@JamalHu69@timricketts_@yarlett_andrew @Dr_BellaR That’s a different question. I’m sure 99% of Drs genuinely care so it’s not just about the money. You will always be able to find outliers that earn more.
@JamalHu69@yarlett_andrew @Dr_BellaR The simple answer to a complex question is yes. Those in roles that require extensive training, carry high levels of responsibility and are expose to continual trauma should be paid more.
@PFEW_HQ@PoliceChiefs This is a race to the bottom of the barest minimum level of fitness. TBH it’s now getting dangerous the level of physical ability that people seem to think is required to do what at times is a role that requires you to physically control someone.
@jkmccrann@DrProudman Shared parental leave sounds great however it makes sense that the parent earning the best living returns to work to ensure the family is best provided for; so what’s your plan?
@mrjamesob Trusted sources is an interesting phrase. Each source has their own narrative to put out this is equally true of traditional news sources. What this means is that a wider range of sources should encourage critical thinking rather than echo chambers.
@andygeorgeni You don’t need to choose building trust in the workforce or the community build both as one without the other is destined to fail. The police are the public and the public are the police. It’s concerning that you have a narrow view between the two.
@dcsprior @DrProudman I don’t disagree with the idea it’s simply one that will fail as the law by definition needs to be distinct. If you use your method someone 2 years and 1 week older would be committing an offence which is obviously a nonsense. You could make it work by say 10 years older
@DrProudman As soon as you add in a staggered age of consent you will have unintended consequences such as people in loving relationships suddenly becoming too old… the concept makes sense but at some point you need a age of consent fixed in law.
@OzGoofyPrincess@DrProudman Unfortunately as soon as you add in a moving age you will end up with unintended consequences; staggered or not. The concept makes sense but at some point you need to have a fixed age of consent.
@transonicduke@samsbit@PedanticPerson@AyoCaesar Simply because officers have a lawful power to use force If the officer acts under a understanding that his or anothers life is under threat then he has a power use lethal force; if this is then put through a court on each occasion we create an impossible position for the officer
@samsbit@PedanticPerson@AyoCaesar It’s not quite that simple. If you were to make a decision at work even if it was completely correct would you be happy to undergo a trial and potentially go to prison (the stress on both yourself and family would be horrendous)
@PearlsorPebbles@KateCox59582715@MarinaPurkiss Just to confirm Cliff that the fact you’ve worked hard to put yourself in a strong financial position and then seen your assets grow has nothing to do with hard work… so if you research and choose what to buy or wisely invest for strong returns has nothing to do with hard work?
@Moesby66@DrProudman The danger of immediately knowing without having to see any evidence is that you only allow yourself a limited view. Brand may be guilty or not however let’s allow the evidence to be weighed against all reasonable doubt rather than torch waving and claims of ‘all men’
@cjd1955@DrProudman If you were burgled and offered crime prevention advise to reduce the risk of it happening again would you see this a allowing the burglars to run free or a sensible course of action? Of course advise could be extreme (put metal shutters on every window) or fit an alarm
@DrProudman I find your position for a lawyer odd. If someone is found innocent the courts have failed if they are found guilty then no one can speak up for them… which is it are the courts right? Or does an allegation out way the evidence?