Should All UK Police Be Armed?

The other night I watched as the drama that was the stand of between police and Raoul Moat with a shotgun to his neck. The array of fire power on show by the police was impressive as was their undeniable professionalism in dealing with the indecent. Then last month we had Derrick Bird who killed 12 people and injured 25 before killing himself.

In both of these cases the unarmed police came in close proximity to the offenders. According to some reports two unarmed police saw Derrick Bird however were forced to retreat to cover behind a wall when he threatened them. Then we had Raoul Moat who shot an unarmed traffic officer in his car.

The point however of this thread is not to discuss these events themselves but to ask if it’s time for all UK police to be armed. If all UK police were armed the arguably both of these recent shootings could have been dealt with quicker and there would have been greater protection for police and public.

When it comes to this I am on the fence, generally in the UK gun crime is not as serious as it has been recently we have more problems with knifes. With that in mind perhaps it would be more advisable for all police to be armed with Tasers. However these are not effective when confronting an armed assailant or dear i say it a suicide bomber. Therefore perhaps for the sake of all round practicality hand guns would be more suitable coupled with tougher knife laws.

I am not talking about all police being armed to the teeth like the tactical firearms teams carrying G36C’s and MP5’s, just a 9mm hand gun. It could even be put into place that all officers are trained to use hand guns however it is at the discretion of the Chief Constable when they should be used and where. So for example say there was police intelligence of guns being possessed by groups of people in the Govan (or another part of a city), police in that area have the option of being armed.


Anyway I am sure allot of you have some very strong views on this so please feel free to shear them with us all.


[edit on 10-7-2010 by kevinunknown]

hmmmm

I don't think we need it, like you said gun crime here is not that common, and when there is a need for armed officers they are on the scene pretty quickly, with some fairly serious weaponry, I'm sure I saw some G36's in amongst the MP5's hunting Moat.

Living in Glasgow, I'd definitely be more concerned about the idiot's out on a friday/sat night bottling, stabbing and attacking people for no reason than I ever would be about a situation arising with a gun.

Personally if all UK officers are armed this will create a tipping point where more of the criminal fraternity will feel the need to be armed, and in response to both those changes, law abiding persons like myself will also feel the need to be armed.

It would be a game changer for the worse, and will be a sad day when the UK Gov feels the need to arm every officer.

Yeah I agree with that, I think that the Tasar weapon would be a good idea though for the type of crime you’re talking about.

I am not talking about all police being armed to the teeth like the tactical firearms teams carrying G36C’s and MP5’s, just a 9mm hand gun. It could even be put into place that all officers are trained to use hand guns however it is at the discretion of the Chief Constable when they should be used and where. So for example say there was police intelligence of guns being possessed by groups of people in the Govan (or another part of a city), police in that area have the option of being armed.

You arm all the cops and all the crims will be armed.... "you aint taking me alive copper"!

The point that it may increase armed criminals is a good one. But I think we already have people in the criminal fraternity who carry guns and are prepared the use them. We already have armed police patrols in some cities anyway and very tight gun laws that make it more difficult for them to get weapons. It’s not like in America were every man and his dog can own his own personal armoury of weapons.

I don't get how people can think more guns in the hands of an already oppressive orwellian government can be a good thing.

Why would you give the Nanny a gun?

Well if policemen had no arms it would sure save on uniform costs.
Not having two sets of sleeves ( considering the shirts and the jackets), would save large, and the .guv could then subsidize a program where the honest folk could get free self defense hand guns, and the criminals would then get jobs, as they are slightly less afraid of work then they are afeared of being ventilated.

The crime rate doesn't change much regarding the police being armed, but it DOUBLES when the population is disarmed...

Considering that at least in CANADA the cops aren't even legally required to show up to a 911...

Well, if you want something done right you have to do it your selfs

[edit on 10-7-2010 by Danbones]

Should all UK police be armed? No.

BUT: All of UK citizens should be.

I think that there is a time and a place for armed police and un-armed police.

I'm glad I don't live there.

Knife crime is up?
Of course it is.

I've shared my views on this several times before one ATS, but i know they are not shared by everyone, including serving officers.

I would like to see our police armed. Not just because of Raoul Moat, or Derek Bird, Hungerford or Dunblane.

The more dangerous criminals are usualy armed these days, or have easy access to arms, so saying that arming the coppers will increase criminals arms doesn't wash too well with me. They already have them if they want them.

I am speaking as someone who was always armed in the military police, and yes we dealt with civillians too, some whom were armed.

It was just nice having the option to choose whether or not i was going to die by a criminals gun.

Thats the thing with me, having the option of using a firearm if need be. Lets face it, although there was overkill with the Raoul Moat incident, thats probably because they wanted to save face after the Bird fiasco.

You are not going to get this level of armed police on the scene every time a criminal confronts a policeman with a gun, so i say at least give the police a chance to protect themselves or the public quicker.

Whether it's compulsory or give them the choice, i would like to see at least one officer in a patrol armed.

CX.

[edit on 10/7/10 by CX]

reply to post by alaskan



That’s just the thing i don’t believe we life in anything like a Orwellian state. If CCTV increases public safety good, if a full DNA database increases public safety, good. The UK is nothing like Oceania it’s just a nice sound bite people like to spout. For me i take the view that 12 people being killed by a gun in the hand of a mad man is truly not a good thing.

[edit on 10-7-2010 by kevinunknown]

reply to post by CX

Again in Canada, during a major gun amnesty the cops were busted selling the turned in guns out the back door.

reply to post by CX


CX

I am starting to think we are both one half of the same brain. A star for you.

Originally posted by alaskan
I don't get how people can think more guns in the hands of an already oppressive orwellian government can be a good thing.

Why would you give the Nanny a gun?

Hear hear there's no need for UK cops to be armed, the reality is a criminal bouncer like Raul Moat with all the crim connections a man could need could only get his hands on a sawn off shotgun with 4 bird shot cartridges.

With the ego boost of carrying a gun coupled with their already arrogant confrontational manner Brit cops would end up provoking a revolution.

reply to post by Thepreye


Would you agree though with this as policing policy which I what I would like to see.

All police armed with tazars, and all trained to use 9mm handguns however it is at the desertion of the Chief Constable were they get used. So for example say they have intelligence saying one part of a city or an entire city has criminals who have possession of firearms the police have to option of arming beat boobies.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by CX

 

CX

I am starting to think we are both one half of the same brain. A star for you.

I hear wedding bells wrapped in tin foil.

Back on topic..... Personaly if the cops can have guns then why cant i? Im ex army and trained enough to safely store, use and show constraint with a rifle. That way i get protection from the crims and protection from rouge cops itching for a kill.

I was personally affected by Derrick Birds actions, one of his victims, was an old college and drinking buddy of mine, and the solicitor, Mr commons, was our family solicitor.....................however...............I DO NOT believe police should be armed as a result of his or Raoul Moats actions.

The people who are willing to go to the extents like those two are few and far inbetween. I honestly do think that if they start arming the police we will start seeing more of this type of crime, back the criminals into a corner, and they will come out fighting.

Gun laws as they stand in the UK are enough to put most people off.

Tazers, I could live with, as long as police didn't abuse them like they seem to do in the states (no offence general public of america).

There are gun crimes all over the world, the UK is probably one of the better off countries, our criminals seem to prefer knifes and bats, which tazers would be adequate to deal with.

Guns on permanent display on our streets would just destroy our way of life, the armed police we have do a good enough job, even if normal police were armed, Derrick Bird and Raoul Moat would have still taken life before getting took down themselves.

EDIT: Both Derrick and Raoul had good knowledge of their areas, especially Derrick, thats one of the reasons they gave the police such a run.

I think Cumbria needs a larger, better spread out armed force. Just not the average day to day bobbies.

[edit on 10/7/10 by woogleuk]

reply to post by woogleuk


Firstly sorry for your loss.

I cant see any real argument against all police having the tazer weapon. I would go further than what you have said saying that all police should be trained to use handguns and the Chief Constable should have the power to authorize all police to be armed were it is necessary. I think there would be a good argument for this to be done when clubs are coming out a night as a deterrent or in a area with gang culture problems.

It is not a good idea and here is why.

The story in the UK regarding the man that shot himself in my opinion was intentionally sensationalized for the very purpose of making the point the OP seems to be in favor of.

Public opinion can be easily swayed yes however there are those amongst us that can see the this story like the many others surrounding it (relating to gun crime) are hand picked for the public to digest and as a result be conditioned into accepting the need for more imposed security laws.

What this does is it puts the power and control more into the hands that use fear against us to gain an advantage. Arming the police will only increase the fear in the public eye although not on a visible but subconscious level.

Guns full stop are not the solution and more of them on the streets means more dead people.

What governments really need to be focusing on is how to address the issues that create crime in the first instance.

Perhaps there is a more pressing illness within society that needs to be looked at!?

Personally i feel the OP has an agenda and is in some way connected to the secret organisation of condition agents.

reply to post by kevinunknown


That I could agree with, have an armoury at the local nick and several trained local officers in the event something like this should occur, deployment would be much quicker.

Not the clubs though, I wouldn't tempt fate, hundreds of drunk yobs and a few officers with guns could get very messy given the right (wrong?) situation.

[edit on 10/7/10 by woogleuk]