LIBERTY criticising the use of spit hoods is a prime example of prioritising criminals over police officers.
While the campaign group's reason for opposing spit hoods – that they are "dangerous, degrading and unjustified" – shows a complete lack of understanding of when and why they are used.
A number of respected police officers and leaders have responded to Liberty's criticism of the use of spit hoods and West Mercia's Chief Superintendent Kevin Purcell offered one of the best explanations, saying: "Spit hoods are used when people are detained for an offence and are spitting at an officer. They are not randomly placed on members of the public, nor routinely on anyone who is arrested."
Quite simply, they are a protective measure to prevent arrested people from spitting at police – not just because doing so is disgusting, but also because officers could be infected with a disease.
Ultimately, banning spit hoods would make our officers more vulnerable to being spat at – and we should be doing more to protect police, not making their jobs more difficult.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel