Police "Will have to quadruple Armed Response Units".

#21
How long are we going to fanny about like a bunch of girly twats, worrying about scrotes carrying guns. Arm the police and lets get on with it. Im leaving in 4 yrs, just about enough time to bed the units in.

Cheers mate, I'll have an HK please. :twisted:
 
#23
leonidas42 said:
How long are we going to fanny about like a bunch of girly ****, worrying about scrotes carrying guns. Arm the police and lets get on with it. Im leaving in 4 yrs, just about enough time to bed the units in.

Cheers mate, I'll have an HK please. :twisted:
Good Drills that man! :D
 
#25
FrankCastle said:
According to Ian Blair, one of the effects of the Met losing the Health and Safety case is that UK police will have to increase the number of Armed Officers by 400% to ensure there is enough armed coppers to cover/respond to any potential operation in the future.

The problem is: where are the extra officers going to come from? There are barely enough to go around as it is without hundreds more being moved from "normal" policing to Armed Response.

The other problem, of course, is that not all police officers are capable of carrying out Armed duties. Indeed, many would not want to. Police officers are not obligated under the terms of their contracts to carry firearms. One cannot simply draft them into new Armed units.

Any ideas?
Since when did ARRSErs believe in politicians?
 
#26
This is not just a Met issue; it needs to be rolled out across the UK.

On the day of the attempted bombing in Glasgow , Strathclyde - which is the second biggest force in the UK - did not even have Armed Officers on duty at the Airport.
 
#27
Hold up for just one second.
Let us not forget this:-
On 7/7 a number of innocent people were murdered on their way to work/visit museums/doing ordinary touristy type thingys.
On 21/7 some wannabees tried doing the same thing and through piss-poor preparation (thank fcuk) failed. They all then, brave prospective martyrs that they were, did a runner and were on the loose.
To cover all of the known plots associated with the, by then, known suspects stretched everyone to breaking point, 16 hour continuous duties just to man the O.Ps.
Obviously there were not enough firearm teams to go around to cover them all. Those that were there are governed by their working hours and a 12 hour shift is tops, absolute, no questions, health and safety etc etc. (The same law covering the illegal overstaying victim with forged stamps in his passport)
Now try to keep a covert surveillance team undiscovered, watching one place for one shift,in a sh1thole area of South London let alone the firearms team(s) with it out of sight and you may as well bring Billy Smart to organise it. Now times that by 45 to 50 addresses associated with them, how would you prioritise them then? All in the urban sprawl of London town. Try and keep that covert.
Then, when it all went tits up, in the middle of the most murderous bombing campaign since those Irish heroes were doing what they do best, where was the Commish?
"Asleep and I was not told for 24 hours." Oh really.
He is a plod, the ultimate plod and has to carry the can. Can anyone else name a Commissioner going home in the middle of the gravest threat to national security since.................? I cannot.
Back to the subject, more plod carrying will not solve this but cause more pain and grief. Just look at the number of NDs from those that ARE trained ffs. Think of Tackleberry and you are half way there!
Personally I would not give most of them a set of car keys let alone a tazer/shooter/gas.
I can just imagine the outcry when the first shoplifter runs off from Tescos with half a bottle of Smirnoff Blue to be met with "Armed Plod, stand still" then 2 in the back for 'failing to comply.'
This is spoken from experience, and lowering the standards any more, and I mean from Bliar down will not make me any safer.
Bliar is one of the Neu Arbeit luvvies and they will close ranks to keep him as their token. How many more lies can they tell??
 
#28
Scabster_Mooch said:
FrankCastle said:
According to Ian Blair, one of the effects of the Met losing the Health and Safety case is that UK police will have to increase the number of Armed Officers by 400% to ensure there is enough armed coppers to cover/respond to any potential operation in the future.

The problem is: where are the extra officers going to come from? There are barely enough to go around as it is without hundreds more being moved from "normal" policing to Armed Response.

The other problem, of course, is that not all police officers are capable of carrying out Armed duties. Indeed, many would not want to. Police officers are not obligated under the terms of their contracts to carry firearms. One cannot simply draft them into new Armed units.

Any ideas?
Since when did ARRSErs believe in politicians?
Since the day after Never. :twisted:

But as I said, even cnuts like Blair get it right now and then. And I think this is one of those times; violent crime is out of control, never mind terrorism.

As I write this, BBC News is doing a report on just how easy it is to smuggle guns in from Europe... :x
 
#29
harrythebastard said:
Hold up for just one second.
Let us not forget this:-
On 7/7 a number of innocent people were murdered on their way to work/visit museums/doing ordinary touristy type thingys.
On 21/7 some wannabees tried doing the same thing and through urine-poor preparation (thank fcuk) failed. They all then, brave prospective martyrs that they were, did a runner and were on the loose.
To cover all of the known plots associated with the, by then, known suspects stretched everyone to breaking point, 16 hour continuous duties just to man the O.Ps.
Obviously there were not enough firearm teams to go around to cover them all. Those that were there are governed by their working hours and a 12 hour shift is tops, absolute, no questions, health and safety etc etc. (The same law covering the illegal overstaying victim with forged stamps in his passport)
Now try to keep a covert surveillance team undiscovered, watching one place for one shift,in a sh1thole area of South London let alone the firearms team(s) with it out of sight and you may as well bring Billy Smart to organise it. Now times that by 45 to 50 addresses associated with them, how would you prioritise them then? All in the urban sprawl of London town. Try and keep that covert.
Then, when it all went tits up, in the middle of the most murderous bombing campaign since those Irish heroes were doing what they do best, where was the Commish?
"Asleep and I was not told for 24 hours." Oh really.
He is a plod, the ultimate plod and has to carry the can. Can anyone else name a Commissioner going home in the middle of the gravest threat to national security since.................? I cannot.
Back to the subject, more plod carrying will not solve this but cause more pain and grief. Just look at the number of NDs from those that ARE trained ffs. Think of Tackleberry and you are half way there!
Personally I would not give most of them a set of car keys let alone a tazer/shooter/gas.
I can just imagine the outcry when the first shoplifter runs off from Tescos with half a bottle of Smirnoff Blue to be met with "Armed Plod, stand still" then 2 in the back for 'failing to comply.'
This is spoken from experience, and lowering the standards any more, and I mean from Bliar down will not make me any safer.
Bliar is one of the Neu Arbeit luvvies and they will close ranks to keep him as their token. How many more lies can they tell??
A shoplifter is shot to death by armed police...and this would be a bad thing why? :twisted:
 
#30
'Cos of two scenarios:-
a) The plod will be suspended for up to 6 years, fcuking up his life, career and family while the IPCC, Liberty, and any other band wagon tips up and pronounces upon it while the job treats him as a leper or-
b) It would be a murder enquiry as in "Where was the threat to your/your mates/the public's lives? He is then suspended while the course of 'justice'
as they understand it rolls on.
Either way a 'lose-lose' situation.
 
#32
JoseyWales said:
No - just checking out your sh1t on the ' Barry the Bullshitter Thread ' and comparing it to your latest sh1t here.
So you're stalking me then? How would you know if what I posted was sh*t or is that just your opinion now, after I pointed out that you are an internet pest?

So, stalker, care to explain why they are both sh*t and the relevance of one to the other in your deliberations before arriving at that conclusion?

Or do you just like to post because you feel the need?
 
#34
I think its only a matter of time before all the police are armed, I don't see anything wrong with arming the police. Criminals either way as gun crime becomes more prolific will carry guns regardless if the police is armed or not. The fact of the matter is, the police will have more stopping power with a Glock on their side than a steel baton and pepper spray.
 
#35
harrythebastard said:
'Cos of two scenarios:-
a) The plod will be suspended for up to 6 years, fcuking up his life, career and family while the IPCC, Liberty, and any other band wagon tips up and pronounces upon it while the job treats him as a leper or-
b) It would be a murder enquiry as in "Where was the threat to your/your mates/the public's lives? He is then suspended while the course of 'justice'
as they understand it rolls on.
Either way a 'lose-lose' situation.
Yeah, but look on the bright side - one less thieving scumbag! :twisted:
 
#36
JoseyWales said:
And your point is..
JW - if you have a problem with Rufus - take it somewhere else. At least Rufus has commented on issues this Thread has raised.
 
#37
#40
One of the great things about being a member of a Bisley gun club is that you get to socialise with members of armed response teams. As an ex grunt, you inevitably get to talk shop with regard to firearms training. One thing that has been made quite clear to me is that training for the street is completely different than training for the battlefield. The Police have much tighter ROEs. Their procedures are different as well. For example they don't give supressing/covering fire in order to win a firefight because of possible collateral damage. Even double-taps are out these days. All their training seems geared towards NOT shooting, except as the last possible resort. With us, it is a complete contrast. Our training is geared to winning the fire-fight by sheer volume of fire before fighting through the position. I grant you that this does not apply to NI training. Apparently, ex service personnel can have real problems having to un-learn what they have been taught in order to shoot the police way.

I am simply reporting on a number of conversations. Is there anyone who has served in both the forces and police armed response who would care to make a more informed comment?

SLR (Not to be confused with SLR Boy)
 

Latest Threads

Top