This spring, on London streets, peaked caps with checkered bands around the crown caught my eye more often than the traditional black helmets with a silver cockade. Barry Taylor was right; he headed a group of designers and fashion designers who design uniforms and other equipment for 'bobbies' - British police officers. According to his words, said back in the spring of 2002, 'traditional helmets fall off, get in the way, and generally cause nothing but trouble. And if you don't hold your head absolutely still, they wobble from side to side.' Perhaps this is where the proud posture and measured gait of traditional 'bobbies' come from.
The unsuitability of the old-fashioned headgear forced its improvement. The contours remained unchanged, but the center of gravity was moved lower, and the helmet was shortened by about six centimeters altogether. But the British would not be themselves if they threw into a grandmother's trunk a sturdy item that has become one of the symbols of London and 'good old England.' No, the old helmet remains in demand; it is still worn, albeit only in two cases: at official events and during guard duty at the residence of the British Prime Minister at 10 Downing Street.
Everything changes, including in Britain. Even one of the most conservative institutions of the state - the police. In a glass-concrete skyscraper, in front of which a cube with the inscription 'New Scotland Yard' rotates, we, an international group of journalists, were unobtrusively enlightened: in the 32 capital districts, a kind of shelters have been opened, where one can find temporary refuge, receive qualified advice, and find consolation; advisory and supervisory bodies have been created, where 'our most vociferous critics' were invited; the position of a 'family' police officer has appeared, whose duties include maintaining contact with relatives of a victim, an injured person, or a missing person, informing them about the progress of the investigation, and so on. In short, Scotland Yard is also called 'new' because it introduces innovations both in the content and the style of its work.
My colleague from Pakistan asked just one question that clearly worried him: 'Why, unlike many other countries, are police officers not visible on the streets?' The answer was somewhat disheartening: a shortage. At that time there were 4,000 vacancies, and there were no applicants to fill them. The shortage of personnel became so chronic that back in late 2001, the newly appointed Home Secretary David Blunkett proposed replenishing the ranks of law enforcement with civilian contractors, so that there would be someone to go out on patrol and at least control street crime.
One cannot allow the numerical advantage to be on the side of more than 900 criminal communities operating in the United Kingdom, actively involved in such illegal activities as smuggling alcohol and cigarettes, money laundering, fraud, and the importation of illegal immigrants. A few striking figures that speak to the scale of the crime situation: annually Britain consumes 100 million Ecstasy tablets; every year, 30 tons of heroin and from 25 to 40 tons of cocaine are brought to the islands, of which the police manage to intercept only about three and two tons, respectively. Did you calculate? That is less than one-tenth...
Another headache: last year, almost 10,000 crimes were committed on the territory of the kingdom, and gunshots were heard more and more often. The trend is alarming: the year before, such crimes were noted 35% fewer. An unprecedented leap. Police officers are increasingly dying in the line of duty.
Until now, 'bobbies' go unarmed: on the belt of the guardians of order hang only handcuffs, a can of tear gas, and telescopic batons. There is, of course, their own special forces with appropriate weapons, attached to each regional department, but they are called for backup only in critical cases.
The logic is as follows: until recently, it was believed here that the image of a 'good policeman' without a weapon, firstly, has a positive effect on the image of law enforcement. And secondly, it protects from a bullet no worse than a bulletproof vest or a 'gun'; thereby it sets a 'good example for anti-social elements, who have their own code of honor that does not allow them to attack the unarmed.'
It is absurd to fight without weapons against increasingly brutal criminal syndicates; it is the same as treating a brain tumor with aspirin. So soon, apparently, unarmed 'bobbies' will be remembered as an antique curiosity. Although even in a new guise, they are unlikely to resemble the wooden oafs of Urfin Jus or Hollywood 'robocops.' The difference will be noticeable, if only in how they behave with inner dignity and at the same time with respect for another person. There are exceptions to the rule; unworthy acts do happen, including racist antics, but name me any police force in the world with an absolutely spotless uniform. For me, the following episode became eloquent evidence that there are people in the police who react sensitively to the changing realities of modern Britain, in particular to the increasingly polyethnic and multi-confessional composition of the population.
A discussion recently arose around an initiative by the Greater London police to replace the official police badges for its employees who profess a non-Christian faith. The badges depict St Edward's Crown, surmounted by a Christian cross. For example, Muslims or followers of the Hindu religion will be offered a badge without the crown and without the cross. The initiative, we admit, was not to everyone's liking. As Glenn Smith, chairman of the Greater London Police Federation, puts it, "we take an oath of allegiance to the Queen. The crown is a symbol of that oath, and the new initiative is in fact an encroachment on loyalty and the oath." And Tony Arbour, a member of the Conservative Party, put it more briefly: this whole affair shows that political correctness has reached the point of absurdity. Perhaps it has, I agree, but the very fact of the psychological readiness of senior police officers to take into account differences in worldview and traditional beliefs of their subordinates says a great deal.
For a long time, until I got used to it, I was struck by the casually friendly expression on the faces of London police officers every time you approached them for a small, purely tourist need. Perhaps, having instantly sized up that the person before them was a non-local, or even a foreigner, and thus by definition an eccentric, they adopted a barely perceptible patronizing manner? I doubt it. Rather, it was duty and habit — the second nature of any professional trained in the simple art of communication. After all, future secretaries and personal assistants are taught to speak on the phone in a friendly voice, with a smile shining through it.
In the voice of the London 'bobby' even today, if you wish, you can hear an echo of that idyllic era when they easily slipped into the prescribed image — not a grimly steadfast tin soldier, but a kind of all-season Santa Claus, on duty for street tranquillity.