Why British police don’t have guns

[Deebank]

I don't trust the police, so I certainly don't want them to have guns.

Funny isn't it that this time last week (or so), we were all bemoaning the fact that the police lied, sought to discredit the dead, covered they tracks and so on. I realise that the two unfortunate coppers killed yesterday were nothing to do with that and grew up in a post-Hillsborough world, but I wonder when people will start to join the dots.

What interests me about that is that so many statements were changed. In other words, the police that were there on the ground told the truth (possibly/probably knowing that those higher up the force wouldn't like it) and had their honest recollections altered.

.. but then kept schtum!

[Jimbly]

I see unarmed police as being an excellent indicator of a generally safe and, dare I say it, progressive society.

I'd say the UK gets the balance right on the whole, which is why incidents like yesterday are so shocking to us, rather than mundane.

This. Much as it pains me to agrees with funky.

This. Much as it pains me to agree with Funky and the Bhoy.

[The Prof]

.. but then kept schtum!

or were ordered to. but yeh, there is that too.

[Insouciant Western People]

arming the British police would put the public at risk as it would increase criminal arms use. the reason the sentencing of criminals usings guns against the police is so hefty is because the police are unarmed. as soon as you arm police criminals tool up to match, putting more people, not just the police, at greater risk.

Will it though?

A lot of European police forces routinely arm their officers, I wonder if those places show a correlation between arming the police and increases in criminals being armed in response.

People make these assumptions, but it's rarely that simple.

[Insouciant Western People]

When I was incapacitated in hospital while recovering from a bad leg-break, the routine was unpleasantly disturbed by the arrival of (apparently) a high-security on the ward. He was ushered into the ward handcuffed to his bed and was hidden into a locked room at the end of the ward. What really shocked me was that police armed with machine guns were stationed at the doors of the ward; in order to obtain access during visiting hours, my parents had to tell the officer the name of the person they were visiting, while staring down the barrel of his gun.

As I'd always thought that UK police were unarmed, the whole incident was quite unnerving. Police were wandering through the ward at all times, and I sensed that the nurses were stressed out by the whole thing. I felt threatened, and wary that the ward could potentially be the site of a bloody gun battle like the ones you might see in a John Woo film. So I was really pleased when, after four or five days, the circus moved on and the ward returned to normal.

Police in UK airports have routinely carried submachine guns for some years now, I think it came in as a widespread measure after the September 11th terrorist incidents.

An acquaintance who worked for the Met once told me that in practice some police vehicles routinely have a handgun or two locked securely in the glovebox.

Whether that's true or just his bravado I don't know, it could well be the latter (he was more than a bit of a nob). He ended up transferring to the Police Service Northern Ireland, largely because they carry guns. But he subsequently transferred back out again because they made him "be nice to catholics"

[Dr Markus]

Arming the police would also slow down their efforts to do their job. Report writing is a bane of most police work, even taking out your gun and not using it in an incident would add to the already crappy paperwork. So more time writing than actually going out and doing a bit of police work.

[Dr Markus]

transferred back out again because they made him "be nice to catholics"

He didn't really stand a chance if he doesn't like catholics. 50% of his work buddies would be catholic, never mind in the general public.

[GoogaMooga]

arming the British police would put the public at risk as it would increase criminal arms use. the reason the sentencing of criminals usings guns against the police is so hefty is because the police are unarmed. as soon as you arm police criminals tool up to match, putting more people, not just the police, at greater risk.

Will it though?

A lot of European police forces routinely arm their officers, I wonder if those places show a correlation between arming the police and increases in criminals being armed in response.

People make these assumptions, but it's rarely that simple.

Exactly. We have regular shootings in Denmark, but nothing on an epidemic level, and police rarely have to draw their guns.

[Deebank]

transferred back out again because they made him "be nice to catholics"

He didn't really stand a chance if he doesn't like catholics. 50% of his work buddies would be catholic, never mind in the general public.

50% in the PSNI? I didn't think it was anywhere near that level yet.... but what do I know

[Diamond Dog]

The British Police were in the Danish news last night, two unarmed constables had been shot.

Lured into a trap by a false burglary report, and attacked with a gun and a grenade.
Not sure what difference being armed would have made under those circumstances.

Is the correct answer.

[Dr Markus]

transferred back out again because they made him "be nice to catholics"

He didn't really stand a chance if he doesn't like catholics. 50% of his work buddies would be catholic, never mind in the general public.

50% in the PSNI? I didn't think it was anywhere near that level yet.... but what do I know

Aye, i think it law now to be fair to both "sides". It has to be 50/50.

[Deebank]

Aye, i think it law now to be fair to both "sides". It has to be 50/50.

I knew that was the aim, but I didn't realise they'd achieved it.

[Jimbly]

Aye, i think it law now to be fair to both "sides". It has to be 50/50.

I knew that was the aim, but I didn't realise they'd achieved it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_Ser ... ecruitment

The PSNI was initially legally obliged to operate an affirmative action policy of recruiting 50% of its trainee officers from a Catholic background and 50% from a non-Catholic background, as recommended by the Patten Report, in order to address the under-representation of the Catholic/Nationalist community that has existed for many decades in policing; in 2001 the RUC was drawn almost 92% from the Protestant/Unionist community. Many Unionist politicians perceived "50:50" as unfair, and when the Bill to set up the PSNI was going through Parliament, Minister of State Adam Ingram had stated: "Dominic Grieve referred to positive discrimination and we hold our hands up. Clause 43 refers to discrimination and appointments and there is no point in saying that that is anything other than positive discrimination."[12] However, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission cited international human rights law to show that special measures to secure minority participation were in accordance with human rights standards and did not in law constitute 'discrimination'.[13]

By February 2011, 29.7% of the 7,200 officers were from the Catholic community, but among the 2,500 police support staff, where the 50:50 rule operated only for larger recruitment drives, the proportion of Catholics just exceeded 18%.[14] The British Government nevertheless proposed to end the 50:50 measure, and provisions for 'lateral entry' of Catholic officers from other police forces, with effect from end-March 2011.[15] Following a public consultation the special measures were ended, in respect of police and support staff, in April 2011.

[andymacandy]

arming the British police would put the public at risk as it would increase criminal arms use. the reason the sentencing of criminals usings guns against the police is so hefty is because the police are unarmed. as soon as you arm police criminals tool up to match, putting more people, not just the police, at greater risk.

Will it though?

A lot of European police forces routinely arm their officers, I wonder if those places show a correlation between arming the police and increases in criminals being armed in response.

People make these assumptions, but it's rarely that simple.

Oh, I agree.And Im sure that 100% of Texas law enforcement officers also carry guns, but it doesn't seem to have proved any kind of deterrent to capital crime over there.
But the UK seems to have an unspoken understanding that gun crime in the general public is still largely the extreme, and formally arming the police would change this unspoken (and, I accept, unprovan) balance.

[The Prof]

Who said YES???!

[bhoywonder]

Who said YES???!

The British Police were in the Danish news last night, two unarmed constables had been shot. Danish police used to be unarmed like the British police, but those days are long gone. Of course they should be armed.

[Dr Markus]

Well it used to be law about the 50/50 thing. I'm not in Northern Ireland to be fair.

[Deebank]

Well it used to be law about the 50/50 thing. I'm not in Northern Ireland to be fair.

Well, nice to see there was a bit of progress made.

[Corporate whore]

I see unarmed police as being an excellent indicator of a generally safe and, dare I say it, progressive society.

I'd say the UK gets the balance right on the whole, which is why incidents like yesterday are so shocking to us, rather than mundane.

This. Much as it pains me to agrees with funky.

This. Much as it pains me to agree with Funky and the Bhoy.

Word

Much as it pains me etc wetc

[Dr Markus]

Well it used to be law about the 50/50 thing. I'm not in Northern Ireland to be fair.

Well, nice to see there was a bit of progress made.

I think the basic package to join the police up there is pretty good, I’m sure jeemo will be alone in a minute to show if I’m wrong.