Should the police be routinely armed?

[Ken L]

The proportion of police officers who support the idea of being routinely armed is increasing.

Is it now time to arm all police in the UK?

Should forces serving major conurbations be armed and hose in the countryside left with a stick?

Are we getting it about right not with only a tiny number of officers visibly armed?

 

 

 

[chesters1]

Arm them all the number of 'chair leg' in bag incidents rise unfortunately ,in most cases i doubt guns will stop crime the police tend to act retrospectively so an armed team will respond to crime involving guns.

I doubt some loon will think twice if a cops armed and suicide by cop seems to be on the rise in america.

So in essence if they are going to shoot foreigners fine i prefer pepper spray or tazer if they're after me

Ofcourse in america or france where they all seem to be armed there is no crime whatsoever?!

Edited September 23, 2017 by chesters1

[Andy_1984]

No i think thats a bad idea ken. Certain circumstances possibly and special units only please.

[Ken L]

Why do you think that arming the police is a "bad idea"?

[snakey1]

No its not needed and i wouldn't trust most coppers with a water pistol let alone a real one, there's already been plenty of cases of police misusing tasers (which were initially only supposed to be issued to firearms units but now seem to be given out willy nilly) even the specialist units still make cock ups (someone leaving a glock in a Starbucks toilet springs to mind). When i held a firearms ticket most of the police that used the same club as me held the same belief, most average coppers couldn't be trusted with a gun.

Edited September 23, 2017 by snakey1

[Phone]

All,

 

Are you so short sighted you can't see across the pond?????

 

Why in God's (or anyone else) name would you want to start a domestic arms race?

 

Phone

[ayjay]

I think it's a terrible idea.

 

As Phone attests, (in one of his more lucid moments) - just look across the pond.

 

It's such a frequent occurrence for armed police officers in the US to shoot unarmed and innocent members of the public that it seems like a national pastime over there.

 

If you want figures - 963 in 2016 and 721 so far this year - (from the Washington Post) those figures may include the guilty (and the mad), but many of them were just normal people going about their daily lives - not any more. (I've seen higher figures quoted elsewhere).

 

Here's an interesting stat: 13 of the largest US city police departments, kill black people at higher rates than the US murder rate. https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/

 

 

[Clifftop]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country

[Huge_Vitae]

I wish, before the usual amount of unjustified criticism was mouthed off, people stopped and cast their minds back to a very short time ago when the only thing the VAST MAJORITY of Officers carried was a truncheon and a whistle (whistle only available in some areas)! And before gobbling off about something you know very little about, voice your annoyance at the events which caused this Country to go from Dixon of Dock Green to Robocop in a generation.

[chesters1]

Theres no difference ,we had IRA problems since 1922 but no armed police as standard and they were far more a threat than a few loonies we see now ,yes they get "lucky" now and again but would a armed policeman be on every street corner or bridge in london ?

Ofcourse not so why not just stick with armed response units with years of training not some recruit with a basic training and trembling trigger finger ,its bad enough the few armed teams make a mistake i shudder to visualise the amount when all cops have guns! What next armed CSO's ? Armed dustmen with shotguns incase some hoodlum moans about the glass left behind? Parking attendants packing glocks ? We really dont want to go the american way mainly because i wouldnt trust an armed copper as anyone can make a mistake but packing a gun makes those mistakes far more serious.

 

As i asked before is america a crime free country because the police are are armed? I second that could armed police on the streets have stopped the twin tower incident? The previous attempt in the basement or the Oklahoma bombing? They may have shot looters but nothing more

I also thing trained armed response units wouldnt like armed police 'backing them up' they would be watching behind as well as infront!

 

Perhaps we could arrange the terrorists to have free reign in london after all its needs cleaning out ,i dont live there ofcourse we never see a copper so arming him pointless here

 

Here we go ,i am not positive what a generation is now today (in some areas 12 years?) But why this century arm police but not previously ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_London

Why can our police if armed stop an attack ,they can stop one prior to an attack with previous knowledge using armed teams but if you dont have a clue where and when unless theres a copper every few yards some geezer planting a bomb isnt going to be noticed armed or not

 

Its easy in reality to not get dead ,if you dont want to die in a plumetting air craft dont fly in an aircraft ,if you dont want to die in a car crash dont go in a car and if you dont want to die in a terrorist incident in london dont go to london ,dont come out with the "we have to" you dont you have choices no one can force you to do anything unless you want them to!

I can gaurantee if you never ever stood ,travelled by car taxi or bus on a london bridge you will not be killed on a london bridge ,you choose to therefore except the consequences of your actions and an armed cop isnt going to be looking in the right direction if you do especially if hes not there either

Edited September 25, 2017 by chesters1