Poll: Should British Police be armed?

[Actual]

I'd also like to add these videos for consideration, they are rare ccurrences in America and they are caused by a number of different factors, I'm not blaming the police, but they do make a strong argument for why police shouldn't have lethal force options.

In this video you see police fire into a parked car killing the driver and wounding four innocents standing nearby. They then threaten to shoot the man recording it on his phone.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/06/201162114131825860.html

In this video you see a police officer shoot a hard-of-hearing man who was making a wood carving with a knife. Now the police officer felt threatened so he shot, but if he'd had a tazer that innocent man might have still been alive.

 

[Hoplon]

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

But if that's not clear, let me elucidate on that answer.

They are not here to make a call like whether or not to shoot some one. It not even a courts job.

 

[TheOneMavado]

I have to answer nay, since I don't believe arming the police would reduce crime (which is your poll question).

I do however think the police should have the means to defend themselves.

 

[TheEvilCheese]

I think there should be special layer of the police that are allowed to have guns, but the every day police officer should not.

There needs to be some enforcement, but trusting every police officer with something that can take a life easily is just asking for trouble.

This is exactly how it is in the UK as of now, we do have armed guards at airports and such (very armed guards) and you can spot a fair few Submachine guns if you walk around the treasury building, but the 'Armed response unit' are the only police who respond to situations with guns. And they have a lot of training and background checks, not to mention every time a police gun is fired the circumstances are investigated independently.

I think it needs to stay this way, as bringing more guns into circulation when they are very much illegal seems like a terrible idea to me.

 

[Icarion (aka Stockholm)]

I think a good compromise would be giving police officers non-lethal rounds. Rubber bullets and the like. Or course, I havent the slightest idea of the gun laws in Britian other than from what I have read in this thread. From what I have read, it seems like your police officers dont really need them. And as a few other people above me have said, tasers might be a good idea as well.

 

[PAGEToap44]

No. We have no need of it and it would only lead to more gun violence. Not all police officers should be given guns anyway. There ARE firearms units within each territorial police force in the UK, but they are rarely needed. Due to the gun restriction laws we have here very few criminals get their hands on firearms. A small percentage of the population have licences for firearms which they use for hunting and/or sport and they aren't really the sort to go around shooting people.

So in short, no, the average British police officer should not require a firearm (maybe a taser, they have started to be introduced) and any incidents or crises involving firearms can be dealt quickly and effectively by specially trained firearms units.

 

[Booze Zombie]

To my knowledge, any police officer can get a firearms training course and then two weeks later can have their very own pistol. However, the reason I've gotten for a lot of them not waving guns about it simply because if some copper gets smacked over the head there's another gun out there, which will probably be used to kill police officers attempting to stop the person with the gun.

 

[DustStorm]

I think that the police should have guns only if the people have guns. Otherwise, no.

 

[Lokithrsourcerer]

Arming the main police force would only mean an increase in criminals with guns as they would feel they need them more than they do now. As it stands the UK police do have guns just not in the hands of the beat bobbies and I think it works pretty well. I remember getting quite a shock during a labour conference week in Blackpool I was working as a sound engineer at the time and accidently took the freight elevator to the roof of the club I worked in, opposite the conference. To my shock (and theirs as well I think) there were 2 police snipers on the roof monitoring the street!!

needless to say I appologiesed profusely and got back in the elevator.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

Why does everyone think that the absolute only way for police to use a gun is killing someone?

And no, it's not a good idea, the current sustem works fine.

 

[MuzzleFlash]

I'm from Northern Ireland. When we were in school we we all sailed over to Scotland on a History lesson. We met a police officer on the street and were rather amused by his little stab vest, pepper spray thing and little baton. I think the only reason the rest of the UK doesn't is that it's not a justifiable expense.

The last time I was stopped by the police 3 officers were in the middle of the road with MP5's and there was one in the bushes on each side with a G3; I think they were checking car tax.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Give them tazers. If things get to out of hand call in the SAS... or SBS because I never here of them doing anything.

 

[Lokithrsourcerer]

the other thing to point out and i'm sure UK isn't isolated in this. is there are a lot of coppers who should not be coppers. Not just corrupt ones of which there are quite a few i feel. But there are a lot of "power Trippers"

for example i got arrested on a D&D (drunk and disorderly not dungeons and dragons) charge. TBH i was sober and doing nothing wrong but there was a massive fight outside a club and they just arrested everyone in the area (once the CCTV footage was reviewed the charge was dropped) but when i got to the station one of the arresting officers tried to claim i had assaulted him. luckily his partner said it wasn't me. but the tone of his voice suggested to me he meant "no one assaulted you what are u talking about"

I have also seen a number of instances of police brutality and excessive force. also a friend of mind who used to be a civilian bailiff at the local cells quit after being told to turn a blind eye to similar misconduct unfortunately without any proof he was unable to bring any justice to the officers involved.

I'd hate to think what could happen in these situations if the cops had guns.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

Yes, this has been done many times before and no, I think the current system of having armed response teams is fine. Arming the police certainly wouldn't lower crime levels to any appreciable degree.

 

[orangeban]

Why does everyone think that the absolute only way for police to use a gun is killing someone?

And no, it's not a good idea, the current sustem works fine.

Police in Britain *always* shoot to kill. Or at least that's how they are meant to do it. That's why the only way for police to use guns is killing someone.

 

[ztara]

i live in Hull, where they're piloting the tazer scheme and even that seems pretty intimidating when you see them strapped to bobbies hips. There bright yellow plastic so there's no missing 'em. You do automatically see them and that's as a law abider (by and large) who's not really focusing on the police. This is not to say i think guns should be introduced. They would have small scale positive effects, reduction in antisocial behavior (lord i hate that phrase) and greater respect of the population for the police. however it seems highly likely that in response proper crims. (not hooligans or the like) and gangs would arm up in kind. no point starting an war of escalation is there?

also arming all beat plods implies that there is a high level of on the ground violence that needs addressing by ordinary officers on a day to day. this simply is not the case. CO19 and the like appear to be handling this 'fine' atm.

 

[zehydra]

I dunno, possibly?

I mean, they're armed in the US, and we still have rampant crime in places.

 

[Robert Ewing]

Most police are armed. And yes, with guns. Most police I've seen are walking around with Mp5's.

But the police that matter, i.e the ones on the beat are not armed. The armed police are security cells.

Police should be armed, because then they are just as effective at policing as a brave citizen. Living in Britain, the police have no power. Because if they touch an offender, the Policeman can be prosecuted, and then lose his job.

Police should have more power than the citizens. Otherwise there isn't even a point in having a police force. You could just have the citizens deal with it.

Arming Britain's police doesn't mean there will be insta-bloodshed and violence for 10,000 years. It gives the police the means in which to do their job. At least give them rubber bullets... At least.

 

[acturisme]

http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/17/britain%E2%80%99s-criminal-utopia/?s-criminal-utopia/

Here's one opinion.

 

[hawkeye52]

You know we just had massive riots in London that was sparked by a policeman shooting a bloke in a low income area. Arming the police is a bad idea in general and only the special response squads should have the authority to use them.