Should British Police be armed as standard 2018?

Should British police be routinely armed?

  • Yes

    Votes: 53 39.3%
  • No

    Votes: 82 60.7%

  • Total voters
    135
That's not my opinion at all.

I honestly believe it is time to start selecting new recruits to the Police, and assess them at interview stage, for their ability, and, suitability to carry and use firearms.

.
Some of the application priorities may need tweaking then, as I imagine that answering with; I can consistently achieve a 50mm grouping at 25 metres probably won’t score many points on the describe how you demonstrate a commitment to equality and diversity criteria.
 
Mmmm do we know how much Dead eye Dick with the pistol owed the guy he fitted with a sunroof?
Or had Sunroof guy been tupping pistol guys wife?
No idea but they did try to cover it up before the video surfaced so there was a bit of an organic fertiliser/Aoelian motion generator interface when it all came to light.
 
Some of the application priorities may need tweaking then, as I imagine that answering with; I can consistently achieve a 50mm grouping at 25 metres probably won’t score many points on the describe how you demonstrate a commitment to equality and diversity criteria.
And where do you see that application form ending up then?
 
This is the way I would like to see the UK go, then there would be no need to arm the police,

"It’s almost impossible to get to a gun in Japan, and selling one or owning one is a serious crime. Fire the gun? Possibly life imprisonment. Gun-control laws are taken so seriously that police will pursue a violator all the way to the grave — and maybe beyond."

If guns are to be banned, caught with a gun 10 years [no early release ] fire a gun 20 years, kill or wound
life or 99 years lets stop pussy footing about
 
This is the way I would like to see the UK go, then there would be no need to arm the police,

"It’s almost impossible to get to a gun in Japan, and selling one or owning one is a serious crime. Fire the gun? Possibly life imprisonment. Gun-control laws are taken so seriously that police will pursue a violator all the way to the grave — and maybe beyond."

If guns are to be banned, caught with a gun 10 years [no early release ] fire a gun 20 years, kill or wound
life or 99 years lets stop pussy footing about
You seem to be advocating a total ban of all firearms and citing Japan as an example?
Wiki says this about Japanese gun law:

The weapons law of Japan begins by stating "No one shall possess a firearm or firearms or a sword or swords", and very few exceptions are allowed.[60] Citizens are permitted to possess firearms for hunting and sport shooting, but only after submitting to a lengthy licensing procedure.[61] After ten years of shotgun ownership, a licence-holder may apply to obtain a rifle.
 
So in a roundabout way you say that the UK police are not as sensible / trainable / capable/responsible or just not as good as their European counterparts.
Am I? Not sure that I said that at all. I would argue that, as our Police are, on the whole, unarmed, they are all the better for it. They are certainly, in general, better at dealing with people and trying to defuse difficult situations. Try it on the continent or, especially, in the US and you just get a gun up your hooter. That doesn't make them better, does it?
 
You seem to be advocating a total ban of all firearms and citing Japan as an example?
Wiki says this about Japanese gun law:

The weapons law of Japan begins by stating "No one shall possess a firearm or firearms or a sword or swords", and very few exceptions are allowed.[60] Citizens are permitted to possess firearms for hunting and sport shooting, but only after submitting to a lengthy licensing procedure.[61] After ten years of shotgun ownership, a licence-holder may apply to obtain a rifle.
I didn't say a total ban on firearms

Anybody processing a unlicensed firearm is sentenced as in my earlier quote no half measures

Edit Make the jails places "you don't want to be"
 
Last edited:
...Anybody processing a unlicensed firearm is sentenced as in my earlier quote no half measures

Edit Make the jails places "you don't want to be"
Already got that in SA. Once again, the only ones affected who have to jump through yet more hoops in order to carry out lawful activity are the law abiding. I don't have to remind you of the crime stats.
 
Already got that in SA. Once again, the only ones affected who have to jump through yet more hoops in order to carry out lawful activity are the law abiding. I don't have to remind you of the crime stats.
After living in SA for a number of years I know what you mean, when you have a large majority
in the country that don't give a f*ck what happens to them and life means nothing you have
one insolvable problem
 
...don't give a f*ck... and life means nothing...
Applies to the entire continent I'm afraid. Some really big cultural obstacles need to be overcome before it can be fixed. Those cultural excesses were kept in check in the past but it's back to the old free for all.
 
I've no problem increasing the numbers of armed plod to provide a more visible presence, its the times we live in, we are realistically at threat of terrorism thanks to chods thinking its ok to run off to Syria to fight for one side or another, these are serious times and especially with "Islamic radicisation"
 
"Some parts of central London have armed patrols to counter the threat of terrorist attack, but the new plans being developed by the Met would send armed foot patrols to residential areas with high violent crime.
Commander Kyle Gordon, the head of firearms for the Met, said the force would consult further before a decision was made to approve or drop the plan by the leadership of Britain’s biggest police force.

Gordon said he had helped to formulate the plan. He said that so far the reaction from people the Met had consulted was largely positive, adding: “Would there be benefit in the [armed] officer getting outside their vehicles, and either being static or walking short distances in an area to do two things; be seen in instances where we believed that would enhance community confidence and where we believe it would disrupt and deter any violent activity?”
Gordon said that officers on armed foot patrols would carry their main weapon and wear a pistol on their hip. “If they leave the vehicle to do a patrol their weapons would be accessible and visible.”
He added: “What we are asking is can we use all the assets [of the Met], including armed officers, to enhance confidence and deter activity.”
Gordon said the presence of officers could deter crimes such as burglaries, and armed officers on foot patrol could do so with gang and knife crime
."

I am genuinely puzzled as to why a head of firearms for the Met would think that officers deployed in an area for the purposes he mentions would need to be encumbered with long weapons. I've seen the armed coppers in London - they look impressive and it may be relevant for anti-terror operations but they also appear seriously encumbered. IMHO it would be more efficient and effective for each officer to be armed with a handgun + Taser and additional spare mags.


link to the source:
Met police push ahead with armed patrols despite backlash
 
"Some parts of central London have armed patrols to counter the threat of terrorist attack, but the new plans being developed by the Met would send armed foot patrols to residential areas with high violent crime.
Commander Kyle Gordon, the head of firearms for the Met, said the force would consult further before a decision was made to approve or drop the plan by the leadership of Britain’s biggest police force.

Gordon said he had helped to formulate the plan. He said that so far the reaction from people the Met had consulted was largely positive, adding: “Would there be benefit in the [armed] officer getting outside their vehicles, and either being static or walking short distances in an area to do two things; be seen in instances where we believed that would enhance community confidence and where we believe it would disrupt and deter any violent activity?”
Gordon said that officers on armed foot patrols would carry their main weapon and wear a pistol on their hip. “If they leave the vehicle to do a patrol their weapons would be accessible and visible.”
He added: “What we are asking is can we use all the assets [of the Met], including armed officers, to enhance confidence and deter activity.”
Gordon said the presence of officers could deter crimes such as burglaries, and armed officers on foot patrol could do so with gang and knife crime
."

I am genuinely puzzled as to why a head of firearms for the Met would think that officers deployed in an area for the purposes he mentions would need to be encumbered with long weapons. I've seen the armed coppers in London - they look impressive and it may be relevant for anti-terror operations but they also appear seriously encumbered. IMHO it would be more efficient and effective for each officer to be armed with a handgun + Taser and additional spare mags.


link to the source:
Met police push ahead with armed patrols despite backlash
@loofkar ...c'mon mate, stop posting about Brit cops...how about some Israeli cops?



Also, is this one in the police? Maybe border police?

 
I am genuinely puzzled as to why a head of firearms for the Met would think that officers deployed in an area for the purposes he mentions would need to be encumbered with long weapons. I've seen the armed coppers in London - they look impressive and it may be relevant for anti-terror operations but they also appear seriously encumbered. IMHO it would be more efficient and effective for each officer to be armed with a handgun + Taser and additional spare mags.
Presumably because there are a limited number of such armed officers, to bimble around on foot they are not going to leave the long weapons locked in their vehicle, and then walk out of sight of it.

Plus this is just a show of force and if a 'real' armed response is required elsewhere then they will have all their usual weapons and will be able to respond as soon as they get back to their vehicle.
 
@loofkar ...c'mon mate, stop posting about Brit cops...how about some Israeli cops?
Also, is this one in the police? Maybe border police?

Correct, Identifiable by the green uniform and the unit patch (which depicts a British Taggart fort).
The Border Police are paramilitary police - they were established because the ceasefire agreements of 1948 required demilitarized borders in some places.
 
A lot of people including me can see that the British Police have lost a lot of respect in wider society, initially in the ethnic communities and then, when they transitioned from a uniformed force to a uniformed social service due to political attack, that lost them respect in the wider native population.

So giving them firearms, when they already have such low respect is a recipe for some decidedly dangerous incidents, escalating very quickly. I would suggest they need to seriously harden up their behaviour and make it clear they will no longer allow people to take the p*** out of them.

Then they can get armed up to deal with the more specific threats.
 
The Glock is going to cost you more than that in the long run. Our plod still have to qualify at least once a year. So that means they will have to shoot at least a few hundred rounds a year to practice, and some will shoot more than that if allowed.

Then you will need long guns, to pass out to the officers in the rural settings. That is going to get pricey.

You will have a spike in accidents, wrongful deaths and all sorts of American issues to deal with. Wrongful death lawsuits ain’t cheap, and you will have a few of those a year.
I was watching you tube today and came across a video cops v cops an undercover drugs bust in texas car gets stopped driver was undercover cop, goes to exit car team commander shouts (GUN) commander a LT then proceeds to pump 8 rounds into his undercover officer who he happen to knew was driving the vehicle. (was he shagging his wife)
Cop survives gets 6.5 million bucks
Lt retires the day before they recommend he gets fired (duh)
 
"Some parts of central London have armed patrols to counter the threat of terrorist attack, but the new plans being developed by the Met would send armed foot patrols to residential areas with high violent crime.
Commander Kyle Gordon, the head of firearms for the Met, said the force would consult further before a decision was made to approve or drop the plan by the leadership of Britain’s biggest police force.

Gordon said he had helped to formulate the plan. He said that so far the reaction from people the Met had consulted was largely positive, adding: “Would there be benefit in the [armed] officer getting outside their vehicles, and either being static or walking short distances in an area to do two things; be seen in instances where we believed that would enhance community confidence and where we believe it would disrupt and deter any violent activity?”
Gordon said that officers on armed foot patrols would carry their main weapon and wear a pistol on their hip. “If they leave the vehicle to do a patrol their weapons would be accessible and visible.”
He added: “What we are asking is can we use all the assets [of the Met], including armed officers, to enhance confidence and deter activity.”
Gordon said the presence of officers could deter crimes such as burglaries, and armed officers on foot patrol could do so with gang and knife crime
."

I am genuinely puzzled as to why a head of firearms for the Met would think that officers deployed in an area for the purposes he mentions would need to be encumbered with long weapons. I've seen the armed coppers in London - they look impressive and it may be relevant for anti-terror operations but they also appear seriously encumbered. IMHO it would be more efficient and effective for each officer to be armed with a handgun + Taser and additional spare mags.


link to the source:
Met police push ahead with armed patrols despite backlash

As this is basically a show of force and as UK police don't usually carry arms in public at all I suspect most civvies wouldn't even realise that the police were armed if all they had was a pistol especially as it would be mixed in with all the other gubbins they carry on their belt. A BFO rifle on the other hand would be noticed straightaway.
 
I was watching you tube today and came across a video cops v cops an undercover drugs bust in texas car gets stopped driver was undercover cop, goes to exit car team commander shouts (GUN) commander a LT then proceeds to pump 8 rounds into his undercover officer who he happen to knew was driving the vehicle. (was he shagging his wife)
Cop survives gets 6.5 million bucks
Lt retires the day before they recommend he gets fired (duh)
And the point you are making issssss ?
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top