Christmas shoppers and children terrified by armed police on streets with machine guns

you know why they are there. I know why they are there. Maybe they know something you don't.
Welcome to the new normal.

a reply to: MagicCow

A boot licker says what?

Amazing display of logic , reason , and intellect
NOT

The most likely explanation is that the local geographical commanders took the decision, for any number of reasons, not have the local police service crest and shoulder numbers displayed on its firearm officers uniforms. Or it could be that the officers featured in the picture have been drafted in from a different geographical police service. There are other reasons but I personally have not known that to happen outside of central London.
reply to: nonspecific

I was talking about my freedom of speech on this thread MagicCow, sorry if you misunderstood.

I think there maybe an issue with cultural differences here (I am presuming you are from the USA?) The USA is a completely different kettle of fish when it comes to how each countries police forces are armed and how the citizens react.

As I said in a previous post, I am a Brit living in France and in general people here are not at all shocked at the sight of armed police, gendarmerie and soldiers (with automatic firearms) patrolling large cities and important venues where huge throngs of people may be... (especially after last years horrific attacks)

Let me just add this link (official UK home office source) for you to read through when it comes to the UK police forces and firearms :

www.gov.uk... ics-england-and-wales-april-2015-to-march-2016

And please let me also add this :

Sadly, due to events in our history including the tragedies at Hungerford and Dunblane , Whitehaven and more recently the increased threat to the UK from international and Home Grown Terrorism we need to have officers with firearms to protect us all.

In the UK, we still have a predominantly unarmed Police Service, something that is almost unheard of worldwide. To avoid having a fully armed Police Service in this country, and to enable the Police to still tackle criminals and terrorists with firearms, we need to have some of the Police Officers equipped with firearms.

By restricting training to the few we can achieve a standard that is not replicated anywhere else in the world.

The Police receive thousands of calls every year relating to armed crime. These calls have to be answered and this may include sending armed officers to investigate.

On very rare occasions officers will have to discharge their firearms to protect themselves, the public or their colleagues. Sometimes this can result in the death of a person.

This then triggers a full investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) into the actions of all the police officers involved.

This investigation has to be open and transparent to comply with Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights.


Article 2

Right to life

1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.

2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary :

(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;
(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;
(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.

Means you have a right…

– Not to be unlawfully killed by the state

– For the state’s systems to be designed so that they protect life, including through the criminal law

– For the state to investigate suspicious deaths

– In certain circumstances to require the state to take reasonable steps to prevent a loss of life

Link here : rightsinfo.org...

Police officers will have legal representation as they are being investigated for what in some cases can amount to allegations that they may have committed criminal offences.

Some officers involved in shootings will apply to the Courts for anonymity while they are giving evidence in a public forum.

More information in addition to the above from the UK police firearms officers association can be found here :

www.pfoa.co.uk...

Warmest regards

Lags

originally posted by: MagicCow
a reply to: Lagomorphe

No Kneejerking.
I read your posts.
Nothing to do with freedom of speech when we're talking about the
militarization of our police officers.
I can assure those militarized officers if the unions get their
way your freedom of speech is the last thing they will be protecting
and the first thing they will be trying to take away.

a reply to: Gothmog

Still doesn't make me wrong.
Deal with it.

a reply to: Lagomorphe

I agree you guys have over there had to deal with with wicked attacks.
It's unfortunate and i'm sorry that you have to live within those constant
threats or thoughts of threats.
Yes I am in the USA and understand now what you're saying I have lived in other countries too
and here in the USA it is by far more escalated than needed.
The problem I feel over here more so than the weapons are the people whom are being hired
and the lack of training they are receiving.
Since they lack proper training many feel being more heavily armed balances it out.

I thought if they needed guns, they could call for them. Time and place, kind of thing.

Wandering about with machine guns 'just in case', needlessly raises tensions in my own humble opinion.

Especially so, given they've spent the past few decades telling us weapons have no place on our streets.

When the police force around you becomes militarized, it's time to take down the wallpaper and move to the rural countryside.

a reply to: CulturalResilience

Could the crests just be on the shirts under the jackets? I'm not sure what the regulations are there as far as marking up uniforms, but here where I'm at there's no requirement to have an inclement weather garment marked with anything other than "POLICE" on it. So long as the officer has identifying markings on under the jacket, it's fine.

a reply to: TrueBrit

But until I trust my government, I refuse to accept that a population which is not generally armed itself, ought to have to put up with a police force which totes rifles around without their being an active situation which demands a tactical response.

This is not just overkill, it is indeed conditioning. It is preparing a populace for a militarized take over, for their safety and their own good.

They won't come out and be transparent with it, but why is there a need for a militarized presence? Those that are celebrating Christmas, and the season of joy and giving, don't need to be protected from each other. Is it justified to gun down a pickpocket or a thief, many of them children? I don't think anyone believes that, so why is this necessary or even justified?

Could it be that they fear retaliation or an uproar from those that don't recognize Christmas as a legitimate holiday, and have been threatened that there will be aggressive action taken against the Christmas shoppers and vendors?

I know how ridiculous that sounds because there is no such boogeyman, but maybe they have planted this seed to be able to grow their orchard without resistance. Surely if they did received threats, they would not respond with such an overt display of fear, giving them the satisfaction and the power they desire over the law enforcers.

Makes sense only if you can see the forest for the trees.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: CulturalResilience

Could the crests just be on the shirts under the jackets? I'm not sure what the regulations are there as far as marking up uniforms, but here where I'm at there's no requirement to have an inclement weather garment marked with anything other than "POLICE" on it. So long as the officer has identifying markings on under the jacket, it's fine.

Could it be because it's a publicity shot? Might be prudent not to give a definite heads up as to their identity?

a reply to: nonspecific

They are there for me Nonspecific, i am a MODERATE REBEL in the war on drugs that is on- going 29 years in the trenches and still puting up a good fight .

I am just packing a bazooka as wwe talk , i am going to light it up and all hell will break loose on the war on drugs and things , i am expecting a drop tonight of Equiptment from friendly forces overseas to continue this battle against evil government forces

This is what is going on even in small towns of a few thousand people where the boredom will kill you quicker than anything
The four officers were all carrying handguns when they stopped for a meal at the branch of Tesco.there were four officers in a Tesco store early on Sunday morning when there was no emergency for them to deal with.”



www.pressandjournal.co.uk...



They are on to me alah et akbar and all that jazz

a reply to: nonspecific

Possible, but then again I'd profess my ignorance of the regulations over there. I don't know how well the identities of armed response officers are protected over there. Here, if you're on a detail that requires some anonymity, you're not posing for pictures with the public.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: nonspecific

Possible, but then again I'd profess my ignorance of the regulations over there. I don't know how well the identities of armed response officers are protected over there. Here, if you're on a detail that requires some anonymity, you're not posing for pictures with the public.

That is what I thought, that maybe the officers in question were bought in for the photo as opposed to the actual guys on the job. It certainly seems reasonable.

originally posted by: CranialSponge
When the police force around you becomes militarized, it's time to take down the wallpaper and move to the rural countryside.

It is not a matter of if. Even some rural areas have been outfitted with military gear. This was an issue that got many people literally up in arms a few years back. This is a storm that is headed our way in all areas.

It may seem strange, but I live in the country, and I don't blink an eye if I see someone open carrying, but it stops me in my tracks when a see our local LEOs all decked out in military gear. My first question is why, and is it time for me to notify others of a possible threat, and if we need to gather the wagons.

In 2011 alone, more than 700,000 items were transferred to police departments for a total value of $500 million. This year, as of May 15, police departments already acquired almost $400 million worth of stuff. Last year’s record would have certainly been shattered if the Arizona Republic hadn’t revealed in early May that a local police department used the program to stockpile equipment — and then sold the gear to others, something that is strictly forbidden. Three weeks after the revelation, the Pentagon decided to partly suspend distribution of surplus material until all agencies could put together an up-to-date inventory of all the stuff they got through the years. A second effort, which gives federal grants to police departments to purchase equipment, is still ongoing, however. According to the Center for Investigative Reporting, since 9/11, the grants have totaled $34 billion. Which means billions of dollars’ worth of military gear are in the hands of small-town cops who neither need the equipment nor are properly trained to use it, critics charge. At best, it’s a waste of resources (since the gear still has to be maintained). At worst, it could cost lives.

Small-Town Cops Pile Up on Useless Military Gear

a reply to: nonspecific

I can't imagine why you'd protect the identities of some armed response officers but not others, though. Unless Northumbria has some reason to protect that information that other localities don't? # if I know

a reply to: andy06shake

I agree with what you said there. It only takes 1 person to screw it up. But like I said, what happens when they are "just taking orders". But that will never happen right?

But even still... We as Americans are asked daily as a citizen why do you need guns etc. Why do police need to be decked out like a Marine?

Also this story is not even in America where there are a ton of guns, but in a country where the gun laws are very strict. So once again, why do the police need to be decked out like this when the average citizen cannot access guns.

Maybe, just maybe they are advocating for citizen gun ownership and don't even know it

The questions people should be asking these policemen.

Why do you need that kind of firepower?

Do you think we all would be safer if average citizens had access to guns and proper training?

Do you always just follow orders blindly?

When was your last target practice and how far can you shoot within an inch routinely?

Do you think that gun is "cool" and if so, why?

Do you think the Nazi's would be impressed with how far you have come?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: nonspecific

I can't imagine why you'd protect the identities of some armed response officers but not others, though. Unless Northumbria has some reason to protect that information that other localities don't? # if I know

Just taken a look at the bbc's article and it is the same identical photo of the smiling coppers and some archive shots of cops with guns so maybe the photo in question was nothing more than a photoshoot for the media and the cops in question might be nothing but beat coppers dressing up.

bbc article

originally posted by: nonspecific
That is a fair question, I am guessing you are in America then?

We simply are not accustomed to that kind of thing especially in my neck of the woods so I would expect at least some kind of reason to have that level of armed policing on the streets. I imagine it would be a bit like you popping down the shops and seeing tanks driving around and bloody great rockets and the likes but with no official reason other than "keep you nice and safe"

Funny thing is (and I know that Germany and the UK are different beasts, but...), I am an American, and a military veteran to go along with that.

You want to talk about being unaccustomed to things, immediately after basic training and AIT (advanced individual training), I was stationed with the 1st Infantry Division based out of Wuerzburg, Germany. When I landed in Frankfurt, I got off of the plane and entered the terminal of the airport and was surprised to see Polizei walking through the airport, patrolling with a German Shepard dog on a leash held by one officer and a small black rifle in the hands of the other. Things like that didn't happen in the United States, and quite honestly, still don't in any airport that I have been through post-9/11.

It was a jarring thing to encounter as it wasn't familiar to me--but instead of freaking out over it, I just shrugged it off and moved on. I understood that it wasn't Nazi Germany into which I was flying, and I safely assumed that they weren't out to just sic their dog on me and shoot me for no reason, nor was the intent to necessarily instill concern or fear into visitors in the airport.

The point of having them is as a deterrent. The point of TSA in American airports (if there really is one) is as a deterrent. The reason that our police in America carry weapons (sometimes more than one weapon per individual) is as a deterrent. The apparent reason that the officers in your OP were there was as a deterrent--but furthermore, all of the noted armed law enforcement agents exist where they are and with the weapons that they have because a reactionary force who is not on-scene when something terrible goes down can take precious minutes to arrive.

With what has been happening around the world, and specifically in the EU since open-border policies have been implemented (or, at least, have become news-worthy), it makes sense to have armed LEOs in areas where large groups of people are gathered in relatively confined spaces, especially in preparation for religious holidays.

But like I said, I understand the jarring feeling of uneasiness when you may encounter such a thing and you're unaccustomed to it, but I must argue that HOW you react to it makes the difference. The parent with the child in tears obviously hasn't been appropriately comforted by his mum, but on the flip side, those fully embracing it without possibly understanding the reason for them being there are reacting equally inappropriate, IMO.

It's fine to be concerned about the why behind them being there, but I don't that it's fair to post obviously biased articles that spread the fear and not consider the benign reasoning of their presence really (probably) being there just to ensure everyone's safety at the event in a manner that appropriately reflects the changing dynamics of the world at this frozen moment in time.

a reply to: GraffikPleasure

Some of those are pretty ridiculous questions