html

The BTP is facing threats of a merger in England and Wales and is destined to become a infrastructure focused law enforcement agency, that has the support of the PM Theresay May who was former Home Secretary whose idea it was: http://www.pfoa.co.uk/3/latest-news-events/article/451/national-armed-rapid-response

AProudScotsman (talk) 01:22, 7 April 2017 (UTC)