I sincerely hope these blokes are a bit more switched on than the ones who surrounded a mini, raked it with fire and failed to kill the bloke inside - which was lucky, because he was the wrong bloke.

Its just posturing.

In 1983 you say? I do believe there may have been some changes in 26 years

Yes indeed, . Shooting innocent Brits is just not on.



I believe that Brazilian electricians are now favourite targets

Or people carrying repaired wooden chair legs in plastic carrier bags.

Tell Jean Charles de Menezes that.

Dont know if this is true but I as once told he was in Martins car, with his girlfriend and wearing a wig that made him look like Martin? Which , if true, buts rather a different perspective on his "innocence".

Anyway as I was 200 miles away as a very junior CCF bod when this happened I file it under "ancient history".

Trotsky

[

Dont know if this is true but I as once told he was in Martins car, with his girlfriend and wearing a wig that made him look like Martin? Which , if true, buts rather a different perspective on his "innocence".

Anyway as I was 200 miles away as a very junior CCF bod when this happened I file it under "ancient history".

Trotsky[/quote]

This was a story put about by a DCI from the div that the CId came from.
I was serving in blue at the time and it made a huge impact on our operational behaviour.

In fact, I believe this was the spur for the founding of specialist depts, instead of the ad hoc procedure at the time, whereby any "authorised shot" could draw a firearm for a job on spurious info.

What really was disturbing was the amount of times he was shot, and survived, only to be pistol whipped by the cop. Now that is what made it look really bad.

First time? For the Met maybe. They've been doing armed patrols in gang blackspots in Nottingham on and off for 10 years.

the mention of the stephen waldorf case brings to mind THIS CASE from my home town. Knowing 3 cops on that police department, I took great pleasure in handing out paper targets to them after this happened.

I am all for cops having guns, but how about we nail down ROE's and priciples of marksmanship first.

But if they'd pistol whipped him as well they might have been able to detain him!

Indeed--given the ascendancy of the homosexual lobby and the human Rights Act of 1998, the police would no doubt have been required to attend rigorous sensitivity training to learn to use other inclusive phrases that respect diversity just before executing villains.

[quote="Arankay"]Secondly no 'Home Office' forces have 'fire selectors', all their long arms are 'carbines', in that they are single shot only, though at least one Non HO forces does have automatic weaponary (CNC)./quote]

Thanks for the correction. Trying to remember where the feck I heard otherwise now.

ok, here is where i sound like a lefty - actually, i guess i don't compared to the current 'left'.

There are two parts to my argument against routeenly arming police

1. psychology.

In the UK there was, generally a respect for others. There was an acceptance that we aren't all at the top of the tree, the alpha. We, historically, have been willing to live and let live, and because we are treated with respect and dignity, we are happy to respond in kind. This is, in large part, down to the emphasis on 'fair play' and respect for others, particularly when raising kids. Sadly this is being lost, (i accept that it does not hold for everyone, but as will all social traits, it is a continuum.)

We are seeing more and more examples of people who are willing to use their positions of power to 'get one over' on others, to advance themselves at the expense of another. Those witnessing this behaviour, learn the lesson that it is ok to impose your will on others for the sake of your own interests or ego. The 'victims' learn to resent their treatment and those who are not 'beaten' psychologically into submission, will be a real threat to those with the power. - leading to more conflict.

This situation plays itself out in many arenas. Football and sports in general, there used to be 'fair play' and respect, but as it has becone 'professional' the respect is gone and it is now dog eat dog. - the kids watching learn this lesson. Films and tv are replete with examples of the one individual imposing themselves on others to get their way. Politics, we have seen in the UK in the last 20 years a growing contempt of the people by the 'ruling class'. Those in power have lied to us, stolen from us, and denied us our democratic right to decide how we are governed. - Those below, who are not being respected, become resentful.

The ideal is that everyone is a 'free-born englishman', regardless of race or sex! Unfortunately, we now have sports teaching 'use any methods to dominate', movies stimulating the veneration of the 'gun' as a symbol of power, politicians stealing from us invading our privacy, and now, putting an even greater symbol of dominance on the streets.

In particular, but not exclusively, those brought up to respect 'power', are willing to use power over others to get what they want. They see that being the alpha is the way to go, and this fits with the natural psychological drive to be the leader of the 'tribe'.

The best example of this is africa. Power is respect - might really is right, and just look at what happens when that mindset dominates.

By having armed police, anyone wanting to be an alpha, will need to get a gun. Let's not underestimate the drive to be powerful, we see wars all over the world for that aim. So, the young guy, full of testosterone, will be driven to aquire the means to be the most powerful man around. if the local police are seen to be carrying guns, then the young man will be driven to do the same. The only offset, is the state being so dominant, that the would-be alpha knows he will lose (by being shot or cought) and is forced into a submissive state of mind. - We all know how much young guys are willing to risk to prove themselves, so I'm sure we can agree that for many, submission is not a realistic possibility.


2. Politics.

I am a 'free-born englishman'. No-one is my superior. That holds true for every one of us. That the state did not routeenly arm those it paid to maintain the peace, sent a powerful message that we, the people are equal to the state. There was mutual respect.

If the police are to be armed at all times, the state is setting itself up as dominant. By definition, that means we are inferior. This will also serve to embolden the ruling classes. The more dominance they feel over the people, the worse they will treat us.

If the government has sole access to firearms, the people become servants. While I accept that there there needs to be some firearms trained officers to deal with criminals, the state should never be allowed to dominate the people. If the state feels that it is justified to arm it's 'peacekeepers', there is no longer any justification to deny the people equal access to firearms.

My understanding is that 'personal defence' is not a suitable justification when applying for a firearms license. If the state is routeenly armed, the people must be free to be armed to ensure the state does not abuse their total domination of the people and the 'personal defense' reason is not only valid, but the ownership of a gun must become a right.

While I do not want us to end up like the states with their high murder rate, the only two options i see to aviod that are; maintaining the power balance between state and the people by not routeenly arming police, or, following the communist example and having total state dominance of the people. - I know which one I would choose.


Well, that was a bit of a ramble, but my point is in there somewhere if you can decypher my lousy english!

Very thoughtful post with good explanation of some of your British "quirks" as to how you view your society and the role of the individual within it. Your statement I quote above is one of the hallmarks of those of us who cherish our right to keep and bear arms here in the US.

To be honest, i never really understood the mindset behind that concept until I was writing that post!! - I guess I'm a bit slow!

As long as you finally "saw the light!' Cheers.

This is really going to boost the PCSO numbers

There is no suggestion whatever that the Police are going to start arming all and sundry, just that the Met is doing (or considering) armed foot patrols to augment their current armed policing strategy.

Skicarver, are you advocating an American style 'guns for all' approach? Would this not lead to an 'arms race' between the good and bad guys? As seen in the good old US of A, making the streets and the 'state' an even more frightening prospect.

doesn't just about anywhere else have guns for all? Hasn't lead to any arms races.