Views on arming police

sauer

Well-Known Member
Ok
I wake up to read another young middle eastern refugee had gone to see however many virgins he thinks he's getting .
Blew himself up outside a restaurant, no dead thankfully but 12 injured , no idea to what extent

So
France , now Germany getting brunt of it the last week or so .....
So any doubt if sneaking a bunch of terrorists in through waves of asylum seekers has been realized [emoji29]

In the wake of this what do we do ?

In order to " react" quicker what about arming our police force ?

Thoughts please ?
Pros & cons ?

Could it possibly help react / contain such an incident if & when it happens in the UK ?

Paul
 
The problem with this in the UK is a cultural/generational thing, it's just something we're not used to and mentally aren't prepared for just like when they introduced 24hr drinking and thought we'd all act like Europeans and have a relaxed cafe culture and drink responsibly. It would take a number of generations for the idea to ever be widely accepted and in all likelyhood never will be.
 
quite happy for arming our police or at least have more armed units per police force can't see Mrs may going for that though !!
 
Up in the Highlands here the firearms police unit have side arms on them at all times and attend normal police call outs, traffic stops, patrolling on foot etc. I don't have a problem with it but the uproar in local papers about it is ridiculous, half the problem is that guns are portrayed to the public as terrible things by media etc which doesn't help things.
 
Get them all armed. I have zero problem with it. With few exceptions, 'The Public' are idiots as far as I'm concerned
 
what exactly do you think an armed Policeman can do to stop a suicide bomber?
assuming the bomber keeps under cover until the explosion? the Gendarmes are armed and that didn't stop the atrocities in France , it may have made the custody costs lower but the deaths had already occurred!
routinely arm out Police and you will see more people shot and not all of them will be guilty of anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and you will still be at risk from suicide bombers and spree shooters with automatic weapons.
 
Yes, but the baton or even better the night stick has to be the 1st line of defence, the gun second....A major problem in America is officers are trained to unholster their pistol first....many of the police shootings of unarmed blacks could have been prevented if they used the baton and just wacked them several times....but no one wanted another Rodney King...

Z
 
Last edited:
what exactly do you think an armed Policeman can do to stop a suicide bomber?
assuming the bomber keeps under cover until the explosion? the Gendarmes are armed and that didn't stop the atrocities in France , it may have made the custody costs lower but the deaths had already occurred!
routinely arm out Police and you will see more people shot and not all of them will be guilty of anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and you will still be at risk from suicide bombers and spree shooters with automatic weapons.

No it didn't stop the atrocities but did it allow a more rapid response than would be possible over here. Can you picture it , the ARV is attending a domestic 5 miles away so will be there in 20 minutes!! I would welcome all or at least more police being armed.
 
I'm sure this was brought up in the papers a while ago and powers that be said they were recruiting extra firearms cops, but it then added there is a massive ammount of firearms jobs/roles not filled as the police don't want to do it.
If they do arm more polis they should also get more protection legally, if they have to use there firearm, don't want things to go as far as america where they seem to be able to shoot 1st ask questions later with no come back, but i do think they seem to be over harshly critised here.
Fair enough if they f**k up or are negligent but if the info and they genuinley believe someon is a real risk/armed they should be allowed to shoot with little to worry about legally

Must admit not a big fan of arming the polis in general and think it would get in the way of day to day jobs plus some of them are complete numpties who i would not like to see with a gun.
i'd be more in favour of having small army units stationed in around big towns/cities that there sole job is to be on standby. not neccesarily special forces, but plenty of barracks scattered around the country with helicopters wouldnae take much to have a small squad on standby
Not saying not plenty of numpties in army but they're only job is if it hits the fan
 
From my personal experience half the Police don't want to be armed, don't like guns/afraid of them and the other half want to be armed because it gives them a 'macho' feeling.
Presently most of them wear anti-stab vests, not particularly comfortable, but bring firearms into the equation and then it ups the requirement for 'bullet proof' vests, which are very uncomfortable.
To suddenly arm a lot of Police would change the training programme, cost a lot of money and would have change the mind set of the recruits.
During my interview, a very long time ago I might add, quite a lot of my questions were about my reaction to certain situations where I was armed.
Being ex army I had to be very careful how I answered as an armed civilian reacts very differently to an armed soldier.
 
Last edited:
And when are you going to train all the police officers, I doubt if most police officers want to be armed anyway,
i love the way people who have never had to actually shoot someone think it's easy, as was shown in the shooting on the underground and the problems it caused, emptying a magazine into the back of the head of a suspected terrorist , does not go down well with the British public, further more all you are actually doing is giving a false sence of security, I remember talking to a Israeli soldier who had been guarding tourist sites in Israel , " we all have to do our national service, but we don,t get any bullets as there is more chance of us shooting each other than a terrorist.( he is now a vet)
 
My whole point to this thread , my thought being exactly as said above

Able to respond faster

Yes above also right , it's not going to stop or protect against a suicide bomber but as in previous attacks some are with weapons .....surely if a few beat bobbies nearby on patrol are able to return fire it might save a life ?
Or even if lucky halt it altogether

Yes "some" cops are armed but if ALL were then only needs one to be lucky with a shot .

Also , ... Yes baton , taser , whatever first but what would you pull first if arriving on scene to gunfire ?

I fear this is a thin edge to a big wedge & will only get worse

How do we police against attacks from these scum ?


Already proved they don't need guns either ... Just access to a vehicle
( Nice )

[emoji29][emoji29][emoji29]

Paul
 
NO!!
They can't be trusted to be safe with a firearm.
(take a walk around an airport, see how many carry across the chest and finger on trigger)

Neil. :)
 
I think the Police should be given (if not already!) an array of immoblising options, ie: baton rounds, bean bag rounds, tasers, and ultimately lethal firearms, and depending on the situation as ordered by their Gold Commanders they can delpoy them

I believe at this point in time they have CS gas, tasers, and firearms, although I do not know what kind of ammunition they are authorised to use in their weapons
 
There is no easy answer but i think intellegeince is the key, like others have said the fact polis are armed in other countries dosen't seem to put them off or do an awful lot of good. The shooters where in that theatre/gig (battacarn?) for quite a while
Althou some random nutter/saddo will be almost imposible to stop.

Touch wood so far uk seems to be getting of lightlty with it.

But there is no point in worrying ur still far more likely to be killed pulling on ur trousers in morning than dieing in a terrorist attack.
So just carry on as normal
 
To add to the equation, in my policing days I sued to ask colleagues about this issue, "Would you like to carry a firearm?" A surprising number said they wouldn't, not because they thought they couldn't learn to shoot, or anything about shooting. The reason given was quite often along the lines of "I wouldn't want the responsibility of taking someone's life."

My response was to ask what they would do if they encountered a situation such as a hostage taker with a knife. The response was that they would call for a firearms unit to deal with it. What do you think of a police officer who is not willing to do something that needs doing but is willing to call on a colleague to do it for him? Not because he's a lousy shot, but because he has some sort of moral objection. Me? Utter contempt.
 
There is no easy answer but i think intellegeince is the key, like others have said the fact polis are armed in other countries dosen't seem to put them off or do an awful lot of good. The shooters where in that theatre/gig (battacarn?) for quite a while
Althou some random nutter/saddo will be almost imposible to stop.

Touch wood so far uk seems to be getting of lightlty with it.

But there is no point in worrying ur still far more likely to be killed pulling on ur trousers in morning than dieing in a terrorist attack.
So just carry on as normal

Indeed. This also applies to just about all crime. In fact, the police might as well stop routine patrols and keep all their officer back at the station until someone calls for a specific crime in progress when they can attend at a convenient time.

Oops! I forgot. That's what they do already.
 
Back
Top