Poll: Arming the UK Police

[Hawkmoon269]

At the minute all police officers escalate to using guns, so will all criminals. Right now, we dont really have a gun problem in this country, and id like to keep it that way. There have to be better ways of enforcing the law without using devises which sole function is to kill people.

 

[ThePeaceFrog]

I'm just glad forum polls have no effect on governmental policy! British policing has always been built around trust and respect for your fellow man, something that is hard to achieve when you carry something that has the ability to take away a life at the pull of a trigger.

British police officers do not want to carry guns, the recent case of CO19 threatening to strike is a perfect example of this. When you carry a gun you have to make choices that should not be made in a split second.

This thread stinks of gun porn, the job of a police officer is to keep the peace, not glorify violence.

 

[Hawkmoon269]

I'm just glad forum polls have no effect on governmental policy! British policing has always been built around trust and respect for your fellow man, something that is hard to achieve when you carry something that has the ability to take away a life at the pull of a trigger.

British police officers do not want to carry guns, the recent case of CO19 threatening to strike is a perfect example of this. When you carry a gun you have to make choices that should not be made in a split second.

This thread stinks of gun porn, the job of a police officer is to keep the peace, not glorify violence.

You're damn right there, damn right.

 

[Danny Ocean]

I'm gonna go with the first option, Get the police a gun, and maybe a shotgun in the cop car. Granted this is coming from an american perspective, and I realize america is a much different place from the UK, but in cities there is always going to be the threat of a violent criminal who won't back down.

On another note, get your police some decent cop cars. It would seem most European cops use something like a Vauxal Astra, or Volvo xc930 or something... we mostly use Ford Crown Victoria cars, the Police Interceptor version, which is quite frankly a beast.

i say pfffft to that good sir.

besides if Hollywood movies have taught me anything its that US cop cars can't go round corners and are prone to flip over and explode

And exactly whats gonna happen to those nice pretty sports cars when you hit a deer doing 90.

Not a lot of deer in London and Glasgow mate. I think you'll find that out in the areas where they are likely to hit an animal, they use Range Rovers and other SUVs.

It's true. I live in Devon. The police here use Range Rovers.

I think it's just common knowledge that American cars are not particularly good. Even the fastest ones aren't as efficient as the European ones, and they're all notoriously bad at going around corners.

 

[Soylent Dave]

i say pfffft to that good sir.

Also Greater Manchester Police have a liveried HMMWV.

You know, just in case...

-

We don't need to arm our police, because police shouldn't (and don't) need to resolve most crime by shooting (at) the criminals. On the rare occasions something serious enough to warrant an armed response comes up in the UK, that's what the armed response and assault units are for.

It is also worth pointing out that - despite claims to the contrary - gun crime is actually falling in the UK, and has been for quite some time (there was a slight rise after the 'no handguns' legislation, but that was probably because a load of new things became gun crime. Like 'carrying a handgun'....)

Outside a couple of particularly bad areas, gun crime is limited in the UK.
Intentional homicides by firearm per 100,000 inhabitants:
UK 0.14 | US 2.5

Just moving that out of the realm of percentages to give it a proper sense of scale; 39 people were shot dead in Britain in 2009*.
1,760 people were injured in crimes involving guns. That includes the 39 dead ones.

There were 7,616 gun-related incidents in the UK in 2010 (out of 833,152 violent crimes); that was a slight drop from 8,134 in 2009.

(There were 29,259 knife (or 'stabby thing') related incidents in 2010, of which 200 were homicides - just to give the "Ah, but without armed police more people get stabbed to death" sentiment a sense of scale, too)

(Home Office [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/crime-research/hosb0611/hosb0611?view=Binary] figures)

Our population is roughly 70 million, just to give that a sense of scale - moving it back to percentages, violent crime is 6% of all recorded British crime, and gun crime is 0.2% of all recorded British crime.

So no, I don't think the vast majority of our officers need to be armed; the vast majority (99.8%) of our criminals aren't.

*I've used 2009 figures for the gun crime breakdown because I can't find an official 2010 breakdown; it'll be proportionally the same though, it doesn't change much year-on-year.

 

[The Harkinator]

I wouldn't support police carrying guns on their person. By all means have a riot shotgun (rubber bullets) locked securely in the boot of the car but in that situation on the video having the officers armed just gives them the means to kill the man. I'm also in support of cutting the restrictions on police. They're there to enforce the law and I, personally don't want 1000 miles of red tape blocking them.

To be honest police in the UK get much less credit than they deserve. Next time you see the police, NHS even something like the government remember my new quote:

'For every thousand unreported and unnoticed successes the one failure is seized upon by the media, not because it was more important but because like a critic, they prefer to negative.'

Also I see that the motto of 'The most dangerous kind of government is the one that is not scared of its people.' is going around here so I'll invent a second quote in one post:

'A government not scared of its people is the most dangerous, but a government scared shitless of its people is the worst.'

 

[Dirzzit]

Do I want armed police bullying their way through like in the US or any other third world nation?

Nope.

Keep our forces unarmed. Obviously exepting the specially trained squads.

I don't think you have the right to judge them if you don't live here. I can and have walked down areas of Manhattan that tourists would crap their pants going through, but NY is one of the most safest places in the world. Every police officer I've talked too are still nice people even though they have guns.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

I'm gonna go with the first option, Get the police a gun, and maybe a shotgun in the cop car. Granted this is coming from an american perspective, and I realize america is a much different place from the UK, but in cities there is always going to be the threat of a violent criminal who won't back down.

On another note, get your police some decent cop cars. It would seem most European cops use something like a Vauxal Astra, or Volvo xc930 or something... we mostly use Ford Crown Victoria cars, the Police Interceptor version, which is quite frankly a beast.

i say pfffft to that good sir.

besides if Hollywood movies have taught me anything its that US cop cars can't go round corners and are prone to flip over and explode

And exactly whats gonna happen to those nice pretty sports cars when you hit a deer doing 90.

Not a lot of deer in London and Glasgow mate. I think you'll find that out in the areas where they are likely to hit an animal, they use Range Rovers and other SUVs.

It's true. I live in Devon. The police here use Range Rovers.

I think it's just common knowledge that American cars are not particularly good. Even the fastest ones aren't as efficient as the European ones, and they're all notoriously bad at going around corners.

Round corners, cars like the Crown Vic will not outdo the Evo or STi. Both vehicles have different design philosophy in mind. Australia uses V8/V6 Holden Commodores, Turbo-charged I6 Ford Falcons, and even things like the Toyota Prius as marked patrol vehicles. Unmarked are an even wider range than that. It's all about the right tools for the job.

With lots of big open roads and space in the US, the Crown Vic makes sense, but in the confined spaces of Europe its next to useless.

 

[The Harkinator]

Of course police in Britain need firearms. The legal system is tough in this country, but in a really relaxed way. The criminals incarcerated often end up having better lives than most people living in the middle class. It's a joke that inmates can get leather couches, plasma screen TV's and all the food they can eat (all at the expense of the tax payer I might add.)

Firearms won't solve our hideous legal system, but it will take us one step forward. For example, a Policeman is not allowed to make contact with a suspect in an aggressive way. Now, the suspect can lie, and say it was aggressive for example. In which case the officer would be stripped of his title, and fired. And the suspect is eligible to apply for compensation, and a formal apology, and an inquiry into the state of the police attitude. Absolute joke.

Police should be tough to enforce the law in a country like this. Because it's out of control.

No way, no how is the life for prisoners better than most middle-class peoples life.
People don't seem to get that prison's main punishment isn't not having TV or radio or books, it is the restrictions on liberty that is the real punishment. Follow the law and you have freedom, otherwise...

Also, do you know that we have a reason for not treating the prisoners like shit? If you make prison all about punishment (give prisoners little nice things, or none at all) then they are much more likely to reoffend, which is why we focus on rehabilitation instead. So your tax-payers money is actually going to prisoners, so that they stop commiting crime.

Secondly, suspects are innocent until proven guilty. That rule is golden and must always be enforced. No one has the right to be abused in anyway if they're perfectly law-abiding citizens. And even if someone does claim they were touched aggressively, they spend a long time making sure this was true (why would anyone not claim they were aggressively touched if they would instantly get let off?)

Also, you are living in some kind of parallel earth Britain my friend if you think (I presume you mean) crime is out of control. It really isn't, our crime rates are low, low enough that my consituencies party was focusing on "youth deliquents" and Anti-Social Behaviour Orders as part of it's law and order schtick. If they can focus on that, then other crime isn't too much of a problem.

I think Robert Ewing reads the Daily Mail.

For those of you not in the UK its a newspaper that believes that a country with one of the world biggest economies, lowest crime rates and best public services is going 'to the dogs' its basically printed scaremongering.

 

[deathninja]

Wasn't there a trial with PPK-armed patrols in Nottingham.

Having been caught up as a civvy in a couple of operations myself (including being smashed in the face by a cop just for being on the same train as a football hooligan), I don't think that standard issue is a good idea without *full* retraining.

Most police from experience are just too happy to get stuck in, adding guns to the mix is a recipe for disaster.

That said, there needs to be more *specialists*, ARVs are spread too thin.

It's true. I live in Devon. The police here use Range Rovers.

Just saw a Police Ford 150 in Leicester, no idea we had anything that hardcore...

 

[orangeban]

Of course police in Britain need firearms. The legal system is tough in this country, but in a really relaxed way. The criminals incarcerated often end up having better lives than most people living in the middle class. It's a joke that inmates can get leather couches, plasma screen TV's and all the food they can eat (all at the expense of the tax payer I might add.)

Firearms won't solve our hideous legal system, but it will take us one step forward. For example, a Policeman is not allowed to make contact with a suspect in an aggressive way. Now, the suspect can lie, and say it was aggressive for example. In which case the officer would be stripped of his title, and fired. And the suspect is eligible to apply for compensation, and a formal apology, and an inquiry into the state of the police attitude. Absolute joke.

Police should be tough to enforce the law in a country like this. Because it's out of control.

No way, no how is the life for prisoners better than most middle-class peoples life.
People don't seem to get that prison's main punishment isn't not having TV or radio or books, it is the restrictions on liberty that is the real punishment. Follow the law and you have freedom, otherwise...

Also, do you know that we have a reason for not treating the prisoners like shit? If you make prison all about punishment (give prisoners little nice things, or none at all) then they are much more likely to reoffend, which is why we focus on rehabilitation instead. So your tax-payers money is actually going to prisoners, so that they stop commiting crime.

Secondly, suspects are innocent until proven guilty. That rule is golden and must always be enforced. No one has the right to be abused in anyway if they're perfectly law-abiding citizens. And even if someone does claim they were touched aggressively, they spend a long time making sure this was true (why would anyone not claim they were aggressively touched if they would instantly get let off?)

Also, you are living in some kind of parallel earth Britain my friend if you think (I presume you mean) crime is out of control. It really isn't, our crime rates are low, low enough that my consituencies party was focusing on "youth deliquents" and Anti-Social Behaviour Orders as part of it's law and order schtick. If they can focus on that, then other crime isn't too much of a problem.

I think Robert Ewing reads the Daily Mail.

For those of you not in the UK its a newspaper that believes that a country with one of the world biggest economies, lowest crime rates and best public services is going 'to the dogs' its basically printed scaremongering.

Either the Daily Mail or the Daily Express (my personal favourite crazy right-wing newspaper) thought the Daily Express loves picking on immigrants in particular. The Daily Express once printed the article headline "Ethnic Baby Boom Crisis". Yeah...

 

[demonsbanenathan]

Watch video of a clearly mentally unstable man trying to be controlled and corralled bravely and admirably by UK Police.

See it used as reasoning to arm said police with firearms, implying they could be(and would be a benefit if) used to control someone who is having a psychotic break.


Look up "suicide by police". The only thing that would have occurred had firearms been involved in that altercation is a dead man. It's quite possibly what that man was after.

The only time firearms are required are when firearms are involved in a crime. That should be handled better and more efficiently - but arming every police officer is not the solution.

 

[Jernau]

Not having everyday police armed is one of the things I most like about the Uk. Yes, obviously we do need to have the threat of a highly trained armed response unit to deal with these situations as necessary but I think that arming the police would be an absolutely terrible idea and lead to MORE police casualties.

Option three for me, and I bloody hope that no-one ever think option one is a good idea.

 

[Pearwood]

Some police should be armed to deal with very serious violent crime. It doesn't matter if the criminal is armed with a gun or a knife or whatever, the police dealing with that level of crime should be well armed enough to protect themselves and any victims. Having said that though I don't think regular police officers should be given guns. There's just no need in normal circumstances.

 

[Danny Ocean]

It's true. I live in Devon. The police here use Range Rovers.

Just saw a Police Ford 150 in Leicester, no idea we had anything that hardcore...

Hell to the yes. They're like tanks. We've got rovers all over the shop down here.

 

[Jamash]

I was honestly surprised at the results of this poll. All police should be armed?

On the bright side, more that half of voters have voted for a combination of options 2 & 3, which is what we have now.

As well as the specialised Armed Response Units such as SO19 (option 3), a lot of other police units are routinely trained in firearms use and are armed as standard (option 2).

There are more armed police in Britain than most people think, i.e. more than just the Armed Response Units.

For example London alone has these different branches of armed police:

Metropolitan Police

Within the London Metropolitan Police there are a number of Operational Command Units (OCUs) that employ AFOs.

The Belmarsh Firearms Team protects Trials at Woolwich Crown Court
The Territorial Support Group has a small pool of AFOs for certain security tasks.
The Specialist Crime Directorate arms certain surveillance officers.
Some detectives in the Flying Squad are armed.
Special Branch deploys armed officers in its surveillance units, and in A Squad, which protects the Prime Minister and other dignitaries.
Royalty Protection Department, which protects members of the Royal Family and guards royal property.
Special Escort Group, which escorts and protects high-risk convoys and VIPs such as the Prime Minister and the Queen.
Diplomatic Protection Group, which guards embassies and government buildings. It also provides the armed guards at Parliament to supplement the Palace of Westminster Division, which is unarmed.
Aviation Security, which protects Heathrow and London City airports.
Specialist Firearms Command (CO19), which provides armed support to the rest of the service, crewing Armed Response Vehicles and providing Specialist Firearms Officers (SFOs)

That's just London, I'm sure other large cities and areas also have armed detectives and specialised units (eg. at all major ports and airports) as well as the Armed Response Units. Also, all over Britain the Civilian Nuclear Constabulary are armed on their routine patrols.

In my opinion, the average UK bobby doesn't need to be armed, since Britain has plenty of constantly armed officers in the places and situations that matter and the Armed Response Units are always on hand to rapidly respond to escalating situations.

 

[maninahat]

Cops - guns = lolwut?

They're no better than a neighborhood watch.

Ha! Precisely.

With respect, demented men running amok with machetes who are seemingly immune to CS gas tend to be an uncommon occurrence. had the armed response team turned up quicker, there would obviously have been no need for something as severe as cops carrying guns.

Plus, guns and the training they require are very expensive, and will get very little use in a country with low firearm murder rates. The weapons the cops already have are perfectly decent for dealing with angry dads with golfing trophies or teenagers with knives. In the rare instance a guy has a decent weapon (like a gun or a sword), they call the armored police in. Usually it works fine. At least for the police.

 

[The Harkinator]

Either the Daily Mail or the Daily Express (my personal favourite crazy right-wing newspaper) thought the Daily Express loves picking on immigrants in particular. The Daily Express once printed the article headline "Ethnic Baby Boom Crisis". Yeah...

If the Daily Express is to be believed binge-drinking, immigrant babies steal wheelie bins and lead to overcrowding.

Yes, I'm so overcrowded that I'm cramped into a 3 storey house that is full to the brim of four people normally five but one is at university (by my own admission I am in a middle class family) and I have no room to breathe.

Like I said, scaremongering.

 

[mortalsatsuma]

Police here in the Uk are not armed with firearms as by doing so, it would encourage much more violent crime as the criminals arm themselves with firearms to take on the police with. It's a bad idea to arm the police force with lethal weapons, they should instead be all issued tazer guns for less lethal takedowns.