• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Civpol marksmen

#1
See that appeal court has cleared the guys who killed the man whe had table leg wrapped up in paper. Inquest said they were culpable. Appeal on grounds that they had good reason to be scared.
So, we all know what to say from now on don't we? Don't be fright = just tell the nice investigator you were scared just like them two big coppers.
 
#2
I do feel that if a polis marksman is given the shoot order or is placed into a situation where he is forced to take the Kill Shot and all shots are kill shots.
Then he must not be hauled up in court.
Parliment has decide we should have armed police, it lays down the training the system has taken the decisions and the system not the guy risking his neck should answer.
john
 
#3
I'd love to put you on the judgement range at Gravesend for the afternoon, O.R.C. I'm sure you'll tell me that in the army you have similar training regimes. I doubt it.

Handing my firearms ticket back in was one of the wisest things I ever did.

I do feel that if a polis marksman is given the shoot order or is placed into a situation where he is forced to take the Kill Shot and all shots are kill shots.
Police firearms doctrine is, in this context, identical to that of the military: all shots are aimed at the centre of the main body mass of the target. The only deviation is the drill for targets wearing body armour, where you are trained to make head shots. This might have changed, because I did my AFO course in '98, prior to the HRA.

V!
 
#4
Vegetius
I was always educated that you are not shooting to wound and you must expect to kill with each hit.
I think its disgracefull to give the Bobby the part of executioner, used to be a specialist trade.
Parliment and the lawyers have abandoned their responsibility and are shifing it to the guy at the bottom of the chain of command, the man risking his neck.
john
 
#5
I think its disgracefull to give the Bobby the part of executioner, used to be a specialist trade.
Firearms are now an almost routine part of modern policing: if you wander around Whitehall you can't fail to notice heavily-tooled up cops everywhere. Or airports, for example. Armed Response Vehicles are commonplace, you see them daily. Many rapid entry tasks on raids that in my early service would have been carried out by the local uniform with a sledgehammer are now subject to "armed dig-outs" by SO19 teams. Whom, incidentally, are known as "Ninja Turtles."

The criminal armoury is also getting bigger and better.

As for "executioner," well I don't really think the cap fits there. Yes, you know when you shoot someone the chances are you're going to kill them. This is why all police AFOs are volunteers and are made utterly aware that shooting a suspect probably makes you a murder suspect. It's just that increasingly obtuse legal decisions made under political pressure have made police firearms use increasingly difficult.

The tactics phase of police firearms training is all about not shooting people. It's about containment, communication etc. I remember comparing my CIVPOL AFO tactics module with my TA infantry FIBUA package: chalk and cheese. All of the AFOs I ever met, to a man and woman, were extremely keen not to have to shoot somebody.

V!
 
#6
F**k 'em I say - if there are some armed coppers pumped up with adrenaline shouting at you to put your weapon down/lay down/stand still etc and you are stupid enough to ignore them, then you deserve to be shot. It's called natural selection.
 
#8
CardCheat said:
F**k 'em I say - if there are some armed coppers pumped up with adrenaline shouting at you to put your weapon down/lay down/stand still etc and you are stupid enough to ignore them, then you deserve to be shot. It's called natural selection.
In this case though, If you are shouted at from behind, when minding your own business, the natural tendancy is to turn and look. You wouldn't expect to get shot for it.
 
#9
I intended no criticism of the actual marksmen. It is the attitude. I know very well from NI experience 70-72 that a soldier there, trained only to basic military standards and having undergone no psychological testing or stress training, would have been judged much more harshly than seems to have happened in this latest appeal. Look at VCP shootings in particular. The latest appeal didn't go any further so won't be case stated but - as I posted - will take a lot of pressure off a poor old squaddy if he mentions it in any post-shooting debrief or milpol interview.
 
#10
As far as I am Away and please correct me if i am wrong . The bloke was shot as he turned round hadnt made any suspicious movements now a
squaddie could be expected to jump to conclusion while police marksman
should be held to a higher standard .They shot and killed an innocent man
going about his lawful busniess at the very least they should be thrown out
of the force imho.
 
#12
woody said:
As far as I am Away and please correct me if i am wrong . The bloke was shot as he turned round hadnt made any suspicious movements now a
squaddie could be expected to jump to conclusion while police marksman
should be held to a higher standard .They shot and killed an innocent man
going about his lawful busniess at the very least they should be thrown out
of the force imho.
If I'd been told that the guy has a shotgun and is carrying a plastic bag that appears to have a sawn-off shotgun in it then turns towards me when told to stand still I think I could well have done exactly the same thing that they did. The fact that he may have been partially deaf is immaterial, folks don't wear big badges advertising the fact.
 
#13
Partially deaf? Oh, I forgot, people with disabilities are all law abiding citizens - not heard of the PIRA guy with one leg? "Why didn't you shoot him Pte Bloggs?" "Well Sir, he was a cripple...". Lets give the plods a bit of respect for doing a bloody hard job under difficult circumstances...their rules of engagement are far stricter than ours (and quite rightly so).
 
#14
woody said:
As far as I am Away and please correct me if i am wrong . The bloke was shot as he turned round hadnt made any suspicious movements
The officer's evidence was that when he turned around and was challenged repeatedly, (this is unambiguous: HALT! ARMED POLICE! and was corroborated by an independent civilian witness) he raised the bag with the chair leg in it. It seems to me that this case turned on the previous information that the two officers had been given via the 999 system: that the man had been seen in a pub with a sawn-off shotgun.

So, in good faith, the officers thought they were confronting a man armed with a shotgun who refused to put it down when challenged. Discuss. There is another debate to be had about police management of real-time intelligence systems, but these officers didn't, at that time, have that luxury.

now a squaddie could be expected to jump to conclusion while police marksman should be held to a higher standard. They shot and killed an innocent man going about his lawful busniess at the very least they should be thrown out of the force imho.
Yes, they shot and killed an innocent man. That is a genuine shame, I personally feel very sorry for Harry Stanley's family. Whether these officers should be continued to serve in an armed role is a fair debate. But sacking them because of a politically-motivated campaign by the Left when it was proven in law that they acted in good faith is out of order.

A lot of firearms officers have handed their tickets in over this; the support isn't there. The Job is almost impossible as it is, and having been an AFO and knowing lots of police firearms people I find it difficult not to believe the SO19 guys' version of events.

V!
 
#15
It depends if he lifted the bag or not. if he did fair shoot if he didnt its not
on .People are idiots so the idea that some one coming home from the pub confronted by armed police will act rationally is a unwise assumption.
I heard several diffrent versions of the event so i guess the courts got it best
 
#16
Recently there have been a series of "suicide by cop". There was a case here last year in Cologne, Germany, where a Turkish bloke (later discovered to have had a psychatric history) confronte a whole police company driving as a convoy from an exercise with a blankfiring replica weapon (all police in Germany are armed, and depending on the state, usualy have a H&K MP5 in their patrol car). This obviously armed man threatened the police officers and on repeated challenges shot some blanks at the officers, who responded with aimed fire from several guns.
Later a suicide farewell letter was found in his house.

Jan
 
#17
The boy's in blue do a bloody hard job i think, at least we all know that if we stick to what the card says in our top left we'll be sorted, however in their case as soon as that round's goin down range he's already "the accused". they do a job, a tough one, let's not make it tougher. i'm very glad they made the decision, and didn't shirk away from it. i'm sure every one here has said "rather be tried by 12, than carried by 6" when confronted with a towel wearing assailant!!! 8O
 
#18
woody said:
It depends if he lifted the bag or not. if he did fair shoot if he didnt its not
on .People are idiots so the idea that some one coming home from the pub confronted by armed police will act rationally is a unwise assumption.
I heard several diffrent versions of the event so i guess the courts got it best
As mentioned before, this is a really complicated case, hence it took so long.

And none of us on this site have all the facts : witness in pub who stated he saw a gun, Mr Stanley being a known criminal, pointing the bag at people and the police etc.

Armed officers have a horribly hard and complicated job, and finally have received the judgement they deserved.

Without a doubt there needs to be more support in law for these guys

I'm pretty sure that no copper is going to risk a life of surprise bum sex and beatings/slashings in jail, just to slot someone.

Thats why it's highly unlikely it was bad decision to shoot.
 
#19
What i find odd is that a jury convicted the two cops of unlawful killing, for it to be overturned by a judge, still don't know why exactly.

I'll give them the benifit of the doubt, but if a jury convicts them i'd want a damn good reason to overturn that conviction. (I heard something about being shot in the neck and forensic evidence disagreeing with the police?)
 

Latest Threads

New Posts