Police Scotland - Officers routinely carrying guns.
Discussion
The only time I was worried about armed police was being surrounded by special branch armed plain clothes officers who had a photo copied picture of someone who looked remarkable like me .
It was at the height IRA activity in London and I was emerging from a phone box where a bomb threat had been made from.
The other times of having people with firearms in their hands was not so threatening , even when being arrested .(Released without charge)
It was at the height IRA activity in London and I was emerging from a phone box where a bomb threat had been made from.
The other times of having people with firearms in their hands was not so threatening , even when being arrested .(Released without charge)
Mk3Spitfire said:
I thought the "routinely armed" aspect referred to the fact that they carry sidearms as standard, not the routine calls they attend. Until recently, my force ARV's would only arm when attending a firearms job, and afterwards, weapons would be stowed. They are now "routinely armed" as in, at the beginning of the tour of duty they will strap the Glock to their thigh.
This is the bit i'm not so sure about. We managed for decades with the guns staying out of sight and in the cars. I am not sure I like the idea of ARV's strolling round at RTC's or breaking up pub fights with a deadly weapon strapped to their leg. I don't know...maybe it is needed. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.
this really is old news for everywhere but the Highlands and Islands. This is the bit i'm not so sure about. We managed for decades with the guns staying out of sight and in the cars. I am not sure I like the idea of ARV's strolling round at RTC's or breaking up pub fights with a deadly weapon strapped to their leg. I don't know...maybe it is needed. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.
another poster has given the stats of how few Armed officers Police Scotland has , although that doesn;t count CNC and MoDPlod nor any 'English' Officer seconded to the Met as lead force for royalty protection and working on scottish soil.
If you are going to have ARVs it is pointless to have it's crew deprived of their sidearms because theredoesn;t appear to be overt threat at this moment ... you may as well go back to keeping weapons in a armoury in a fixed location and recalling shots for the weapons to be issued when there is a defined threat.
carrying sidearms is a compromise that allows the ARV Officers to take immediate action even if some distance from the vehicle and to provide a credible counter while the additional weapons are retrieved
much like the hoo-ha over taser only being issues to 'specialist officers' , when the sepcialist officers are infact bog standard response constables driving the same bog stand IRVs they were before and if it wasn;t for politics they'd still be response constables, just trained and equipped to use Taser , buit as sop to hysteria fro mthe public they have miraculously become elite force support officers by virtue of parking their cars on the other side of the car park and changing the letter on their rank sliders from a divisional one to force support .
mph1977 said:
Mk3Spitfire said:
I thought the "routinely armed" aspect referred to the fact that they carry sidearms as standard, not the routine calls they attend. Until recently, my force ARV's would only arm when attending a firearms job, and afterwards, weapons would be stowed. They are now "routinely armed" as in, at the beginning of the tour of duty they will strap the Glock to their thigh.
This is the bit i'm not so sure about. We managed for decades with the guns staying out of sight and in the cars. I am not sure I like the idea of ARV's strolling round at RTC's or breaking up pub fights with a deadly weapon strapped to their leg. I don't know...maybe it is needed. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.
this really is old news for everywhere but the Highlands and Islands. This is the bit i'm not so sure about. We managed for decades with the guns staying out of sight and in the cars. I am not sure I like the idea of ARV's strolling round at RTC's or breaking up pub fights with a deadly weapon strapped to their leg. I don't know...maybe it is needed. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.
another poster has given the stats of how few Armed officers Police Scotland has , although that doesn;t count CNC and MoDPlod nor any 'English' Officer seconded to the Met as lead force for royalty protection and working on scottish soil.
If you are going to have ARVs it is pointless to have it's crew deprived of their sidearms because theredoesn;t appear to be overt threat at this moment ... you may as well go back to keeping weapons in a armoury in a fixed location and recalling shots for the weapons to be issued when there is a defined threat.
carrying sidearms is a compromise that allows the ARV Officers to take immediate action even if some distance from the vehicle and to provide a credible counter while the additional weapons are retrieved
much like the hoo-ha over taser only being issues to 'specialist officers' , when the sepcialist officers are infact bog standard response constables driving the same bog stand IRVs they were before and if it wasn;t for politics they'd still be response constables, just trained and equipped to use Taser , buit as sop to hysteria fro the public they have miraculously become elite force support officers by virtue of parking their cars on the other side of the car park and changing the letter on their rank sliders from a divisional one to force support .
Bigends said:
Unless theyre going to run to jobs - they'll need to go back to the car to get to them - so why not leave the guns in there? Or..sort out some form of covert carry. They dont need to wander the streets armed to the teeth - all hair gel, muscles and dark glasses. A retired Policedog handler said in an article that as a specilaist, he used to regularly assist other units at jobs - didnt take his dog with him unless needed - left it in the van!
in rural forces especially the ARV needs to be able to react promptly and that means having a their side arm to hand , what are they expected to do if someone presents with firearm or using another weapon in a way which presents an immediate, clear and present danger to life of the officer or an innocent party ? politely ask the offender to wait until he can retrieve his sidearm / taser ?as for dogs, it must just be for s
ts and giggles than many dog vehicles are now equipped with remote door opening devices to allow an officer to summon his landshark without returning to the vehicle ...it is amazing on an international footing that the UK has lasted so long without routine arming of officers on the mainland...
I'll say again, and I am nowhere near islands or highlands, but I have worked in two different forces which up until now (within last 2/3 years) we're not routinely armed. So it's not old news for everywhere.
I'm not saying it's bad. All I'm saying is I have been approached by MOP's who have been genuinely shocked to see AFO's routinely armed.
I'm not saying it's bad. All I'm saying is I have been approached by MOP's who have been genuinely shocked to see AFO's routinely armed.
Mk3Spitfire said:
And as for dogs...certainly in my force (can't remember about the other one I've worked in) but K units weren't authorised to have their dogs out on patrol unless there was a live job on. So I can kind of see where Bigends is coming from with that one.
Just the retired handler saying he didnt need his dog out with him all of the time in routine non conflict situations so why would they need their guns with them in similar situations-think thats what he was getting atPSNI officers are always armed, do you English/welsh/scots visitors notice it or think its a bit over the top? I've been working with a load of people from different parts of the mainland over the last few months, some of them had never been here before, none of them has mentioned it.
As it's been the case here since I was a kid It's just part of the uniform now.
As it's been the case here since I was a kid It's just part of the uniform now.
Greendubber said:
I can't understand how it's news when it's been happening for years!
It is news precisely because it has NOT been happening for years in this area, we have a large amount of the small percentage in this area due to the proximity of Balmoral and I can assure you that firearms trained cops have not ever been overtly wearing sidearms on routine duties in this area, it is a new occurrence hence the news interest!La Liga said:
I wasn't, the point I was making is they were always there, they just weren't doing as much work as they do now (and thus not as visible). And that you can't really assess whether or not they had their sidearms as default if you never saw them.
I don't think anyone cares whether they were around and to some extent even carrying. It's the overt nature that normalises it and brings it into public consciousness that's particularly undesirable in a country which has managed to avoid them being part of every day modern life with low gun crime statistics that are something of an anomaly as a result.0000 said:
I don't think anyone cares whether they were around and to some extent even carrying. It's the overt nature that normalises it and brings it into public consciousness that's particularly undesirable in a country which has managed to avoid them being part of every day modern life with low gun crime statistics that are something of an anomaly as a result.
Undesirable to one is perfectly acceptable to another. You only need to look at this thread to see there are at least as many who aren't bothered / welcome it - perhaps they think that 275 officers in the whole of Scotland doesn't mean that much. The other places GB where I know this occurs doesn't seem to cause any issues. Indeed, the locations in Scotland that did this 6 years ago don't seem to have had any issues, either. Those who object tend to make the most noise. If there's a reasonable balance of opinion, then I'm happy to let an objective look at the risks / assessment of how it's worked for others be the judge. I think the CC needs to fully explain the situation and justification for bringing in the uniformity since there's the apparent public interest, though.
Greendubber said:
Carrying of side arms is very old news. With less and less none firearms officers the ones that do carry are being for more mundane jobs.
The only difference is that they are carrying a side arm. Don't forget that every officer is carrying a firearm in the way of CS/Pava anyway.
Oh come on! Half-arsed law which included gas and electrical discharge devices along with prohibited firearms does not make those items firearms.The only difference is that they are carrying a side arm. Don't forget that every officer is carrying a firearm in the way of CS/Pava anyway.
Every police officer does not carry 'firearms' (they carry a rest of EU-legal gas canister) and it is a MASSIVE jump between this and carrying a self loading pistol or patrolling with a sub-machine gun, or an assault rifle (calling either of the latter 'carbine' doesnt make them any more cuddly, irrespective of current thinking).
I agree with the OP and the Police's apparent arrogance with regards to public concern and opinion is disturbing. We don't live in a police state yet, and they would do well to remember that.
GC8 said:
Oh come on! Half-arsed law which included gas and electrical discharge devices along with prohibited firearms does not make those items firearms.
Every police officer does not carry 'firearms' (they carry a rest of EU-legal gas canister) and it is a MASSIVE jump between this and carrying a self loading pistol or patrolling with a sub-machine gun, or an assault rifle (calling either of the latter 'carbine' doesnt make them any more cuddly, irrespective of current thinking).
I agree with the OP and the Police's apparent arrogance with regards to public concern and opinion is disturbing. We don't live in a police state yet, and they would do well to remember that.
A little irony being critical for him apparently 'hamming-up' CS into a firearm, yet you do the same with something that occurs in most places anyway by mellow-dramatically linking it to a "police state". Every police officer does not carry 'firearms' (they carry a rest of EU-legal gas canister) and it is a MASSIVE jump between this and carrying a self loading pistol or patrolling with a sub-machine gun, or an assault rifle (calling either of the latter 'carbine' doesnt make them any more cuddly, irrespective of current thinking).
I agree with the OP and the Police's apparent arrogance with regards to public concern and opinion is disturbing. We don't live in a police state yet, and they would do well to remember that.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff