Police Scotland - Officers routinely carrying guns.

[340600]

La Liga said:

340600 said:

AndrewEH1 said:

What's all the chat about U-Turns too...

They'll still be armed, but just sat in a car/station waiting for a shout.

No, they won't. Armed Officers tend to be dual or even tri-role in my area so the chances of someone "sat waiting for a shout" is highly unlikely.

That's the point, they won't be multi-role, which is what they are everywhere else. Everywhere without mass death, too!

BBC article said:

But today they've announced that officers attached to armed response vehicles will now only be used for specific incidents or if there is a threat to life.

Understood, what I was getting at is that there won't be Officers sat doing nothing waiting for jobs to come in.

If their force is anything like mine (or anywhere else in England), they won't have enough resources to cope as it is. Taking AFO's out of routine Policing would see my force grind to a halt.

[Eclassy]

I dont want an armed policeman stopping me for walking in the street.

I dont want an armed officer coming to attend a fight on a train

I dont want an armed policeman coming to help stop my schizophrenic son from killing himself with a knife while locked in a bathroom.

I dont want an armed policeman stopping me for not wearing a seatbelt.

I definitely dont want an armed police officer anywhere near me if I am a blind man with a stick in a town where there is a report of a lunatic with a samurai squad.

I think the best compromise is for the guns to be locked up in safes. Even in America and I am sure in this country, the big guns are locked in the trunk.

The ARVs I see in London are usually with 3 officers on board. They could maybe take turns of who is armed in the car and this armed person can remain in the car when they are responding to incidents which do not require armed officers. This person can also quickly attend an incident where armed response is required while the other 2 retrieve their weapons from thw safe thereby saving that 1 minute.

[ookware]

And I don't want someone with no real world experience or training of deploying and managing armed and unarmed officers making operational decisions about what officers can or can't do.

[mph1977]

Terzo123 said:

But this isn't about Cops being routinely armed. Thats a totally different arguement.

This is about whether dedicated armed units should be going out on routine patrol duties (They represent less than 5% of the force, there or there abouts)

we are deaing with Eclassy here though ....

the 'one minute extra' rubbish aobut keeping the guns in the gun safe is exactly that rubbish ...

IF you have a 'glove box' safe for pistols the delay to deployment if you are sat i nthe car might be i nthe order of tens of seconds ...

However if you cannot reach the car ( whether the door to get to the pistols in the glove box or the boot to get to the carbines / long guns ) it isn't an Armed resource any more ...

If the officers are carrying their pistols there is NO delay to deployment whether in the car or out and there is the ability to 'fight ' back to the car for the long guns if necessary e.g. a Derek Bird situation evolving in the vicinity while the Officers are in the doughnut shop / doing enquiries / talking to a MoP ....

Thius disregards the firearms handling safety issues of frequently loads and unloads and taking weapons from storage, rather than having control of a loaded but uncocked and /o0r safety applied weapon.

[Terzo123]

Eclassy said:

I dont want an armed policeman stopping me for walking in the street.

I dont want an armed officer coming to attend a fight on a train

I dont want an armed policeman coming to help stop my schizophrenic son from killing himself with a knife while locked in a bathroom.

I dont want an armed policeman stopping me for not wearing a seatbelt.

I definitely dont want an armed police officer anywhere near me if I am a blind man with a stick in a town where there is a report of a lunatic with a samurai squad.

I think the best compromise is for the guns to be locked up in safes. Even in America and I am sure in this country, the big guns are locked in the trunk.

The ARVs I see in London are usually with 3 officers on board. They could maybe take turns of who is armed in the car and this armed person can remain in the car when they are responding to incidents which do not require armed officers. This person can also quickly attend an incident where armed response is required while the other 2 retrieve their weapons from thw safe thereby saving that 1 minute.

[anonymous-user]

340600 said:

Understood, what I was getting at is that there won't be Officers sat doing nothing waiting for jobs to come in.

In terms of deployment it sounds like that will be the case. They are stopping them responding to anything that won't have an authority, according to the article (it doesn't say authority - not to be confused with the standing one - but says they'll only going to be going to firearms incidents and threats to life AKA 'otherwise so dangerous').

340600 said:

If their force is anything like mine (or anywhere else in England), they won't have enough resources to cope as it is. Taking AFO's out of routine Policing would see my force grind to a halt.

As it would a lot of forces. Hopefully not Scotland!

[Sherpa]

BBC News said:

However Police Scotland said the standing order allowing the deployment of officers with handguns and Taser stun guns would continue.

They're still carrying firearms, just keeping the longs in the car or station.

They're coppers at the end of the day, they'll continue to police the streets, but they can also respond (quickly) to incidents requiring firearms officers.

[Bigends]

Sherpa said:

BBC News said:

However Police Scotland said the standing order allowing the deployment of officers with handguns and Taser stun guns would continue.

They're still carrying firearms, just keeping the longs in the car or station.

They're coppers at the end of the day, they'll continue to police the streets, but they can also respond (quickly) to incidents requiring firearms officers.

They werent seriously patrolling with the big stuff out were they?

[Sherpa]

Not sure, the article is fairly contradictory. Mentions still carrying sidearms and then not using fireamrs officers for anything but firearms incidents. I'd rather more police on the streets than sat like coiled springs.

[anonymous-user]

Bigends said:

They werent seriously patrolling with the big stuff out were they?

No, the side-arms.

[Greendubber]

Eclassy said:

I dont want an armed policeman stopping me for walking in the street.

I dont want an armed officer coming to attend a fight on a train

I dont want an armed policeman coming to help stop my schizophrenic son from killing himself with a knife while locked in a bathroom.

I dont want an armed policeman stopping me for not wearing a seatbelt.

I definitely dont want an armed police officer anywhere near me if I am a blind man with a stick in a town where there is a report of a lunatic with a samurai squad.

I think the best compromise is for the guns to be locked up in safes. Even in America and I am sure in this country, the big guns are locked in the trunk.

The ARVs I see in London are usually with 3 officers on board. They could maybe take turns of who is armed in the car and this armed person can remain in the car when they are responding to incidents which do not require armed officers. This person can also quickly attend an incident where armed response is required while the other 2 retrieve their weapons from thw safe thereby saving that 1 minute.

Why wouldn't you want them helping you?

Oh and the big guns in our cars are not locked away, the passenger has their carbine on an open rack on he side of the transmission tunnel of the car.... fast easy access.

[Bigends]

Found they were handy to make the numbers up when they backed up but there was little they would or could deal with as they couldnt afford to get involved in any jobs.

[Greendubber]

Very handy for fast aid when there's a stabbing....and they carry MOE kit and can get to you in a hurry.

No good sat about in nicks not allowed to go out.

[AndrewEH1]

From what I've read:

Armed officers will still always carry their side arms plus taser.

The heavier stuff with be locked in the car, as it has always been. (Apart from at airports where I presume they will continue to carry them)

These officers will now only respond to "firearms incidents or where there is a threat to life".

This will mean they will not respond to 'normal' calls.

Only 5% of Police Scotland are armed at any time, but I expect those officers will be frustrated that they are effectively benched.

Remember we are taking about Scotland, other forces are irrelevant.

[Mr Trophy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31752981

My thoughts on Police being armed is pretty clear - I am all for it.

I am interested to see how what now happens.

[AndrewEH1]

Mr Trophy said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31752981

My thoughts on Police being armed is pretty clear - I am all for it.

I am interested to see how what now happens.

I'm prediciting they either they won't be able to respond to non-firearms calls or all firearms must remain in the boot until they ask for permission/go to firearms call...

This political discussion waste of time, and probably annoying armed officers.

[anonymous-user]

The article isn't that clear.

The way things should be are, though. You have a pool of armed officers on duty 24/7. Not allowing them to do non-armed police work (most of their time is spent not doing armed work) is unbelievably stupid, irrational and wasteful.

[GC8]

Mr Trophy said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31752981
My thoughts on Police being armed is pretty clear - I am all for it.
I am interested to see how what now happens.

Hearing people say that theyre 'all for it' makes me shudder. Do you think that the country will in some way be improved by this? What on earth is going around in your head?

Edited by GC8 on Thursday 5th March 16:49

[anonymous-user]

GC8 said:

Hearing people say that theyre 'all for it' makes me shudder. Do you think that the country will in some way be improved by this? What on earth is going around in your head?

All for what, exactly?

What happens every day in England?

[AndrewEH1]

GC8 said:

Hearing people say that theyre 'all for it' makes me shudder. Do you think that the country will in some way be improved by this? What on earth is going around in your head?

Do you know the full details about this 'issue' in Scotland?

There hasn't been a change in policy for a number of years. This all came around due to one photo on the front page of a Scottish newspaper of armed officers helping regular officers to deal with drunk people on a weekend night.

As far as I can remember there hasn't been a case of a Scottish police officer shooting someone who didn't need to be shot in a long, long time let alone them shooting anyone.

Armed officers aren't an issue.

Edited by AndrewEH1 on Thursday 5th March 16:41