Militarization Of British Police

originally posted by: Soloprotocol Smart policing.

that's an oxymoron.

It is a horable idea and always has been.

"Civilian" police, (because that's what they are, "Civilians"), should be of the common citizens not the military.

Or you end up with what we have here now, in the U.S.A... A bunch of former "operators" or just a bunch of "want to be",..."tacticool" that have "immunity" to "operate" and they become "unanswerable" to those they "serve". Which wasn't the point of the American Revolution.

I had a cop stop me on the road, that had a Ka-bar on his duty rig and a U.S. Marine tatoo on his forearm. Made me chuckle a little, (I hid my amusement for the situations sake). I could've bounced a ball off his head on "the play ground". But I respect "badges"! What can I say? I like things that shine.

America "police" are "security guards" for a corporation.
American Sheriffs and deputies are real American LEO's. Because the Sheriff (boss) is hired or fired, by "The people. For the people".
City cops are a problem, as they don't really serve a purpose. Other than creating "public bonds" for their existence and other, "local revenue" collection.

Other than that?... They don't really provide a "service" that any other "former U.S. military" person can not provide for themselves and more cost effectively. ... Being sworn to uphold the same "law" and stuff.

a reply to: Trueman

Like in the U.S.?

Militarization of police at home, never ends well.

The only place it could lead, is for there to be one military organization, that fights their citizens and those abroad. Everyone will be seen the same, as those that need to be controlled, or as the enemy.

I tried to fight the militarization of the police, here in America. People were not paying attention. Now look at the mess we are in, and it will get worse.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Here in the U.S. "law makers" (the servants) started making "law". We should've abided by the C.O.T.U.S.. "Law Enforcement" in the U.S. got out of hand when we allowed the "servants" to make the "law".

Just a "little" violating the "C.O.T.U.S.". "For public safety" reasons.

originally posted by: RoScoLaz5

originally posted by: Soloprotocol Smart policing.

that's an oxymoron.

Hahaa yes, yes it is

a reply to: Kester

No matter how 'militarized' british police gets, they will somehow still not dare go to the 'no-go zones'. Or was that the swedish police..

originally posted by: Shoujikina
a reply to: Kester

No matter how 'militarized' british police gets, they will somehow still not dare go to the 'no-go zones'. Or was that the swedish police..

What no-go zones?

originally posted by: Kester

. . . the Government recognises the value and contribution veterans can bring through their life experiences and strong transferable skills.

www.polfed.org...

The British government want military skills in policing. This seems like overkill. The military have always played a part in British policing. Surveillance, infiltration and some arrests are easily admitted to. Executions, beatings and harassment are not so easily admitted to, but they have occurred, Orgreave, Beanfield, de Menezes etc. Military skills are used when wanted.

The skills needed for policing are taught efficiently. No transferable military skills are needed.

Ex-military police sometimes behave as if they're facing a lethal threat when they're carrying out a standard policing task. This can heighten tensions and cause escalation. In these cases their memories of their previous military life experiences lead to avoidable harm.

From your source:


"National Chair of the Police Federation of England and Wales John Apter said: “This is good news and shows the Government recognises the value and contribution veterans can bring through their life experiences and strong transferable skills."

Hardly militarisation. Just common sense?