Poll: Arming the UK Police

[silentx3ro]

After watching that video, something I thought was interesting, What exactly would the police have done if he had tried to run into somebodies house, and it was unlocked? Would the police just let him attack whoever's inside? How would they stop him? This whole thing could have ended so much worse.

We'd have had to have rushed him. If there's any danger to an MOP then we have to put their lives first. It would have almost certainly resulted in serious wounds or deaths, but it's preferable to letting Joe Public take one in the neck from a nutter with a machete. This is why we joined the police: to make the country a safer place, even if it costs us our lives. Of course, with a firearm, the officers could have shot to neutralise the threat if an MOP were in danger.

No, what I am talking about are the the kind of less leathals that have a physical knockdown effect such as rubber/wax bullets, beanbag rounds ect.

I've heard from AFOs that these don't work very well and deaths resulting are generally blamed squarely on the officer since "it's a non-lethal so you must have used it wrongly". Take a few of those to the sternum or temple at medium range and you could be looking at a fatality outcome.

I'd certainly support non-lethal alternatives, but since even a stab vest pretty much leaves only potential killshots open, I think lethal firearms also need to be issued.

Oh I completely agree, I just don't think its something that will happen.

I see your point about the less lethals, but even aiming for the same areas as they are allowed to strike with the batton from 15 feet away is much better than having to move in close.

To use the above video as an example, if even 1 of the officers had an FN303 and only aimed for the legs the 15 rounds would be more than enough to take down or at the very least hinder the man to allow an arrest to be made safely

 

[Alade]

I always thought it was dangerous assigning firearms to people who weren't smart enough for a better job than "cop".

 

[sharptoast]

As a British Citizen I can't help but be kind of shocked at the proportion of people who feel our average Police Officer needs arming, as a person who has lived in some of the more dangerous areas of Britain (Although I do now live in a sleepy town of 6000 :L) I have to say the most dangerous weapon I have ever seen a criminal wield is a knife, and the legalisation of firearms in this country would completely change this.

It is no wonder really that the US has one of the highest murder rates (Proportionally not in just pure numbers) in the world when the average citizen can pick up a firearm and wield it without any kind of real check upon him or her.

I have always found that fast response units have always been on hand extremely quickly in places such as Edinburgh or Glasgow, within minutes in most cases.

And as for that video, it is clear bringing a firearm into such an unstable situation would have simply increased the chance of violence, action always brings reaction, and guns breed violence, that is a fact, no matter whos hands they are in.

 

[Bobbity]

Problem is that if this was America, not only would the police have had guns; the suspect most likely would have as well. We should probably give the UK bobbies credit for this, because they managed to take him down, and no one was hurt. Maybe give them tasers next time though.

 

[88chaz88]

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.

The police here in NYC are actually quite polite most of the time. There are a few bad eggs as will happen in a police force of 50000 officers, but in general no complaints.

Well since you want to use the NYPD as an example then here's a scene where a number of police were "needed" to arrest a cyclist who was merely cycling up the sidewalk for a couple of seconds to his mate's house.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxjNVSCs_Lg

But yes, as you said, every police force has bad eggs. I still feel the need for every cop to be armed as excessive though. I don't believe that more guns = less problems.

 

[BGH122]

I've lived in the UK for over 20 years (all my life, put it that way ), and I haven't witnessed a single incident of the like shown in the video, ever.

You've either lived in very nice areas or you've been very lucky. I've seen more of these events (as an MOP, growing up in south London) than I'd care to have seen.

And as I said in my edit, I think a taser would have been a much better idea - the guy in the video didn't seem like the type to be threatened by a gun, and he would in all likelihood have been killed had the officers been armed with lethal weapons; an incident that would have been avoided had the officers been armed with tasers.

Unfortunately, tazers don't work especially well. Ignoring things like misfires, the way they're designed requires both (or four, if that's the design) probes to attach at wide spacing around the chest and not attach in a highly grouped way. Unfortunately, this is largely down to luck.

Also, is it just me or is it anyone living outside of the UK who are mostly calling for arming the UK officers?

There does seem to be a lot of support from abroad, yeah. Can't tell if it's the majority.

 

[i7omahawki]

Well, the above situation was unusual and ended up being well contained and dealt with. I don't see the need to have firearms, as we don't have an out of control gun situation in our country.

Sure, in America you all need guns, not just the police, because everyone already has one. Gun control here is a little better, and seeing as the police are causing some unnecessary deaths as it is, I don't think giving them guns is the answer.

You don't need to be able to kill people instantly to have law and order, we've been getting along fine for a while now.

 

[undeserving]

Vote: Non-lethal projectiles would be more than enough for normal police work in the UK. Beanbag shotgun, rubber bullets, quick-setting foam spray, net launcher...? I'm reluctant to say tasers because of the potential abuse issue but why not...

The US' post 9/11 fear mongering caused a great deal of change in this world. One of them was this concept of sudo-security in central London. If you see a couple of policemen walking down the South Bank carrying MP5s; remember it's like airport security. Their presence on our streets only "creates the illusion" of internal security. They have no autonomy, they're not going to shoot anyone for any reason without explicit and direct orders.

I know a recently retired top-dog armed response police officer. He describes the work as 99% boring as hell, sitting around doing nothing and 1% the most terrifying, pooped yourself, adrenaline filled and violently disturbing situation where every second feels like borrowed time.

In the US the cops live with that everyday, knowing that anybody and his dog could start shooting at them or at the public. Long term exposure to that dampens their empathy and ultimately leads to a situation where police officers are no longer fine upstanding citizens, dedicated to public service and protection; instead they're aggressive, confrontational, reactive and unrecognised military personnel. Surely law enforcement should be proactive, educational and community based, and not an environment of fear and risk where every step out of line runs the risk of a bullet in the back?

i concede that some situations require a bit more than just raised voices, that's why we have highly trained tactical response teams... this is too long, cba anymore. probably gonna get trolled anyway >D

 

[erztez]

We just need to make this thing man-portable is all

Spoiler

Problem solved

 

[BGH122]

I have to say the most dangerous weapon I have ever seen a criminal wield is a knife, and the legalisation of firearms in this country would completely change this.

I don't understand this logic, could you elucidate? Why would firearms in the hands of officers entail firearms in the hands of criminals? It's a movie nonsense that minor criminals arm up to fight the police; criminals know that the murder of a police officer is one of the few offences that'll see 25-life. Minor criminals arm up to assault the public and other criminals, the police are an irrelevance. Most of the time, a gang with a gun has that gun because of threats from other gangs, not coppers.

Madmen, as pictured in the video, arm up sporadically and with little pattern. Sometimes heavily, sometimes with whatever's lying around. Since they've got no clear plan, the police's armaments shouldn't affect theirs.

Organised career criminals do arm up heavily if they're expecting police resistance, but they're already packing assault rifles so unless they're going to one up us with tomahawk missles then I don't really see what more they can do.

i concede that some situations require a bit more than just raised voices, that's why we have highly trained tactical response teams... this is too long, cba anymore. probably gonna get trolled anyway >D

Welcome to the Escapist! If you do get trolled then hit that big red button to blast the troll straight back to hell, just don't engage.

But herein lies the problem, AFOs require command to sign off on their deployment (as you've rightly said) and 'just' a guy with a machete isn't going to do it. The police know that the media shitstorm would destroy some poor guy's career.

But this leaves beat cops in a rough situation: with no armed backup (unless they actually get stabbed), they're left to attempt to talk the, often crazed or drugged, suspect down. This rarely ever works. They're then allowed, according to operational procedures, to use CS spray or (and I shit you not) 'strike to the lower leg or thigh with retractable batons only'. Strike the weapon-hand? IPCC. Strike with fists? IPCC. Use the car to ram the suspect (as in Totonto, see clip below)? IPCC.

There is currently no effective way to prevent people like this going on killing sprees. Sure, once he's killed someone then brass will finally let AFOs assist, but that's a cold comfort to that dead person's family.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I think they should be armed at all times. I work at a police department in Halifax, MA and all officers here are armed at all times with a pistol. They also have access to a shotgun and an M4(I think its M4) in every cruiser.

 

[dementis]

I vote give them paintball markers, there are plenty of crowd control and non-lethal projectiles for them and they have a higher velocity than commercial ones, you can get rubber balls, mace balls and things like that all travelling at 400fps, they should be able to take someone down without killing them surely.

 

[Knusper]

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.

 

[InfiniteSingularity]

I don't believe anyone should have guns, for many reasons. I don't think anyone should get special treatment just because of their job - police included. They are not an exception

The reason is because it can be incredibly dangerous if a) the police officer is "corrupt" which happens all too easily because police appear to be above the law, b) the police officer makes a false judgement, or c) an accident occurs related to, say, a stray bullet, for instance.

Police, in my eyes, seem to be too exempt from the law - they have priority over regular citizens, they have the command of anyone, and giving them the means to kill in an instant is ridiculous. I don't believe in guns because they make killing too easy - it makes the death of someone feel quick and without remorse. I don't believe in guns at all, and I believe they should be banned for any person, but if you give them to police you're giving them permission to use them. Which often means killing people.

Basically I have a problem with police having "special rights" because they're police. They're no more important than anyone else, and shouldn't be treated as such.

 

[88chaz88]

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.

The police here in NYC are actually quite polite most of the time. There are a few bad eggs as will happen in a police force of 50000 officers, but in general no complaints.

Well since you want to use the NYPD as an example then here's a scene where a number of police were "needed" to arrest a cyclist who was merely cycling up the sidewalk for a couple of seconds to his mate's house.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxjNVSCs_Lg

But yes, as you said, every police force has bad eggs. I still feel the need for every cop to be armed as excessive though. I don't believe that more guns = less problems.

I'm not sure what I saw there but no one was shot and all the cops had guns. I cycle in NYC and only made the mistake of riding my bike on the sidewalk once, I'll tell you that.

But why were their guns needed? The example I gave is about total overkill. You didn't need more than one or two officers on the scene and neither of them needed to be armed.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Arm the officers and continue to keep guns out of the public's hands. Then they don't need them as much.

 

[Extraintrovert]

The only thing that would have resulted from the police officers here being armed is someone shot to death despite doing little but standing around and shouting at people. Yes, they require better gear for such situations, yes, it could have been handled much better, and yes, specialist forces are necessary, but that is exactly why they're specialist; those with government sanction to wield deadly weapons better be damn sure they know what they're doing.

 

[BGH122]

To use the above video as an example, if even 1 of the officers had an FN303 and only aimed for the legs the 15 rounds would be more than enough to take down or at the very least hinder the man to allow an arrest to be made safely

It'd also almost certainly be illegal; centre-mass is the only legal shot area for AFOs.

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.

In a perfect would I'd totally agree, but the old adage (much abused) that 'if you outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns' is valid. If criminals were removed from the equation then the police oughtn't be armed, but if criminals were removed from the equation then there oughtn't be police!

The reason the police need weapons isn't to stop law abiding MOPs, it's to stop the seriously dangerous outlaws from hurting MOPs.