Poll: Arming the UK Police

[Westerschwelle]

Why do the british think every other policeman is a psychotic maniac? Because perhaps the real issue isn't the gun laws but the british policeforce hiring guidelines :-/

 

[EvilPicnic]

OK people, reality check here.

Is gun violence in the UK out of control? Are cops getting killed left and right? Are citizens getting shot up in monthly school shootings? Are there constant calls in Parliament for the police to be given lethal weapons?

Errr... no

It's not that there isn't violent crime. Criminals over here are violent too, they just prefer weapons on a smaller scale.

In fact, most people in the UK have never seen or heard a gun fired in anger in their entire lives. I know I certainly haven't, and I've lived all my life in London.

Giving everyday cops the power to kill isn't even an issue in the UK, in fact, most of the debate is about whether the police have too much power. But generally I think we're pretty ok with our police force just how it is.

Even the police themselves don't want to be armed. In the Police Federation's most recent (2006) Officer/Arming survey, 82% of respondents were against the routine arming of police.

Indeed, in the year 2007-08, there were 6,780 Authorised Firearms Officers, 21,181 police operations in which firearms were authorised throughout England and Wales but only 7 incidents in which conventional firearms were used.

And reading this thread is actually quite farcical when you split it along national lines - all of the US posts are gloriously incredulous that such a system could work, whereas nearly all of the Brit posts are just like, 'What? is this an issue? We're getting along just fine...'

Whilst you US folks naturally have your massive 'gun=freedom' association we, simply, don't. And though I completely respect your 'right to bear arms' as it applies to police, please respect our right to keep our police force free from such things.

 

[Westerschwelle]

Well, There is a lot of organised crime in NYC and well, they might still be a tad iffy about that big thing that went down about 10 years ago.. better safe than sorry.

It's really only show of force to make the public feel better. A policeman with an assault rifle can't do anything a "normal" policeman with a handgun can't.

 

[kurupt87]

Snip

Hey OP, could you do this thread again, but with 8 options on the poll. Those options being two of each of yours, the difference being "I am American and..." and "I am not American and...".

eg.
Option A - American
Option A - Not American
Option B - American
Option B - Not American
etc

I think that would yield an interesting result.

 

[gibboss28]

I'm okay with the way things are now.

 

[Lionsfan]

To all those saying that we should legalise firearms, I honestly don't see your logic. This is a mental patient with a machete, in america he would have been a mental patient armed with a gun.

Contrary to all you're stereotypes and bad jokes getting a firearm in the US isn't as easy as buying a Machete, with that you go to the freaking Superstore half a block down the road and you're golden, which leads to situations like this. In most states he probably wouldn't pass a background check and get cleared for a permit any type of gun and in others he would still have a three day waiting period to buy a rifle and even then it's a crime to carry them around in most states

 

[Blue_vision]

I really don't see why police officers shouldn't have firearms. They're pretty much the only people on the planet that should actually have them, to use as a last resort in the protection of the officer or any bystanders/victims.

Given, I don't think that arming the officers and shooting this guy would have been the best solution. Officers should have some stronger less-lethal weapons to use in these cases, like a taser (that's only used in an emergency one step below requiring to use a gun, mind you,) or riot gun standard among squad cars.

And of course, the ultimate solution to this particular problem would of course improving the mental health system, which is something that pretty much all countries need to work on.

EDIT: Of course, all officers need to receive rigorous training in using firearms as well as less-lethal weapons, and need to show they are adept at using it only as a last resort. Officers also need to be better screened in general, to make sure we only get the best people in charge of the public's security.

 

[Westerschwelle]

Option 1 - Not American

But in the end the British have to live with it and it's only my opinion. And if this really isn't an issue in the UK then why the hell did we have this discussion anyway???

 

[F'Angus]

We currently have specialised units armed with both lethal and non-lethal firearms, for the moment I think that's enough. I do however think that we should arm all UK police with tazers rather than having specific officers carry those.
I think that if we arm all of our Police with lethal firearms that would probably make things worse, gangs and dealers might start thinking they need more guns too. We're only a small country, American police need guns because their cities are Huge and it takes a while for an officer to get backup.

 

[AWC Viper]

I find it ironic that I could walk down the street with a pocket knife and be arrested for carrying a dangerous weapon and the guys who are arresting me have CS spray, batons and handcuffs. Hypocrisy much? I think no one should have guns.

But that's the point of the police, to be the higher power. To serve and protect
If they didn't have guns or any form of weapons what's to stop some muscle head from punching the officer a new one?

The officer has friends and training, and the police, CPS and juries take assaults on police officers very seriously.

But that's the point, why wait until it's already happened.

My point is, That the Police are not ordinary people, they're trained to use those weapons at the right time, Hell Take a note from the Queensland Police Service Arm the police with a handgun, tazer, baton and CS spray. that way they have an alternate option from shooting the perp.

 

[Hashime]

1. The cop putting his arm out at the guy with the machete is dumb defense against a guy with a machete.

2. I am from NYC and am happy that all of our police have handguns, and a select corps carry AR-15 rifles.

3. That video is too f**king funny. I always joke that the NYPD could invade and take over Canada, I guess the same would be true of the UK.

or option 5, a long sword would have come in handy as well.

Sorry, what? The NYPD could invade Canada?

You do realize Canadian cops carry fire arms, and our swat teams are equip to the same level as yours are. You also forget that canadians can and do own guns, we just don't have a societal fetish for them like the US does.

 

[mightybozz]

I'm loving how many people are quoting info and statistics from the various Wikipedia pages on UK and US gun law.

 

[Angryranter101]

I'll just say the next time a man with a machette comes at me, I'll wish for a cop with a taser. Guns only mean that criminals feel the need for guns. How many times have we seen people being gunned down in America for no other reason than the cops got twitchy? Do you see cops killing people with pepper spray by accidnet? Or if a stray tuncheon were to hit me in the head during a riot would my brains be splattered across the protesters behind me?

I don't know how many people die in the US due to cops pulling the trigger but I'd say its a damn sight more than the number of machette weilding mental pateint incidents were likely to encounter here in the UK. If guns were widely available then fine, go right ahead, but their not and the only thing you'll be doing is starting an arms race with every serious gang out there.

I still think the taser thing wasn't given a proper try. What I heard was it was scrapped after a cop fucked about and killed someone with it. So what? do we get rid of tuncheons for killing that protester?

Guns only lead for criminals to feel the need for a gun. Its not a matter of "Well their illegal" because people still get them and they'll feel far more obliged to go out and buy one if they think someone is going to be shooting at them.

Accuracy and efficiency has nothing to do with it. The famous "Let her have it" scenario could easily have been repeated with a police officer in their stead. If you have a gun, you are far mopre able to kill someone, if I have a brick I'm far more likely to wound someone severely so I don't carry one for self defence.

 

[Hashime]

If the UK police were to be armed with fire arms at all times it would force criminals to do the same. It in my opinion would be counter productive.

 

[LuckyClover95]

I loved those guys commentary
The end where the policeman maced himself, WHUT THE FOOK.
But yeah, that was ridiculous. I say that they carry firearms.

 

[Westerschwelle]

Sorry, what? The NYPD could invade Canada?

You do realize Canadian cops carry fire arms, and our swat teams are equip to the same level as yours are. You also forget that canadians can and do own guns, we just don't have a societal fetish for them like the US does.

Don't let it get to you, everyone I now thinks Canada is way better than the USofA.
And their arrogance is what gets them into terroristic trouble all the time anyway.

 

[TerribleAssassin]

I'm no conspiracy nut that owns a room full of automatic weapons, or anything -- I'm gunless. But I have always held the strong belief that the people should have the ability to be as well equipped as the government they elect. Revolution mightn't seem relevant, but there may well come a time when it is needed.

But that's just my view. I can't offer any evidence or hold up my side in a debate. I just feel that way.

No, no need to backhand it. I agree with you entirely. The most dangerous government is that which has no reason to fear its people. At least, that's my motto. I can't see the police being turned against the public any time soon in the UK (we make heavy use of 'specials' across London, warranted police officers who are just MOP volunteers but with full police powers), but it's an idea that isn't wholly preposterous and one that's definitely come to pass historically in other nations.

If the police can have guns, I should be able to.

People in the UK can't have guns? I mean that is tough. In NYC it is difficult to get a firearm for everywhere carry, but you are allowed to have one in your home for protection.

One may apply to own a .22 rifle or some limited shotguns for private use (i.e. no, you mayn't have an AA-12 for 'pest control'), but it's generally declined if one lives in the city. This was due to a massive overreaction to a school shooting some years back. Dunblane was horrific tragedy, but these few isolated incidents (whilst horrendous) are heavily reported whereas crimes foiled or abandoned due to fear of armed MOP reprisal aren't.

Are you effen kidding me?
Does anyone remember Iain Tomlinson? No? Mkay....
ARV's are trained very well from what I've seen - I've never heard of them killing innocents. This is fine.

Give every EDL-member bobby boulders with a beer belly and a hatred of hippies a gun and we are up shit creek.

Also more guns in the UK means ... more guns in the UK. Look at our murder statistics, look at amuricuh's. The poliss lose things, sell things after hours and have stuff nicked from them: crack, smack, cars; let's not make it crack, smack, cars, and guns, eh?

As I mentioned farther up (no offense intended, I rarely read through too), directly comparing statistics between countries is tricky because so many other factors produce those stats. For instance, the UK has amongst the best social security and public healthcare in the world, the US barely has either. You're not going to starve or die of easily preventable disease in the UK no matter your circumstances, not so for the US.

Whilst Tomlinson's death was a tragedy and in my mind a clear abuse of police powers (the shove is acceptable if people are deliberately attempting to detain the police at a scene where MOPs are in danger, but not that hard and the baton shouldn't have even been extended, let alone used), that doesn't equate to 'all coppers are abusive and want to hurt MOPs'. How are the Police supposed to protect the public if they need to deploy their entire regional force to detain a single man? Think of all the crimes that probably occurred in those 20 minutes whilst all the officers were at one location.

Lack of guns for protection isn't much of issue in the UK as most criminals don't have guns either, so we're safe in that respect ;-)

But most criminals do carry a deadly weapon that we're currently unable to extricate without seriously endangering ourselves or the public. Organised criminals (even as loosely as gangs) do tend to carry, or be in possession of, deadly weapons.

This haul was found under, London based, 'Hoxton Boys' associate's bed last month:

I want...


OT: Yeah, arm them, because you never know what challanges you face.

 

[iron codpiece]

none arrived as they were all either busy elsewhere or denied by command

..Erm, perhaps because they weren't needed?

Edit: a gun in that situation would've only resulted in death. if they needed a gun then a tazer would do better.

Yeah, because a guy with a blade can't possibly close the distance and harm you in the time it takes to get out and fire a taser.
[a href=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_c3WtQv44wGc/TFCzqp38iaI/AAAAAAAACnU/QZdv5iL2RjA/s1600/Knife+wounds1.bmp]This image contains blood and is somewhat graphic. You have been warned[/a]

Cops should be at least as armed as the people they have to control if not better.