Patch ban fears
Some rural police worry move could be dangerous
Northland police fear rural officers will face more assaults on the frontline as a result of the Government’s proposed gang patch ban. Under the policy, patches would be banned in all public places as part of proposed legislation that would also give police the power to break up gang gatherings and allow courts to stop gang members from associating with each other.
But many police believe enforcing such a ban would be impractical and dangerous.
One officer claimed there would be more assaults on police.
Patches meant everything to gang members and asking them to remove them would invite conflict.
“Gang members usually hang around as a group. So, for any one of us to approach them and ask them to take it off is asking for trouble.
“Even if we were to have numbers on our side, the gangs would not give it up without a fight.”
The officer said such confrontations could lead to mass brawls that could get out of control and possibly put members of the public in danger. One officer said they would not be surprised if some police chose to ignore enforcing the ban, especially if they were significantly outnumbered by gang members. “Officers in rural areas would probably have a more difficult time dealing with it, since they usually police a large area by themselves.
“So, in a community which has a heavy gang presence, there is no reason why they should go out of their way to put their life on the line when the backup is usually hours away or cannot arrive due to other priorities”.
Police Minister Mark Mitchell, a former police officer, understood the different environment rural officers faced.
He said they often needed to adapt their style of policing to be more informal and relationshipbased.
“Rural officers will be the best
judge of the appropriate operational response in each situation.”
He said those officers were already used to making such decisions and had been required to do so under a wide range of legislation.
Former gang leader Martin Kaipo, now chief executive of Te Hau Äwhiowhio ō Otangarei Trust, believed the ban would have little to no effect on combating crime.
The proposal was “political votebuying” and nothing more. Additionally, it put unnecessary pressure on the police force, he said.
Kaipo felt that, in the past, rural police had a “deep understanding” with the community.
“So, if a crime was committed, the community including the gang members would co-operate and support what the cop instructed them to do.”
Despite what Mitchell believed, a ban would only destroy those relationships and understanding that police had built with the community and gangs, he said.
He understood from long-time gang members that they would rather go to jail than take off their patches.
“So it’s understandable if cops choose to ignore such enforcement to avoid big fights and can use their resources for actual crime and not some babysitting job given by the Government.”
Waikato University’s Dr Armon Tamatea, an expert on New Zealand gangs, agreed the ban didn’t make sense.
“What happens when hundreds of gang members attend a tangi? Will officers approach each one of them to take their patches off?”
Tamatea pointed out that wearing patches did not necessarily equate to committing a crime. Rather it fell under the Bill of Rights, which gave people the freedom to wear what
So it’s understandable if cops choose to ignore such enforcement to avoid big fights and can use their resources for actual crime and not some babysitting job given by the Government. Martin Kaipo
they wanted.
However, if the Government was determined to see the legislation through, he believed it would become a human rights issue that would be contested by the gangs.
“A classic example is the Whanganui bylaw to ban any gang patch in 2009, which was later ruled invalid by the High Court a year later.”
A police officer told the Northern Advocate the only way officers could safely enforce the ban was to take the patches away from gang members after they were arrested for committing other offences.
“The downside to this method is that it will take ages before we get all of them off.
“Honestly speaking, we are too involved in attending other crimes, some of which we can’t even attend. So we just can’t see how we would enforce this without any issues.”