Since the shooting of two police officers in Manchester, UK, there are calls for all officers to be armed, and questions as to why Britain is one of the very few countries with unarmed police.
Do you think they should be armed? or if they are already armed in your country, do you prefer it this way?
In my opinion, no - or at least not in the UK. If you look at the statistics:
[quote]In 2010-11, England and Wales witnessed 388 firearm offences in which there was a fatal or serious injury, 13% lower than the previous 12 months. In Scotland during the same period, there were two fatal and 109 non-fatal injuries during the same period, a decade-long low.[/quote]
388 offences in a country of nearly 65,000,000 is low, and if you ask the police:
[quote]A 2006 survey of 47,328 Police Federation members found 82% did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty, despite almost half saying their lives had been "in serious jeopardy" during the previous three years.[/quote]
The police generally don't want to carry weapons.
And you have to think of the public too, this is what happened last time a police officer shot someone:
[IMG]http://www.firstnews.co.uk/site_data/images/screen_shot_2011-08-09_at_09_12_15_4e40eb98e1094.jpg[/IMG]
So I don't think we need them, just yet anyway.
Sources: [URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398[/URL]
This is just my opinion of course, but I know I feel much safer when I call 911 and an armed police officer responds.
I mean when I look at a cop in Britain or any related country for that matter, I feel as though that they need to be armed and ready to deal with [B]any[/B] situation they may encounter, and to protect the public and themselves.
Depends on the degree of arms.
Some should range from pepper spray, to tasers, to pistols.
But all in all they should be prepared.
Arming the police polarises the public's opinion of armed enforcement, often to the point whereby it is detrimental.
This debate crops up every time a police officer is killed in this country. At the end of the day, the police realise and understand the threats they face on a daily basis. If anyone has the best insight as to whether the entire police force should be armed, it's the police officers themselves. And they've repeatedly said they don't want to be carrying firearms. We have specialists response units that deal with firearms offences. I don't see what needs to be changed
just give em pellet guns
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("This is not debating" - Megafan))[/highlight]
If the police arm them selves so will the majority of criminals. Simple logic.
[QUOTE=Bad)-(and;37728974]This debate crops up every time a police officer is killed in this country. At the end of the day, the police realise and understand the threats they face on a daily basis. If anyone has the best insight as to whether the entire police force should be armed, it's the police officers themselves. And they've repeatedly said they don't want to be carrying firearms. We have specialists response units that deal with firearms offences. I don't see what needs to be changed[/QUOTE]
Absolutely.
82% of British officers do not want firearms, and for good reasons.
Take this as an example from an officer.
"I have been in the police for 12 years, before that I was in the Army. I would happily carry a gun if the decision was made but it won't ever happen.
"I don't think practically it could work because of the training. Officers in this country are highly trained and this would extend to firearms training, too. But, at the moment, with all the cuts, we can't put enough officers in the cars, let alone give them firearms training.
"Also, the police in this country are always under so much scrutiny. Look at the issue of Tasers, the civil liberty groups think they are one of the most inhumane things going.
"I was previously injured badly in an assault. My colleague and I feared for our lives - thankfully other officers came to our aid. I don't think a gun - or a Taser for that matter - would have helped us in that situation. Communication is one of the best tools, and to be honest, having a gun could make an officer feel over-confident."
With proper training I see no issue with armed officers. If they were trigger happy little shits like you see all too often in the US then I'd be thinking differently.
They should be armed with non-lethal weapons that can incapacitate a target from a decent distance. Things such as plastic bullet guns and tasers should be used. Lethally arming police officers could go wrong if the officer gets a bit too excited or something, because it does happen sometimes.
[QUOTE=Samiam22;37733546]They should be armed with non-lethal weapons that can incapacitate a target from a decent distance. Things such as plastic bullet guns and tasers should be used. Lethally arming police officers could go wrong if the officer gets a bit too excited or something, because it does happen sometimes.[/QUOTE]
Those things aren't very effective and their range is very short
If police are suddenly armed the criminals will all be armed. It will probably just escalate the violence and get more innocent people killed in the crossfire.
[QUOTE=download;37733061]With proper training I see no issue with armed officers. [B]If they were trigger happy little shits like you see all too often in the US then I'd be thinking differently.[/B][/QUOTE]
This is not even true.
Just because you dont understand what makes it legal for an officer to fire his weapon does not make them all "trigger happy little shits". All officer shootings are investigated by a private, third-party department that will review the facts of the case and based on how the officer articulates his stance on why he discharged his weapon.
[editline]20th September 2012[/editline]
for the case for "should they be armed"
in the US - Yes. Because of our slack gun laws, and vast amount of people in the country, it is paramount that the officers are armed for defending the public against violent offenses.
[QUOTE=Singo;37724361]This is just my opinion of course, but I know I feel much safer when I call 911 and an armed police officer responds.
I mean when I look at a cop in Britain or any related country for that matter, I feel as though that they need to be armed and ready to deal with [B]any[/B] situation they may encounter, and to protect the public and themselves.[/QUOTE]
They do have armed police and armed police will respond to your 911 call if necessary.
I thought that regular British police - the ones that patrol, etc - don't have firearms to prevent accidents, but have armed emergency response teams.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;37738546]I thought that regular British police - the ones that patrol, etc - don't have firearms to prevent accidents, but have armed emergency response teams.[/QUOTE]
There are armed teams whom patrol as well.
Since I live in the us all officers are armed usually. But in other industrialized countries like the us, there is still violence, but not as much as the us in most cases. I think there are plenty of NON LETHAL options to choose from. Tear gas, batons, rubber bullets, etc
[QUOTE=Protocol7;37738546]I thought that regular British police - the ones that patrol, etc - don't have firearms to prevent accidents, but have armed emergency response teams.[/QUOTE]
Spot on, though there are a few places where there are armed police at all times, like NPPs, some parts of airports and some major train stations.
[QUOTE=MalwareOhMy!;37738701]Since I live in the us all officers are armed usually. But in other industrialized countries like the us, there is still violence, but not as much as the us in most cases. I think there are plenty of NON LETHAL options to choose from. Tear gas, batons, rubber bullets, etc[/QUOTE]
I think all unarmed offices in the UK carry a baton, but to use a taser or anything else, they need the same firearms training as the armed officers.
They were talking about rolling out separate training so unarmed officers could carry a taser but nothing really came of it.
[QUOTE=matt.ant;37738746]I think all unarmed offices in the UK carry a baton, but to use a taser or anything else, they need the same firearms training as the armed officers.
They were talking about rolling out separate training so unarmed officers could carry a taser but nothing really came of it.[/QUOTE]
sorry, im sort of what you would call a typical american and need to do some more research on other countries. I didnt realize what a big deal this actually is
[editline]20th September 2012[/editline]
im not trying to be a dick
[QUOTE=matt.ant;37738746]I think all unarmed offices in the UK carry a baton, but to use a taser or anything else, they need the same firearms training as the armed officers.
They were talking about rolling out separate training so unarmed officers could carry a taser but nothing really came of it.[/QUOTE]
Tasers are still on test run at the moment with some boroughs already having adopted them. I can tell you with utter assurance that within the next few years, most officers will have them.
too bad tasers can be avoided by wearing extra clothes. or taking PCP
I think a lot of officers might not want to use weapons because they're scared of the consequences.
Look at the Ian Thomlinson case, the police officer pushed him and hit him with his baton and the man fell over and died. The police officer was instantly fired and threatened with jail.
Then you have the Mark Duggan case where the officer shot him because he had a gun, and we had country wide riots.
In the investigation into the riots, a lot of police officers admitted the stood back because they were afraid of being 'too violent'
[QUOTE=matt.ant;37738958]I think a lot of officers might not want to use weapons because they're scared of the consequences.
Look at the Ian Thomlinson case, the police officer pushed him and hit him with his baton and the man fell over and died. The police officer was instantly fired and threatened with jail.
Then you have the Mark Duggan case where the officer shot him because he had a gun, and we had country wide riots.
In the investigation into the riots, a lot of police officers admitted the stood back because they were afraid of being 'too violent'[/QUOTE]
Where was Mr.Duggan shot? Did he die?
[QUOTE=areolop;37738045]
[editline]20th September 2012[/editline]
for the case for "should they be armed"
in the US - Yes. Because of our slack gun laws, and vast amount of people in the country, it is paramount that the officers are armed for defending the public against violent offenses.[/QUOTE]
wait... how do our gun laws affect this? Criminals don't give a shit about gun laws when it comes to attaining weapons.
For the overall question, some not all I would suppose. But have 9/11 responders armed if a crime is going on.
what i said mostly applies to America, Different countries need different laws. I think the way the UK is going works fine for them.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;37740545]wait... how do our gun laws affect this? Criminals don't give a shit about gun laws when it comes to attaining weapons.
For the overall question, some not all I would suppose. But have 9/11 responders armed if a crime is going on.
what i said mostly applies to America, Different countries need different laws. I think the way the UK is going works fine for them.[/QUOTE]
I was saying that it is easy for everyone to buy/own a gun in the US. Not just criminals but everyone.
[QUOTE=areolop;37738045]This is not even true.
Just because you dont understand what makes it legal for an officer to fire his weapon does not make them all "trigger happy little shits". All officer shootings are investigated by a private, third-party department that will review the facts of the case and based on how the officer articulates his stance on why he discharged his weapon.
[editline]20th September 2012[/editline]
for the case for "should they be armed"
in the US - Yes. Because of our slack gun laws, and vast amount of people in the country, it is paramount that the officers are armed for defending the public against violent offenses.[/QUOTE]
I know perfectly well what makes it legal in the US for an officer to use a firearm. Doesn't mean they always obey those laws
Doesn't mean they are constantly and negligently violated like you implied.
[QUOTE=MalwareOhMy!;37739019]Where was Mr.Duggan shot? Did he die?[/QUOTE]
He was shot dead in a taxi in Tottenham, London. He pulled a gun from his waistband (Accoring to the most recent report) when pulled over by armed officers who were trying to detain him and was subsequently shot and killed.
The shooting then sparked a riot in parts of London, which then spread across England
I dont see why not. It's their job to protect us from dangerous and unlawful people. Anything that can help them to stop these people I am for.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.