Police Scotland - Officers routinely carrying guns.
Discussion
What rubbish most of the above is......
The overt carriage of a sidearm is to protect the ARV and the armoury inside it from attack as well as allowing the officers to deal with spontaneous incidents.
I don't see what the big drama about armed police is, unless your waving a weapon around you have little to worry about.
This video is worth a watch, it shows why AFO's carry a side arm and how stupid people can be!
http://youtu.be/ehzq9OdE2w0
We have the best police force in the world and in the current cop bashing political climate maybe it's time for the public to start supporting the massively over stretched police service instead of whining about it?
The overt carriage of a sidearm is to protect the ARV and the armoury inside it from attack as well as allowing the officers to deal with spontaneous incidents.
I don't see what the big drama about armed police is, unless your waving a weapon around you have little to worry about.
This video is worth a watch, it shows why AFO's carry a side arm and how stupid people can be!
http://youtu.be/ehzq9OdE2w0
We have the best police force in the world and in the current cop bashing political climate maybe it's time for the public to start supporting the massively over stretched police service instead of whining about it?
C00kie said:
What rubbish most of the above is......
I don't see what the big drama about armed police is, unless your waving a weapon around you have little to worry about.
We have the best police force in the world and in the current cop bashing political climate maybe it's time for the public to start supporting the massively over stretched police service instead of whining about it?
There are already, with relatively few armed cops, incidents involving armed police shooting people dead (both criminals and innocents) who weren't carrying guns under the excuse that the cops thought they were. If armed cops were far more numerous then these incidents would be far more numerous too. That isn't good. And there are far too many dodgy cops to even consider routinely arming them. I don't see what the big drama about armed police is, unless your waving a weapon around you have little to worry about.
We have the best police force in the world and in the current cop bashing political climate maybe it's time for the public to start supporting the massively over stretched police service instead of whining about it?
drainbrain said:
There are already, with relatively few armed cops, incidents involving armed police shooting people dead (both criminals and innocents) who weren't carrying guns under the excuse that the cops thought they were. If armed cops were far more numerous then these incidents would be far more numerous too. That isn't good. And there are far too many dodgy cops to even consider routinely arming them.
it looks like Elcassy and carinaman have a new compatriot. do you include in your assertion aobve those who repeatedly fail to take heed of the numerous warnings given ?
do you have any evidence to support your assertion - especially given the numbers of incidents in mainland europe where the police are routinely armed , i forget the exact figures, but don't the routinely armed German police use less ammunition nationally per annum in live incidents than many small US depts use in a week ...
define 'dodgy' or are you yet another of these 'unlucky' souls like carinaman and Eclassy that manage to fail the attitude test with any emertgency services or health staff the moment your ego enters the room , often several seconds to minutes ahead of your body ?
drainbrain said:
There are already, with relatively few armed cops, incidents involving armed police shooting people dead (both criminals and innocents) who weren't carrying guns under the excuse that the cops thought they were. If armed cops were far more numerous then these incidents would be far more numerous too. That isn't good. And there are far too many dodgy cops to even consider routinely arming them.
Then clearly the answer is no armed police and a new unit of powerfully build PH forum legends who will respond to all firearms, terrorist and weapons related incidents which they will peacefully resolve with out the use of firearms or tasers......... Some of the posters on here are just as disillusioned as the politicians and journalists who started this nonsense.
I hasten to add that most if not all of the politicians have fully armed officers protecting them all the time, think of that what you will!
Edited by C00kie on Sunday 8th March 11:31
FurtiveFreddy said:
jith said:
RIIIGGHHHT! Maybe I need to explain this to you in joined up writing in the hope you can grasp the concept. This officer was quite frankly a rude, aggressive ignoramous who was totally out of order in the way he handled the situation. Within seconds of addressing me he escaltated the situation to the point where I warned him if he put his hands on me I would retaliate. His colleague who said absolutely nothing up until this point restrained him and calmed the situation down.
This man's temper was out of control and all over an alleged minor traffic offence! In England of course, the chances are he would have been single crewed in a traffic car and there would heve been no colleague to calm him down. What do you think would have happened then?
Had he attacked me I could have defended myself. Had he been armed I would have had a real problem. It is this scenario that gives the greatest rise for concern. It just takes this kind of copper having a bad day and it can go very wrong. I find it difficult to believe you can't see that as a possibility; I know that several serving officers at the moment do.
J
You're making the same assumption many people do when discussing civilian gun control - that people with access to guns will automatically use them when they get into a dispute or are angered for some reason. There isn't enough evidence to support this, even in the U.S.This man's temper was out of control and all over an alleged minor traffic offence! In England of course, the chances are he would have been single crewed in a traffic car and there would heve been no colleague to calm him down. What do you think would have happened then?
Had he attacked me I could have defended myself. Had he been armed I would have had a real problem. It is this scenario that gives the greatest rise for concern. It just takes this kind of copper having a bad day and it can go very wrong. I find it difficult to believe you can't see that as a possibility; I know that several serving officers at the moment do.
J
Presumably this officer had a baton or something about his person he could have pulled out and hit you with, so why didn't he?
This thread is all about the gun paranoia we suffer from in the UK which stems from a lack of education on and exposure to firearms.
Just look at these:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_l...
http://regressing.deadspin.com/were-compiling-ever...
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/01/opinion/ghitis-p...
What really bothers me is that I am going to assume you are a police officer, but correct me if I'm wrong. To make a statement like that about the utterly horrendous gun problems in the States is grossly irresponsible. The evidence supporting this is absolutely overwhelming; please don't infer otherwise.
My oldest son has lived in Chicago for around five years now. He is very successful, has 2 young children and has a lifestyle that he could only dream of living here, but uppermost in my mind and his is what might happen if he was involved in an encounter with the type of officer who contributed to the shocking statistics in the above articles. Whilst I would never imply that the British police are modelled in the same mould as the Americans, the concept of having police officers armed has implications that must be considered at all times.
To imply this is paranoia is quite frankly stupid.
The incident I was involved in happened in a lay-by and the officer was from Roads Policing and was only wearing a white shirt and jacket. He was an older man and should have behaved impeccably: instead he was aggressive and insulting and after a few words were exchanged he made a move towards me. I have no idea what his intent was but I warned him not to put his hands on me. It was his colleague who intervened and stopped him, not me. It should never have got to that stage of course had he behaved professionally.
The point is that incidents similar to this happen on a daily basis in the States and often end in bloodshed, simply due to the fact that there are guns involved. It is desperately easy to kill or seriously injure someone with a gun, that is the problem.
There is absolutely no doubt that there are many incidents that can only be resolved by arming the police, I find it difficult to accept the constant defensive attitude by the majority of officers on here that seem unable to accept criticism of the system they operate in. A lack of criticism in any system is a dangerous thing and only leads to complacency.
J
jith said:
Had he attacked me I could have defended myself. Had he been armed I would have had a real problem. It is this scenario that gives the greatest rise for concern. It just takes this kind of copper having a bad day and it can go very wrong. I find it difficult to believe you can't see that as a possibility; I know that several serving officers at the moment do.
Bringing it back to the reality of the UK, armed officers stop people all the time. There must be a sample of millions of stops and interactions. I can't think of an example where an officer who spontaneously attacked someone and shot them. jith said:
There is absolutely no doubt that there are many incidents that can only be resolved by arming the police, I find it difficult to accept the constant defensive attitude by the majority of officers on here that seem unable to accept criticism of the system they operate in. A lack of criticism in any system is a dangerous thing and only leads to complacency.
The system people are defending is one that operates as the norm for nearly all the population of the UK. It appears a few parts of Scotland didn't operate like this prior to the merge and are now doing so. You appear to be attacking the defence of something that isn't being defended. Do you understand what the fuss is about?
If I may wade into this as a currently serving AFO.
In my particular force we are overtly armed with sidearm and Taser. We have the long weapons and ammunition locked in the safe within the vehicle. Now, during any one shift I must carry out dozens of encounters with motorists and other members of the public. Some of them become heated and confrontational (some people don't like getting told off by Police). In each case I manage to deal with the situation in the appropriate manner. This appropriate manner does not involve drawing my sidearm. The thought doesn't cross my mind.
The truth is that most forces choose to overtly arm their AFO's. This does not preclude the officer from being a rational human being. The only time I have ever used the threat of a firearm is in line with government policy on the use of Police Firearms. The fact is that in order to simply become an AFO I had to go through a very arduous selection process, only following personal recommendation by my Area Commander (a Chief Superintendant). I then had to go through a very long and extremely difficult Firearms course. Out of 300 applicants, only 13 made it onto the course, and only 4 of us passed. You don't become an AFO by being a bad officer. Yes, the Police has it's idiots, show me a single job that doesn't, but they generally don't become AFO's. Even if they somehow did slip through the net and made it as an AFO, they wouldn't last long as their behaviour wouldn't be tolerated. The professionalism of the department is beyond reproach and the amount of currency and continuation training we do is brutal. However, we're still cops at the end of the day and can deal with a routine incident as well as any other officer. There really is absolutely no need for concern.
The number of AFO's hasn't changed, we're just being seen more often which is an unfortunate consequence of the terror threat and the world we live in today. Routine arming in the UK won't happen, we the Police don't want it, and there are no plans to increase the UK AFO capability any time soon.
In my particular force we are overtly armed with sidearm and Taser. We have the long weapons and ammunition locked in the safe within the vehicle. Now, during any one shift I must carry out dozens of encounters with motorists and other members of the public. Some of them become heated and confrontational (some people don't like getting told off by Police). In each case I manage to deal with the situation in the appropriate manner. This appropriate manner does not involve drawing my sidearm. The thought doesn't cross my mind.
The truth is that most forces choose to overtly arm their AFO's. This does not preclude the officer from being a rational human being. The only time I have ever used the threat of a firearm is in line with government policy on the use of Police Firearms. The fact is that in order to simply become an AFO I had to go through a very arduous selection process, only following personal recommendation by my Area Commander (a Chief Superintendant). I then had to go through a very long and extremely difficult Firearms course. Out of 300 applicants, only 13 made it onto the course, and only 4 of us passed. You don't become an AFO by being a bad officer. Yes, the Police has it's idiots, show me a single job that doesn't, but they generally don't become AFO's. Even if they somehow did slip through the net and made it as an AFO, they wouldn't last long as their behaviour wouldn't be tolerated. The professionalism of the department is beyond reproach and the amount of currency and continuation training we do is brutal. However, we're still cops at the end of the day and can deal with a routine incident as well as any other officer. There really is absolutely no need for concern.
The number of AFO's hasn't changed, we're just being seen more often which is an unfortunate consequence of the terror threat and the world we live in today. Routine arming in the UK won't happen, we the Police don't want it, and there are no plans to increase the UK AFO capability any time soon.
I think this article will blow the 'potential for mis-use of firearms' concept out to sea: http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/a...
AndrewEH1 said:
I think this article will blow the 'potential for mis-use of firearms' concept out to sea: http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/a...
where as in the States both officers would likely have emptied the mags on their sidearms and sod the consequences in collateral damage especially if the area was lower class and/or ethnic.focusxr5 said:
If I may wade into this as a currently serving AFO.
In my particular force we are overtly armed with sidearm and Taser. We have the long weapons and ammunition locked in the safe within the vehicle. Now, during any one shift I must carry out dozens of encounters with motorists and other members of the public. Some of them become heated and confrontational (some people don't like getting told off by Police). In each case I manage to deal with the situation in the appropriate manner. This appropriate manner does not involve drawing my sidearm. The thought doesn't cross my mind.
The truth is that most forces choose to overtly arm their AFO's. This does not preclude the officer from being a rational human being. The only time I have ever used the threat of a firearm is in line with government policy on the use of Police Firearms. The fact is that in order to simply become an AFO I had to go through a very arduous selection process, only following personal recommendation by my Area Commander (a Chief Superintendant). I then had to go through a very long and extremely difficult Firearms course. Out of 300 applicants, only 13 made it onto the course, and only 4 of us passed. You don't become an AFO by being a bad officer. Yes, the Police has it's idiots, show me a single job that doesn't, but they generally don't become AFO's. Even if they somehow did slip through the net and made it as an AFO, they wouldn't last long as their behaviour wouldn't be tolerated. The professionalism of the department is beyond reproach and the amount of currency and continuation training we do is brutal. However, we're still cops at the end of the day and can deal with a routine incident as well as any other officer. There really is absolutely no need for concern.
The number of AFO's hasn't changed, we're just being seen more often which is an unfortunate consequence of the terror threat and the world we live in today. Routine arming in the UK won't happen, we the Police don't want it, and there are no plans to increase the UK AFO capability any time soon.
A really excellent post. Thanks for the insight and information.In my particular force we are overtly armed with sidearm and Taser. We have the long weapons and ammunition locked in the safe within the vehicle. Now, during any one shift I must carry out dozens of encounters with motorists and other members of the public. Some of them become heated and confrontational (some people don't like getting told off by Police). In each case I manage to deal with the situation in the appropriate manner. This appropriate manner does not involve drawing my sidearm. The thought doesn't cross my mind.
The truth is that most forces choose to overtly arm their AFO's. This does not preclude the officer from being a rational human being. The only time I have ever used the threat of a firearm is in line with government policy on the use of Police Firearms. The fact is that in order to simply become an AFO I had to go through a very arduous selection process, only following personal recommendation by my Area Commander (a Chief Superintendant). I then had to go through a very long and extremely difficult Firearms course. Out of 300 applicants, only 13 made it onto the course, and only 4 of us passed. You don't become an AFO by being a bad officer. Yes, the Police has it's idiots, show me a single job that doesn't, but they generally don't become AFO's. Even if they somehow did slip through the net and made it as an AFO, they wouldn't last long as their behaviour wouldn't be tolerated. The professionalism of the department is beyond reproach and the amount of currency and continuation training we do is brutal. However, we're still cops at the end of the day and can deal with a routine incident as well as any other officer. There really is absolutely no need for concern.
The number of AFO's hasn't changed, we're just being seen more often which is an unfortunate consequence of the terror threat and the world we live in today. Routine arming in the UK won't happen, we the Police don't want it, and there are no plans to increase the UK AFO capability any time soon.
The issue of arming the police and searching kiddies 16 minutes in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JgL0ua9xI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JgL0ua9xI
carinaman said:
The issue of arming the police and searching kiddies 16 minutes in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JgL0ua9xI
Reinforces exactly what is being said all over really...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JgL0ua9xI
carinaman said:
The issue of arming the police and searching kiddies 16 minutes in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JgL0ua9xI
Ukcolumn news? What's that?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JgL0ua9xI
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff