Police describe woman who reports the theft of two pounds and some cuttlery as "totally irresponsible".

I disagree, I think It depends on how well-off someone is - Five quid could mean the difference between life and death for a homeless person.

67.142.172.24 (talk)01:03, 11 December 2010

That is not a police emrgency, that is a medical emergency. If somebody is liable to freeze/starve, it's a job for the ambulance service. (Of course, the police would get involved, but if it was time to ring 999 the medical services are the urgent ones.) Alternatively, of course, if a homeless person got to the police before it reached that stage then the force could help with finding accomodation etc for the night.

One piece of legislation covering that part of the world is the Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act 2006 - it can be viewed here and gives a decent definition of 'emergency'.

I would add that police advice is that if a crime is in progress or rapid police response greatly increases the chance of catching an offender (e.g. a hit-and-run where a general description of the vehicle and its direction is available) then it is also appropriate to dial 999. In this case, it was hours ago. It did not meet any definition of an emergency, such as the one linked above. Not appropriate.

There's non-emergency numbers, or you can go direct to the station, or even email most forces and arrange for officers to meet you. There is no reason to use the emergency number.

Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs)14:19, 11 December 2010

Indeed, the situation described was clearly inappropriate and wasteful. My point was simply that the theft of five pounds, (or another small sum) could- in certain limited circumstances- merit dialing 999.

67.142.172.22 (talk)09:55, 31 December 2010