Now you are baiting me.
I read the whole thread, and the biggest issue was the perception of the inept nature of planning, and over worrying by managers. You mention resource management, and officers standing off and not doing anything, yet bemoan the presence of horses designed to deal directly with aggression. Comically, you refer to anyone reading message boards being able to plan resources, as if this forum world is more advanced than public order intellience held by the police. You also think that there wont be any police on the streets when needed, as if they will be allowed to take time off freely, leaving huge holes in domestic policing.
My post pointed out the slightly larger strategic picture, viewed by those more qualified to make decisions that keep you safe.
If you think you know it all, good luck.
I refuse to get drawn into an argument, as I'd suggest it is already quod erat demonstrandum. Most of what is written above is factually wrong, mainly in relation to how things are planned, and what risk indicators are important. You can't argue on the wrong facts.