West Mercia Police not even remotely right?
- Thread starter Greymaster
- Start date
bobthedug
Well-Known Member
Ok, I'll take you to task here.
Firstly I apologise for getting guy/girl mixed up in my post. I give you that although the gender of the alleged offender is of little importance.
I await to be amazed though. As far as who you are or what you do, I fail to see the relevance as you continually post negative and often clearly wrong comments about police powers and procedures.
I have taken the liberty of going back through your previous posts to confirm that indeed is the case. I see though that the gender thing is an issue for you and you see the police as being "sexist" especially concerning the recent publications of guidelines where there is Domestic Violence and Certificate holders under the same roof.
Having read it several times I cannot see where you gain that from though.
I am at a loss as to who you know would have any bearing on your posts which show a lack of knowledge of police procedures.
Also, it is indeed the "boys" on the ground as you say ( it can also be the "girls", see you have done it as well ) who collate the information and make recommendations. Also on the ground would be a Tactical Firearms Advisor who would be in constant communication with the Incident Commander who would normally be at least a Superintendant or above. He or she would wish to take the Advisors advice should it go belly up, they do not wish that their own head be on the block. So if the advisor recommends 18 officers attend, if 18 are available, that's what would happen.
So again, I have shown that you do not know what goes on behind the scenes, but are keen to criticise.
I'm sure that there are numerous anti police websites which will applaud your comments and not take you to task but be prepared to be challenged here.
I don't think there's any suggestion of an intruder, but yes, a report of an armed person in the building, however no reports of an immediate threat to life or hostage situation
do you:
i) kick the door down and rush the building, shouting 'ARMED POLICE'
ii) calmly surround the house, evacuate the neighbours, phone the house and ask the householders to come out calmly with their hands where you can see them
I'd strongly suggest that a risk assessment would see option ii) as the sensible cause of action - particularly given the known history of accidents where option i) has been taken!
Last edited:
kevhumps
Well-Known Member
Thought it, but couldn't say it!!!!!
Kev.
Morgy
Well-Known Member
When I need medical advice I seek expert help.
So I suggest we leave these matters to the professionals!
When we leave it to the professionals, we get Mid Staffordshire NHS scandals - or in this case Azelle Rodney, Harry Stanley, John Shorthouse, James Ashley, Stephen Waldorf, Abdul Kahar, etc...
Cernunnos
Well-Known Member
I assume you have conducted detailed research into these individual cases. Or are you simply reciting a list of names linked to police shootings? You mention the Harry Stanley case. The officers involved in this shooting were given information about an individual in possession of a firearm wrapped in a plastic bag. When challenged, Stanley is reported to have levelled this object, at the officers concerned. He was shot. Unfortunately, it was a table leg. Stanley's lack of compliance may have been linked to his previous convictions for armed robbery and GBH.
The officers then endured seven years of enquiry, prior to a US expert in conflict behaviour studies, Prof. Bill Lewinski, providing testimony which corroborated the police officers account.
Force Science Institute
BBC NEWS | Magazine | What happens when police kill?
Whilst shootings of innocent individuals has happened due to poor intelligence and ineptitude (Jean Charles De Menezes is a prime example), unpalatable as it may be, some of the individuals who have been shot were partly responsible for the outcome.
Azelle Rodney was in a vehicle which was en route to commit an armed robbery. There were several firearms in the vehicle within reach. What were his intentions towards the police at that moment of contact? The officer involved in this has now requested a judicial review of this incident following the ruling by Sir Christopher Holland which stated, “There was no lawful justification for shooting Azelle Rodney so as to kill him." This is subject to debate.
I read your plan for dealing with a firearms incident with interest. It is very neat on paper but simplistically assumes that the occupants of the house, who are alleged to be in possession of a firearm, will be compliant and dutifully exit the building with, " Their hands where you can see them," as you put it. Yes, police firearms operations have gone disastrously wrong sometimes. On occasion they have been successful and have prevented some rather violent, unpleasant individuals from furthering their aims.
I could discuss in detail the incidences surrounding the names you have listed. Mistakes have been made in some of them. Others are not quite as cut-and-dried. However, from reading some of the posts on this subject, there are some intransigent opinions which seem to have been formed without consideration of all the facts. There may be no reports of immediate threat to life or a hostage scenario, but these incidents tend to develop rapidly and sometimes decisions, whether right or wrong, have to be made.
If nothing else, I suppose this makes for an interesting conversation with a diverse range of views.
Cheers,
Scott
Last edited:
news of the world
Well-Known Member
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
was about to ask which one is Keith and which one is Michelle!!
Morgy
Well-Known Member
Personally I have the utmost respect for those in the Police who find themselves in these positions.
Not too long ago, two female Police Officers from GMP attended at a house where Dale Cregan emptied 30 odd shots from a handgun into them and then threw hand grenades as they lay helpless on the floor, do Police Officers continue to attend at these incidents despite what happened to these unarmed Officers? That takes guts!
What of the split second an armed Police Officer has to react to someone looking down the barrel of a rifle having been ordered not to move, but that individual, in their infinite wisdom, make a sudden movement leaving the Officer with a split second to determine whether that individual is reaching for a gun in order to take the life of an Officer or a member of the public, making the wrong decision can mean the Copper ends up in prison, or years of hindsight theorists who were not there, didn't see first hand what was happening and now seek to close the stable door long after the horse has bolted with blame laid at the door of the Police. What of the stress for the Police Officer and their family and friends after these incidents?
In the aftermath do we still have "ARV's" roaming our streets, Police Officers knowing colleagues are facing murder charges for dealing with deadly situations?
Perhaps you should apply for the job of conducting these operations, I assume these incidents would end with your appointment!
landkeeper
Well-Known Member
i think being dragged from your bed in the wee small hours then kept and questioned for hours followed by a cold walk home in your underwear would **** anyone off
it's one thing making a mistake but then inflicting those indignities on innocent folk is a step too far in my book
it's one thing making a mistake but then inflicting those indignities on innocent folk is a step too far in my book
Accounts that were so similar as to not only be disbelieved by two separate juries, but that the IPCC says both lacked credibility and directly led to the allegations of fabrication.
The fact remains that in the examples I've given, in the cold light of day the police have been shown to have been wrong in each of them, the point is that the tactics applied all led to a 'high noon' confrontation where something went wrong and people who shouldn't have been shot, were.
The 'system' creates a confrontation in situations where there was no immediate need for one and you create the opportunity for these mistakes to happen.
Still a significantly lower risk to all than storming the castle
Of course there are scenario's where immediate reactions take place - however they are few and far between, there is a huge amount of psychology at play in dealing with incidents whereby the wrong approach can lead to a crisis/showdown - in fact the classic bank job scenario is a good example of where the police put 'catching crims' ahead of protecting the public - rather than arresting for conspiracy early (with a chance they'll get off) they wait for the high noon crescendo of stopping them in flagrante.
Its not a critisism of the bravery and commitment of the police doing the job, its a significant systemic fault that puts them in a position where there is a high risk of mistakes happening, rather then defusing the situation in the least risk.
Last edited:
Cernunnos
Well-Known Member
Labrat,
Quite often juries and the IPCC have their own agenda. Most of our societies institutions are not truly objective or independent, including the police.
In the examples you refer to, the police have made mistakes. This is different from consciously setting out to shoot someone and then intentionally lying, which I think may be what's being implied by some posts. Forgive me if I'm mistaken. Have you looked into the effects of perceptual narrowing in police shootings? It makes for interesting reading in relation to the recall and presentation of evidence. This is why I think there should be a move towards helmet and/or weapon mounted cameras, where the evidence is easily viewable and incontrovertible.
Reaction Time - Police Shooting Study :: Blue Sheepdog
Critical Incident Amnesia- Memory Influences Before The Critical Incident
http://www.aele.org/law/2008FPAUG/wb-19.pdf
I concur wholeheartedly that an intelligence - led approach is always favourable to more kinetic solutions. Again, this is not always viable depending on the circumstances. This may interest you, it's from a North American perspective, but it does make some observations about the militarisation of police tactics and the resulting consequences:
Botched Paramilitary Police Raids | Cato Institute
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp50.pdf
Your statement that containing a building is lower risk than effecting an entry is self-evident, but still does not take into account the inherent variables of these situations.
You make a valid point when you refer to the mindset of some police personnel who are more focused on a resolution, than safely managing a situation. I think much of this stems from outdated, insufficient training and the processes which are used to select and recruit police officers. The quality of training is a product of an available budget. Sadly, I don't think this will change anytime soon. Quite often, the police are doing the best they can with weak, self-interested leadership, poor management, insufficient resources, training and personnel.
Thank you for your comments and all the best.
Scott
Quite often juries and the IPCC have their own agenda. Most of our societies institutions are not truly objective or independent, including the police.
In the examples you refer to, the police have made mistakes. This is different from consciously setting out to shoot someone and then intentionally lying, which I think may be what's being implied by some posts. Forgive me if I'm mistaken. Have you looked into the effects of perceptual narrowing in police shootings? It makes for interesting reading in relation to the recall and presentation of evidence. This is why I think there should be a move towards helmet and/or weapon mounted cameras, where the evidence is easily viewable and incontrovertible.
Reaction Time - Police Shooting Study :: Blue Sheepdog
Critical Incident Amnesia- Memory Influences Before The Critical Incident
http://www.aele.org/law/2008FPAUG/wb-19.pdf
I concur wholeheartedly that an intelligence - led approach is always favourable to more kinetic solutions. Again, this is not always viable depending on the circumstances. This may interest you, it's from a North American perspective, but it does make some observations about the militarisation of police tactics and the resulting consequences:
Botched Paramilitary Police Raids | Cato Institute
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp50.pdf
Your statement that containing a building is lower risk than effecting an entry is self-evident, but still does not take into account the inherent variables of these situations.
You make a valid point when you refer to the mindset of some police personnel who are more focused on a resolution, than safely managing a situation. I think much of this stems from outdated, insufficient training and the processes which are used to select and recruit police officers. The quality of training is a product of an available budget. Sadly, I don't think this will change anytime soon. Quite often, the police are doing the best they can with weak, self-interested leadership, poor management, insufficient resources, training and personnel.
Thank you for your comments and all the best.
Scott
Last edited:
Cernunnos, I think that to a large extent we're on a similar track.
I am very much talking about what generally comes down to error rather than deliberate actions, and its connected to both 'tunnel vision' and training patterns ("When the only solution you have is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail.")
If you look at the human factors analysis that has been done in both civil airline accidents and military environments, you can see that its the patterns that you look for, its not enough to write things off as human error, errors and accidents are rarely if ever down to a single cause, there are multiple factors at play and responsibility for an error lies in the system that leads you there
Can I point you towards this:
http://leonardo-in-flight.nl/PDF/FieldGuide%20to%20Human%20Error.PDF
to see where I am coming from, its about understanding the gateways that lead to an error/accident and that give you the opportunity to systemically reduce their occurrence and severity, its simply not good enough to put a policeman behind a gun kicking in the door of a flat after telling him that the bloke inside might be armed, and then blame him when it goes wrong - the whole system needs to be broken down and analysed to prevent him getting in that position.
I am very much talking about what generally comes down to error rather than deliberate actions, and its connected to both 'tunnel vision' and training patterns ("When the only solution you have is a hammer, every problem begins to look like a nail.")
If you look at the human factors analysis that has been done in both civil airline accidents and military environments, you can see that its the patterns that you look for, its not enough to write things off as human error, errors and accidents are rarely if ever down to a single cause, there are multiple factors at play and responsibility for an error lies in the system that leads you there
Can I point you towards this:
http://leonardo-in-flight.nl/PDF/FieldGuide%20to%20Human%20Error.PDF
to see where I am coming from, its about understanding the gateways that lead to an error/accident and that give you the opportunity to systemically reduce their occurrence and severity, its simply not good enough to put a policeman behind a gun kicking in the door of a flat after telling him that the bloke inside might be armed, and then blame him when it goes wrong - the whole system needs to be broken down and analysed to prevent him getting in that position.
Cernunnos
Well-Known Member
Labrat,
Thanks for posting that link. It's nicely explains the organisational, environmental and psychological factors that influence peoples behaviour. The introduction to chapter 7, which describes the pilot who was awarded damages for being fired after refusing to fly in dangerous conditions, also shows the personal consequences of thinking as an individual and going against an employers or peers expectations.
I think this is something which would be beneficial for managers in safety-critical occupations to be more aware of. However, sometimes individuals in management positions suffer from arrogance and the illusion of competence.
I've saved a copy of the Field Guide to Human Error for future reference.
Thanks for posting that link. It's nicely explains the organisational, environmental and psychological factors that influence peoples behaviour. The introduction to chapter 7, which describes the pilot who was awarded damages for being fired after refusing to fly in dangerous conditions, also shows the personal consequences of thinking as an individual and going against an employers or peers expectations.
I think this is something which would be beneficial for managers in safety-critical occupations to be more aware of. However, sometimes individuals in management positions suffer from arrogance and the illusion of competence.
I've saved a copy of the Field Guide to Human Error for future reference.
Similar threads
