Armed police

[better dead than red]

And what if they had a dead man's switch?

Then they have a dead man's switch. Sometimes you have to take the best option, knowing there is no perfect option.

What if a squad of armed terrorists fast rope down out of a helicopter? What if a van pulls up to a local government buulding and ten bad guys with rifles and body armour pile out? There are always what if scenarios. I suppose it's up to those in police, military and security services to think of scenarios and try to find a way to counter them.

All that being said, I'm not arguing against your statement. Merely adding to it maybe? In any case, I don't live in the UK so it's not my circus and not my monkey. However, I'm aware many in off topic fancy themselves as experts in the goings on and domestic policies of other nations. :)

 

[better dead than red]

The Met need to first consider adding more Police.

That would probably be a good start, yes.

 

[better dead than red]

The Met need to first consider adding more Police.

One thing I noticed about the fear and distrust "con" option is they said many are against it because it causes fear and distrust? Who are the "many?" They quoted an MP from Tottenham.

Who are the others in many? Are they "community leaders" that are community organisers and essentially anti-police in some cases? Are they part of the criminal class that appear to be legit business people but are actually the gangs' shot callers?

I wonder if they spoke to older residents who lived in those neighbourhoods for decades and watch them deteriorate the point where they're afraid to go outdoors to the market or other places in their daily lives? Or to working families that can only afford to live in these areas but are honest people been trying to live honest lives but are afraid every day when their kids leave for school?

 

[FantasyIreland]

That would probably be a good start, yes.

The entire Police Service is scandalously understaffed,underpaid and over worked - it's no surprise cops are stressed to fuck,making poor decisions and leaving in their droves.

 

[dannyboy29]

Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and the UK that i am aware of.

There will always be tragic examples of "if only", but given the still ongoing controversy around the Mendes case from 5 (?) years ago, even on this very thread, doesn't that highlight the issues with giving more coppers more guns.

Let's say the copper had at parliament had a gun and he shot the assailant - all is good with the world yeah? The following week, another random person runs at him with what looks like a knife, copper shoots random guy, turns out it was just a phone - an extra dead person, another innocent dead person.

Now if you can provide evidence of a country where the introduction of firearms has lead to a reduction in crimes i will be all ears.

If the copper yells freeze, get on the ground, then if there's nothing to worry about the guy/girl with the phone will get down. If he ignores the order and continues to charge at the copper then wack a few bullets in the legs no problem. Im not saying shoot to kill just neutralise.

People might start to show a bit more respect to the police if the option of more force was there. At the minute there's much little Many who's 5ft4 weighing 8 stone can do if some beast decides to go on a rampage with a knife.

 

[Blue tube]

Can you explain how police with guns would be a deterrent using evidence from countries where police are routinely armed?

The simple fact is, that when people make a choice to commit a criminal act, they are not planning to get caught and therefore the deterrent of any punishment is minimised in their decision making process.

I would’ve thought that’s pretty obvious? People would rather get locked up than shot to death wouldn’t they? No evidence from me though.

I think a lot of people in recent years have started to notice that sentences at least appear to be getting more lenient and are more willing to risk it. Whether they are getting more lenient I don’t know but when you read the MEN website it suggests they are

 

[better dead than red]

If the copper yells freeze, get on the ground, then if there's nothing to worry about the guy/girl with the phone will get down. If he ignores the order and continues to charge at the copper then wack a few bullets in the legs no problem. Im not saying shoot to kill just neutralise.

People might start to show a bit more respect to the police if the option of more force was there. At the minute there's much little Many who's 5ft4 weighing 8 stone can do if some beast decides to go on a rampage with a knife.

All armed police are taught to neutralise the threat, not to just kill. They aren't soldiers. Those that want to carry guns in hopes of getting to use them should hopefully be weeded out in the application process. Do people sometimes die? Yes, unfortunately, but that isn't the goal.

I'll add, consciously deciding to try and shoot the legs of an assailant isn't the best way to do it. They are moving, you (the police) should be moving offline if you are being charged at and the legs are a relatively small target, which will be moving as well. You'll be getting an adrenaline dump, if you haven't already gotten it, making your fine motor skills harder to use. Shooting centre mass is what the armed police officer will be taught. It gives you a bigger target thus a better chance to stop the threat.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

I'll give you the whataboutism - it was probably unnecessary, although since you have already replied to this post, your delayed reaction to it was quite amusing.

I will acknowledge that knife crime is up since 2011, but as per my previous response, violent and sexual crimes as a whole (which one assumes includes knife crime) are down significantly since their peaks in the 90's. So whilst violent crime is rising at 20% per annum, it is from a historically low base and the actual numbers remain relatively low. That is not to say that it doesn't need to be addressed, just that it needs to be looked at in proper context.

As for your frankly moronic desire to put more guns on the streets of the UK, you moved to a gun toting paradise, please stay there. I hear virtually zero demand from people who live in the UK to arm regular police officers - your uninformed thoughts on the matter are neither needed nor welcome.

I would take all of the money that you want to spend arming our police officers and pour it into youth resources and community policing, two areas that have been massively cut in terms of funding under austerity and two areas which would actually positively impact the number of crimes and criminals on our streets.

Good luck with that!

Given the current, at least 30 yr, trajectory of the number of crimes and criminals, it’ll take a lot more than goodwill and a few quid diverted from guns to protect police to fix what ails Manchester and the rest of urban England.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

How many police officers, in a gun soaked culture as the US, actually shot their weapons in the line of duty last year?

You’d be surprised how few. There are waaaay more officers who retire without ever having shot their gun than did.

The notion that the US is the Wild Wild West is from YouTube!

Police use their weapons as DEFENSIVE TOOLS, not offensive. And, they use it to neutralize the threat to themselves far more than any other reason, such as chasing down a criminal. Yes, we have all seen a video or two, but having had the training, seen the real thing, and being ready, willing and, more importantly, able to use a gun to defend my life, many of you have no idea about actual guns and their use by police.

Good luck with the meltdown of what is left of British society.

 

[i kne albert davy]

And what if they had a dead man's switch?

What if they had their's heads bullet proofed possible but highly unlikely.