Police Scotland - Officers routinely carrying guns.

Police Scotland - Officers routinely carrying guns.

Author
Discussion

telecat

Original Poster:

8,528 posts

240 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
It seems that in one of the lowest crime areas of the UK The Police are now at odds with elected officials and have a policy that Firearms officers, even on routine duties, carry Sidearms. Members of the public have reported seeing officers carrying Glock Pistons in supermarkets, bakeries, on routine Traffic stops and while Policing the Highland Cross Biathlon.

It does not seem to be going down well and despite opposition from MP's and MSP's Police Scotland have stated that the policy will not change.

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
I live in one of the lowest crime rate areas of Britain. The ARV guys are routinely armed here too. I'm not a fan and I think it's unnecessary. They love it though.

MKnight702

3,096 posts

213 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
I fail to see a problem. Trained officers carry guns, and???

The guns are not going to suddenly jump up and start randomly shooting people, they are inanimate objects.

ben5732

763 posts

155 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Not got a problem with it what so ever. I don't see why people would feel threatened by armed police just going about their business if they are doing nothing wrong, if anything it should reassure them.

telecat

Original Poster:

8,528 posts

240 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
MKnight702 said:
I fail to see a problem. Trained officers carry guns, and???

The guns are not going to suddenly jump up and start randomly shooting people, they are inanimate objects.
Oh the irony!!!

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
It's the image. It makes people feel unsafe, and gives the impression that we are turning into an American-esque country. Which we're not. Yet.

Greendubber

13,128 posts

202 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
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.

TurboHatchback

4,151 posts

152 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Realistically how else would it work? Leaving a car full of firearms parked by itself whilst the officers pop into Greggs for some pasties unarmed seems a bit daft. Whilst I would not support all officers carrying firearms there aren't that many armed response units around, they are necessary for some situations and I can't see why any law abiding person would feel any different interacting with an armed or unarmed officer. They aren't going to whip it out and shoot you if you look at them funny.

Elroy Blue

8,686 posts

191 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Pretty much every AFO in the country overtly carries as sidearm and has done for many, many years. Suddenly it's news.

Absolute non-story created to 'alarm'. Journalists and Politicians doing their thing.

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Personally wouldnt like to see cops routinely patrolling with guns
Most (non airport) AFV crews will only be seen with guns by the public when buying coffee or a sarnie or if they are helping out at a job, after which its back in the car and then away. They dont need guns on routine patrol though i'm not sure what they should do with them - wear them a bit more covertly whilst on general patrol perhaps if its not safe to leave them in a high vis car parked in full view of everybody -chances of them getting nicked would be pretty slim id suggest. As it is when they arrive at jobs weapons are left in unattended cars. - In fight situations surely they'd be a bit of a liability with the risk of having their guns taken from them if on their own?
Either stay in the cars doing what theyre trained to do or keep the guns out of sight.

Edited by Bigends on Wednesday 6th August 16:24

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Bigends said:
Personally wouldnt like to see cops routinely patrolling with guns
Most (non airport) AFV crews will only be seen with guns by the public when buying coffee or a sarnie or if they are helping out at a job, after which its back in the car and then away. They dont need guns on routine patrol though i'm not sure what they should do with them - wear them a bit more covertly whilst on general patrol perhaps if its not safe to leave them in a high vis car parked in full view of everybody -chances of them getting nicked would be pretty slim id suggest. As it is when they arrive at jobs weapons are left in unattended cars. - In fight situations surely they'd be a bit of a liability with the risk of having their guns taken from them if on their own?
Either stay in the cars doing what theyre trained to do or keep the guns out of sight.

Edited by Bigends on Wednesday 6th August 16:24
Exactly.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
I posted this in another thread:

The Scottish force has 17,234 officers. 275 are Authorised Firearms Officers. Scotland has around 55 armed officers per million people. England and Wales has around 120. That's some "routine arming" in Scotland, indeed rolleyes

This 275 provides the 24/7 cover so only a % amount of those officers will be on duty at any one time. On a 5 shift-rota this will be a 55 theoretical officers covering the whole of Scotland. In reality, this will be a fair bit less given leave / courses and other consistent abstractions. Plus a % may not carry each day depending on the minimum specified numbers. Some may also be on ports and other roles etc.

From what I can read the Chief has asked them to be more visible and do more routine work (as they always have done). They are a normal policing resource that has a specialism, and the majority of their time is spent not doing firearms work, so why not? It means a better response as more incidents get dealt with. I can understand why people think there are more if they are being more visible, but that's no excuse for having a debate based on false pretences.

There is no "routine arming". Until the people challenging the police actually know what's going on and stop debating red herrings, there should be no call for any Parliamentary justification.

telecat said:
It seems that in one of the lowest crime areas of the UK
You, like others, are framing this as a response to risk / threat and it therefore not being justified. That's an easy argument it make, except it isn't the cause / effect here. It's that the Chief has asked the AFOs do more non-firearms stuff.

telecat said:
MKnight702 said:
I fail to see a problem. Trained officers carry guns, and???

The guns are not going to suddenly jump up and start randomly shooting people, they are inanimate objects.
Oh the irony!!!
What irony?

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
La Liga said:
I posted this in another thread:

The Scottish force has 17,234 officers. 275 are Authorised Firearms Officers. Scotland has around 55 armed officers per million people. England and Wales has around 120. That's some "routine arming" in Scotland, indeed rolleyes

This 275 provides the 24/7 cover so only a % amount of those officers will be on duty at any one time. On a 5 shift-rota this will be a 55 theoretical officers covering the whole of Scotland. In reality, this will be a fair bit less given leave / courses and other consistent abstractions. Plus a % may not carry each day depending on the minimum specified numbers. Some may also be on ports and other roles etc.

From what I can read the Chief has asked them to be more visible and do more routine work (as they always have done). They are a normal policing resource that has a specialism, and the majority of their time is spent not doing firearms work, so why not? It means a better response as more incidents get dealt with. I can understand why people think there are more if they are being more visible, but that's no excuse for having a debate based on false pretences.

There is no "routine arming". Until the people challenging the police actually know what's going on and stop debating red herrings, there should be no call for any Parliamentary justification.

telecat said:
It seems that in one of the lowest crime areas of the UK
You, like others, are framing this as a response to risk / threat and it therefore not being justified. That's an easy argument it make, except it isn't the cause / effect here. It's that the Chief has asked the AFOs do more non-firearms stuff.

telecat said:
MKnight702 said:
I fail to see a problem. Trained officers carry guns, and???

The guns are not going to suddenly jump up and start randomly shooting people, they are inanimate objects.
Oh the irony!!!
What irony?
By all means get them out working but keep the guns out of view

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
There's no rational or risk-based reason in which to do so. I never see AFOs without their side-arms when they've attended incidents.


Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
La Liga said:
There's no rational or risk-based reason in which to do so. I never see AFOs without their side-arms when they've attended incidents.
Agreed - if theyre attending an assigned job - but then its generally back in the car and away - not off patrolling the High street. They cant deal with anything thats going to tie them up for any length of time anyway and takes them too far away from their car.

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Bigends said:
Agreed - if theyre attending an assigned job - but then its generally back in the car and away - not off patrolling the High street. They cant deal with anything thats going to tie them up for any length of time anyway and takes them too far away from their car.
Personally from a work point of view i'd sooner they stay in the car and out of the way -they bugger up everything they do deal with in any case

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
The problem is is the lack of accurate information and the way the word "routine" is being thrown around.

Taking this BBC article as an example and all the sub-articles in links to.

It gives an example of AFOs attending a public order incident in a Town Centre. Is this anything new? I've seen them attend plenty over the years. In fact, town centres on a Friday and Saturday night are rather well policed by ARVs in my experience. I wonder if it's because of the sights?

Also from the article:

C.Supt said:
“When not undertaking their ARV roles, all officers are available to provide support to local policing areas through regular and tasked patrols. All officers within specialist services, which includes armed policing, are deployed in support of their colleagues in local divisions and contribute to our focus on keeping people safe which includes addressing concerns within communities and responding to calls.
ARVs being tasked and responding to calls as they always have done, then.

The Daily Record reports on them attending an RTC to try and fuel the fire. Dealing with traffic matters, as they always have done, then.

The Press and Journal gives and example of when someone buys food. Buying food, as they always have done, then.

This is the best evidence of "routine arming" and a policy change? Quoting regular things.

AGK

1,601 posts

154 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
I don't have a problem personally, I see them most days as I live very very near someone who has them parked on his drive.


Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

127 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
La Liga said:
The problem is is the lack of accurate information and the way the word "routine" is being thrown around.

Taking this BBC article as an example and all the sub-articles in links to.

It gives an example of AFOs attending a public order incident in a Town Centre. Is this anything new? I've seen them attend plenty over the years. In fact, town centres on a Friday and Saturday night are rather well policed by ARVs in my experience. I wonder if it's because of the sights?

Also from the article:

C.Supt said:
“When not undertaking their ARV roles, all officers are available to provide support to local policing areas through regular and tasked patrols. All officers within specialist services, which includes armed policing, are deployed in support of their colleagues in local divisions and contribute to our focus on keeping people safe which includes addressing concerns within communities and responding to calls.
ARVs being tasked and responding to calls as they always have done, then.

The Daily Record reports on them attending an RTC to try and fuel the fire. Dealing with traffic matters, as they always have done, then.

The Press and Journal gives and example of when someone buys food. Buying food, as they always have done, then.

This is the best evidence of "routine arming" and a policy change? Quoting regular things.
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.

eldar

21,614 posts

195 months

Wednesday 6th August 2014
quotequote all
Mk3Spitfire said:
I thought the "routinely armed" aspect referred to the fact that they carry sidearms as standard. Until recently, my force ARV's would only arm when atttending 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 is my concern. Seeing obviously armed police carrying out routine duties starts to normalise guns.