Should the English Police be armed?

[Chimpy]

My point there, Chimpy, is the statement I made is equally valid. Read the post. What I'm saying is, there is as much evidence for that point of view as there is for Duff's: none. It's extrapolation based on an understanding of human nature. Neither has actual proof. The difference is, I am putting my opinion forward as a possibility, not stating it as inalienable fact.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I realise your point was to make a secondary point about the supposed effects of arming the Police and how its all really a bit of a guess. It is however a bit rich to ask for evidence to support someone elses argument without some to back up your own. It also slows the debate of what is after all something completely hypothetical at present

[xRAZERx]

I wonder how often officers loose their batons or cuffs in a struggle.....

 

Not too much of a problem, untill the officers start to loose their Glock and Sigs....

[Chimpy]

I wonder how often officers loose their batons or cuffs in a struggle.....

 

Not too much of a problem, untill the officers start to loose their Glock and Sigs....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Proper training in weapons retention.

 

How else do our three full armed services cope?

[Duff Beer]

but if they had one a pistol surely there would not be any struggle?

[Sledge]

Chimpy, try and understand my point this time: I am asking for evidence from people who are stating their opinion as fact. My opinion is just that: an opinion, based on an understanding of human nature I've gleaned during my time on this Earth. I am taking issue with people stating as fact something they patently can't prove. Got it?

 

[xRAZERx]

Proper training in weapons retention.

 

How else do our three full armed services cope?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The trainings already there mate. Sadly the training doesn't seem to be there to teach you to retain it when you've left your MP5 on the roof of the ARV and driven off, or left it in the chippie on top of a fruit machine and walked out with your cod and chips

 

but if they had one a pistol surely there would not be any struggle?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Why not mate?

[Chimpy]

but if they had one a pistol surely there would not be any struggle?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The pistol isn't going to be in the Officers hands all the time and if they are jumped from behind it could result in the Officer losing his weapon to the criminal and being shot. Same is true of all the other force options they have but this one is somewhat more lethal.

 

The alleviation of course is proper, regimented training, rigourously applied so the Officer knows what to do. Taking a look towards the US where there can be a wide gulf in martial skill between LEOs is this feasible nationwide? It would take Officers off the beat (to train), require more dedicated trainers and cost a lot of money.

[Chimpy]

Chimpy, try and understand my point this time: I am asking for evidence from people who are stating their opinion as fact. My opinion is just that: an opinion, based on an understanding of human nature I've gleaned during my time on this Earth. I am taking issue with people stating as fact something they patently can't prove. Got it?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Got it right back in your first post making the point. It is still however a bit rich not to back up your opinion with facts and ask someone to factually enrich their own.

 

The trainings already there mate. Sadly the training doesn't seem to be there to teach you to retain it when you've left your MP5 on the roof of the ARV and driven off, or left it in the chippie on top of a fruit machine and walked out with your cod and chips laugh.gif

 

Theres no accounting for the 10% though, short of sacking them for gross incompetance.

[Duff Beer]

I never stated the opinion, I just tried to justify it. I am of the opinion that the arming of police would be detremental with regards to levels of gun crime.

[pace]

Living on island where so far by no means is the crime and violence levels anywhere near that of the uk, i can only pass comment to best of my knowledge,

 

Given that so far the people with the guns seem to be large gangs in big metropolitan areas then surely this is where the armed police are needed; far from being there as a means of direct assault but as stated by many a means of protection (we all no the value of covering fire, i don't need to explain this) I haven't personally looking in the papers come across a statement deeming direct action against groups of people with guns bar ARU units who are for want of better term trained in countering said groups.

 

So my point being yes i think officers should be armed but only in place's where they need to be. The village bobby for instance is not going to need a remington and a glock to make sure the local kids aren't littering the local green,

 

However give him the training and means to carry one if need be could swing the outcome of potentially life threating situations, taking a local incident that happened, two police offers were attacked and hurt badly by a man with a knife at huge house hold argument could this of been avoided if he knew how the police could of reacted if they had firearms?

 

Well thats my input flame away, hehe

[xRAZERx]

Mrs Miggins has been robbed, two armed officers are deployed to take her statement. Mrs Miggins sees the guns and decides not to make a statement.

 

PC Smith is the local Schools Liason Officer, he goes to schools to promote the work of the police and to warn of the dangers of drugs. If he is armed the schools won't want him.

 

he will not be able to go unarmed because his Glock is now part of his personal protection equipment and he is not allowed outside the station without it....

[Chimpy]

Given that so far the people with the guns seem to be large gangs in big metropolitan areas then surely this is where the armed police are needed; far from being there as a means of direct assault but as stated by many a means of protection (we all no the value of covering fire, i don't need to explain this) I haven't personally looking in the papers come across a statement deeming direct action against groups of people with guns bar ARU units who are for want of better term trained in countering said groups.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To my knowledge there have been armed footpatrols in London, Manchester and Bristol during particularly bad spells in some of the rougher areas.

 

My personal opinion is that our current armed officers are doing a stand up job and short of increasing their numbers and funding slightly there are more important criminal issues to tackle. Not to mention tackling the causes of gun crime at the social level and not with more legislation!

 

Mrs Miggins has been robbed, two armed officers are deployed to take her statement. Mrs Miggins sees the guns and decides not to make a statement.

 

PC Smith is the local Schools Liason Officer, he goes to schools to promote the work of the police and to warn of the dangers of drugs. If he is armed the schools won't want him.

 

he will not be able to go unarmed because his Glock is now part of his personal protection equipment and he is not allowed outside the station without it....

 

Case in point the DEA Agent who shot himself whilst giving a lecture to school kids in the states.

[Sledge]

I agree, simply put that if our UK Police Forces became armed, gun crime would increase dramatically. 

 

The requirement of an armed criminal to possess a real firearm would become a necessity and as a result airsoft replica's or indeed any imitation firearm would be redundant.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here is the post I responded to that started this all off. Note that it offers no evidence, but states the writers' opinion as fact. I took this to task and asked for evidence. Duff repsonded with theory. Fair does, but not what I asked for. See?

 

[Chimpy]

Here is the post I responded to that started this all off. Note that it offers no evidence, but states the writers' opinion as fact. I took this to task and asked for evidence. Duff repsonded with theory. Fair does, but not what I asked for. See?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Apologies then, I missed that post and your subsequent reply by the looks of things.

[xRAZERx]

To my knowledge there have been armed footpatrols in London, Manchester and Bristol during particularly bad spells in some of the rougher areas.

 

My personal opinion is that our current armed officers are doing a stand up job and short of increasing their numbers and funding slightly there are more important criminal issues to tackle. Not to mention tackling the causes of gun crime at the social level and not with more legislation!

 

Case in point the DEA Agent who shot himself whilst giving a lecture to school kids in the states.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yep and Birmingham, Notthingham, Gloucester and many other areas.

 

 

Yeah but that DEA guy was the only person in the room professional enough to handle the 40

 

You job Chimpy?

[Sledge]

So, back on track, should the police be armed? We definitely need more ARU's, I don't think there's a debate there (or is there?), but should every copper be packing heat? And who wouldn't sign up if police recruiment ads said "Join the fuzz. Pack a nine."

 

[pace]

Razor, so are we to say that we cant infact trust the law at all then, if we cant trust the police with guns then surely we cant trust anyone with them??? Lets not mentions the 17/18 years with assualt rifles infantry i think their called, i was led to belief the police only accepted a certain type of person, i know i've done my PIR, Personaly if ive just been mugged or attacked the bloke with the gun would be quite welcome to stick around,

 

Chimpy, That is my point, keep it to where its needed,

[xRAZERx]

Nah it's join the fuzz, pack a 4.2

[Chimpy]

Yep and Birmingham, Notthingham, Gloucester and many other areas.

Yeah but that DEA guy was the only person in the room professional enough to handle the 40

 

You job Chimpy?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Then carrying on to the M4!

 

Nope, just out of Uni. It's something I'm interested in and am looking towards as a career though.

[pace]

Nah it's join the fuzz, pack a 4.2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sounds good to me

[xRAZERx]

Razor, so are we to say that we cant infact trust the law at all then, if we cant trust the police with guns then surely we cant trust anyone with them??? Lets not mentions the 17/18 years with assualt rifles infantry i think their called, i was led to belief the police only accepted a certain type of person, i know i've done my PIR, Personaly if ive just been mugged or attacked the bloke with the gun would be quite welcome to stick around,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Nope what I'm saying is, some of the members of the public won't want to have contact with the police because of the fact they're armed.

[DrewLawson]

They had a special on the police on the History channel, and in some cities police carry in one car, their hand gun, a shotgun in betwenn the driver and passenger seats, in the trunk a semi automatic M4, and a grenade launcher capable of holding 6 tear gas grenades or 6 bean bag stun rounds( CAW REVOLVER LAUNCHER).

 

So in a word, yes, because like the cop in Batman says criminals just keep getting better and more well armed.

[Un_FriendlyFire]

Razor, so are we to say that we cant infact trust the law at all then, if we cant trust the police with guns then surely we cant trust anyone with them??? Lets not mentions the 17/18 years with assualt rifles infantry i think their called, i was led to belief the police only accepted a certain type of person, i know i've done my PIR, Personaly if ive just been mugged or attacked the bloke with the gun would be quite welcome to stick around,

 

Ill tell you why those 17/18 year olds hav rifles, because their JOB is to kill people who are going to hurt them with guns (no offense to them at all) if your going directly into a conflict against someone with a gun then YOU take a gun (along with other stuff).

 

The thing is bobbies not even in nottingham or london are going to be coming up against people with the express intent to shoot them (even if they are armed). And most times the public calls in the police and tells them firearms are involved and then they respond, it is very rare that a bobby will come up against a gun unexpectedly and even rarer if it is intentional and with hostile intent.

 

in the meantime police CAN be trusted with guns but frankly making guns part of the job implies that police are out to kill people which is NOT their job

[cpaxton]

in the meantime police CAN be trusted with guns but frankly making guns part of the job implies that police are out to kill people which is NOT their job

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah obviously not, well done, the guns would be to protect them selves and others.

[Phoenix]

No, absolutely not.

 

It has been my experience (and that of many others) that American police officers can be somewhat trigger happy, and are often sadly lacking when it comes to exercising proper safety.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You couldnt be further from the truth.

 

And yea, y'all should have armed poilice. A cop w/o a gun is a target. After reading some of y'all posts I'm beginnign to see why y'all have a problem with gun crime. Youre being a bunch of p***ies. Sorry but it had to be said. If a cop doesnt want to carry a gun they don't need to be a cop. My cousin is on my county's poilice force and they have some of the best firearms training. Ask any cop and they will tell you that using lethal force is always an option of last resort.