I do not jump to condemn Richard Brunstrom who often decides to lead from the front and is not afraid to confront (perhaps even create) controversy. His contribution to the drugs debate is not one I immediately accept but I will take the time to consider the evidence he has provided via his blog.
To what extent this is the role of a Chief Constable may be debatable and his style is not that of a traditional public servant. Where I think Richard lets himself down in his attitude to those who may hold different views - his blog refers to them as "flat earthers and ostriches". Labelling a significant cross section of the population in this way does not seem language suited to such an important debate, indeed it is a tone of language unbecoming of his role and status. I assume the people he describes as such may include some of his own employees, other chief constables (judging by ACPO reaction) and other folk across our communities. What scope for internal dissent and debate if the boss has already stated publicly he considers you a "flat earther"?. That could be unhealthy for any organisation.
It might include me, but I will consider his evidence without the need to resort to language of such a tone.