Police firearms with under powered binoculars

Herbi1969

Well-Known Member
Greetings all!

read in the Metro this morning, and frankly I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned it sooner about the GMP sniper team, providing surveillance support for the Tory conference

http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...rity-march-during-tory-conference--ZkCOo_TXDg

I can imagine the chief constable for GMP is sitting in his office holding his head in his hands, I quote

"And they [the guns] are used for their powerful sight, which is stronger than any pair of binoculars. They are not there to shoot people"

SO what you are saying is we (GMP) advocate firearms officers using the rifle scope (which is attached to the rifle) as an observational tool?????

I hope to god that the spokesman is taken out of context!

I weep I truly do.

What do we think people??
 
in a military and I would assume Police role the marksman/rifleman's primary optical aid is the rifle sight for observation and spotting in most situations, the spotter on the other hand for sniper roles has more of a responsibility to locate, spot and call the shots with bins or spotting scope.

There's no benefit spotting a threat with binoculars as the marksman to then have to revert to the rifle sight and re-aquire the threat, especially in a fluid situation where that moment of switch could loose the target. The spotter though if identifying would guide the marksman to the target.

edit, we all know not to point our sporting rifle at something unless we intent to shoot it because that's our sporting etiquette. But operationally firearms officers need to point the rifle at anything that may be a threat to them or people they are their to protect.
 
Last edited:
in a military and I would assume Police role the marksman/rifleman's primary optical aid is the rifle sight for observation and spotting in most situations, the spotter on the other hand for sniper roles has more of a responsibility to locate, spot and call the shots with bins or spotting scope.

There's no benefit spotting a threat with binoculars as the marksman to then have to revert to the rifle sight and re-aquire the threat, especially in a fluid situation where that moment of switch could loose the target. The spotter though if identifying would guide the marksman to the target.

What he said! Excellent post from Paul.
 

They couldn't give a toss what your FEO would say 99.9% of firearms officers don't even have a Licence to worry about anyway. And who said the snipers rifle was loaded and made ready? From experience doing the exact job as mentioned the charged magazine would be at the side of the rifle ready to insert or inserted and bolt closed on an empty chamber
 
They couldn't give a toss what your FEO would say 99.9% of firearms officers don't even have a Licence to worry about anyway. And who said the snipers rifle was loaded and made ready? From experience doing the exact job as mentioned the charged magazine would be at the side of the rifle ready to insert or inserted and bolt closed on an empty chamber

Things must have changed since I jacked the job in Martin. We both did the same training, but the policy of our department was ALWAYS to have weapons fully loaded and ready when deployed. Of course, as you know, every force has different rules which they change like the wind when a new boss comes along! :D

Anyway, I trust you are keeping well and we should have a catch up some time mate. :cool:
 
I don't see what all the fuss is about I've never heard of a police marksman accidentally shooting someone I'd much prefer all police armed just in case
 
I don't see what all the fuss is about I've never heard of a police marksman accidentally shooting someone I'd much prefer all police armed just in case

Not sure about that. Do we really want to see all our Police armed? There would likely be a lot more people shot by them.
 
shakey google gmp firearms officer shoots other officer ,:popcorn:2008

Oh yes he deliberately went out to shoot another officer..NOT!
That was a training exercise where Tez (RIP) was playing the role of an armed criminal and xxxxxx was put in a situation where he did exactly what would have been expected and justified in a real life scenario. Using a special type of ammunition that was designed to shoot tyres out (which was the role of xxxxxx) however he reacted to a more imminent threat!!
 
shakey google gmp firearms officer shoots other officer ,:popcorn:2008
Just did and that was a deliberate shooting with horrible outcome it was a badly thought out training exercise I would guess police driving or a night in the cells are a far bigger risk


Edit not blaming the copper that fired the fatal shot he meant to shoot not kill was the way I read it and meant it to come across sorry if caused offence
 
Last edited:
wingy i wasnt getting personal he said he hadnt heard of any officers getting shot accidently and i refered him to that case ,we all know it was accidental but it does happen ,
 
wingy i wasnt getting personal he said he hadnt heard of any officers getting shot accidently and i refered him to that case ,we all know it was accidental but it does happen ,

Doug no offence taken these threads just p i s s me off and I shouldn't get drawn in but often do, TEZ or Ian Terry was a good personal friend and I had a lot of involvement immediately after the incident.
I'm now going to log off before it winds me up anymore
 
Doug no offence taken these threads just p i s s me off and I shouldn't get drawn in but often do, TEZ or Ian Terry was a good personal friend and I had a lot of involvement immediately after the incident.
I'm now going to log off before it winds me up anymore
sorry martin mate there was no malice intended or infered regards doug,
 
I doubt the wider Public gives a toss what the operational policy is for deployment of rifle mounted scopes in the context of general surveillance and will simply see - as the OP endeavoured to point out - a certain incredulity that these guys were so publicly drawing a bead on the likes of you and I as we gathered at the Labour and Conservative conferences.

A PR exercise that has unfortunately backfired if any element of the deployment was so intended as a very visual show of anti-terror strength?

K‎
 
I doubt the wider Public gives a toss what the operational policy is for deployment of rifle mounted scopes in the context of general surveillance and will simply see - as the OP endeavoured to point out - a certain incredulity that these guys were so publicly drawing a bead on the likes of you and I as we gathered at the Labour and Conservative conferences.

A PR exercise that has unfortunately backfired if any element of the deployment was so intended as a very visual show of anti-terror strength?

K‎

In my view the bit that has backfired is the frankly daft statement that the rifles were deployed just to use the scopes for observation. What's wrong with stating the facts: "Police riflemen were deployed to a high profile political/public event because there is a high terrorist threat alert in force." As pointed out above by guys with more knowledge of the subject than me, the operational procedure is to observe persons of interest/incidents through the rifle scopes so that the weapon is on target if required. We all need to take a step back and remember this is not a sporting situation, it's a paramilitary operation in a crowed place which could become a matter of life and death. What would be the reaction if some bearded nutter yelling religious slogans and brandishing a machete or firearm burst from the crowd, headed for a senior politician and there was inadequate immediate response?
 
In my view the bit that has backfired is the frankly daft statement that the rifles were deployed just to use the scopes for observation. What's wrong with stating the facts: "Police riflemen were deployed to a high profile political/public event because there is a high terrorist threat alert in force." As pointed out above by guys with more knowledge of the subject than me, the operational procedure is to observe persons of interest/incidents through the rifle scopes so that the weapon is on target if required. We all need to take a step back and remember this is not a sporting situation, it's a paramilitary operation in a crowed place which could become a matter of life and death. What would be the reaction if some bearded nutter yelling religious slogans and brandishing a machete or firearm burst from the crowd, headed for a senior politician and there was inadequate immediate response?


A more probable response would be a double tap from one of around a half dozen close protection officers.
 
In my view the bit that has backfired is the frankly daft statement that the rifles were deployed just to use the scopes for observation. What's wrong with stating the facts: "Police riflemen were deployed to a high profile political/public event because there is a high terrorist threat alert in force." As pointed out above by guys with more knowledge of the subject than me, the operational procedure is to observe persons of interest/incidents through the rifle scopes so that the weapon is on target if required. We all need to take a step back and remember this is not a sporting situation, it's a paramilitary operation in a crowed place which could become a matter of life and death. What would be the reaction if some bearded nutter yelling religious slogans and brandishing a machete or firearm burst from the crowd, headed for a senior politician and there was inadequate immediate response?

Who mentioned a "sporting situation"??

K
 
Back
Top