RocketDodger
Longterm Registered User
You're in Greece. Your Cops are already armed. Now do shut up.
It is one thing to be thought of as a fool, it's another to open your mouth and confirm it.
Nick Clegg Rejects Calls For All Police Officers To Be Armed
- Thread starter Close Protection World News
- Start date
You're in Greece. Your Cops are already armed. Now do shut up.
It is one thing to be thought of as a fool, it's another to open your mouth and confirm it.
Having been in the Military and an armed Police officer in the UK, I feel it is about time and overdue that officers are armed in the UK. When you need an armed officer as soon as possible on the street, that wait is a VERY long time! and that situation can go bad very quickly. When Clegg and Orde, state that the majority of officers do not want guns, love to know when they surveyed everyone about it, I know they didnt and never will because they wouldnt like the result. I am currently a serving cop in Canada and am routinely armed. Nobody is affraid to approach us and it is just another tool on the belt. We also have people who I wouldnt trust with a rubber and pencil but it is just a matter of training officers correctly.
The recruit process adds a psychological interview and tests and then blend the training into the use of force portion. This takes people with no weapon knowledge to officers who can pass their qualification and refresher training each year and do their job with that better ability to protect themselves and the public they serve.
All this crap about being an unarmed service and public wouldnt like it. Only ones who wouldnt like it are the ones who do things wrong and have no regard for anyone or anything. criminals have guns etc. already and the excuse they will just get guns is so pathetic and a left wing cop out it makes me puke. That argument holds no weight and a reality check in UK need to be done. This is the 21st Century and about time everyone accepted Policing needs to catch up. The rest of Europe carry firarms on the job and none of them have the mindless without provocation violence that the UK has. The UK is statistically per person the most violent European location, and if the Good old BOBBIES are unable to protect themselves , how can the protect the public.
Yes the Police has bad apples in it, were all human after all, and eventually they will all be found out and removed. I read the comments about what if that copper at the riots who pushed the guy who dies had a gun what would he have done then!!! probably still pushed him you cretin!! please, as armed officers we know the consequence of using our weapons and no wriggle room is given.
I feel that the great British public, and I mean the normal everyday hard working public,( not the sponging, drop out, cant be bothered, entitled arseholes and ASBO accumilating scum and their lawyers ) would be able to adapt to armed officers as if it was always the norm. Remember when we were given the new batons and CS the first time, everyone was shocked for about a week and the left went on for a while longer but it was fine.
No Upper echelon senior command weenie or Politicain is willing to admit the streets are too violent as this admits they are wrong and then they may not get promoted or offerd a position on a new high paid position because of it. The Government and Senior command have no spine and never will till you get Police Officers back in charge and a Government that cares about its population.
I wish you all the best my brothers and sisters in Blue and god rest those two brave amazing ladies who gave the ultimate sacrifice in protecting a sometimes very ficle public.
The recruit process adds a psychological interview and tests and then blend the training into the use of force portion. This takes people with no weapon knowledge to officers who can pass their qualification and refresher training each year and do their job with that better ability to protect themselves and the public they serve.
All this crap about being an unarmed service and public wouldnt like it. Only ones who wouldnt like it are the ones who do things wrong and have no regard for anyone or anything. criminals have guns etc. already and the excuse they will just get guns is so pathetic and a left wing cop out it makes me puke. That argument holds no weight and a reality check in UK need to be done. This is the 21st Century and about time everyone accepted Policing needs to catch up. The rest of Europe carry firarms on the job and none of them have the mindless without provocation violence that the UK has. The UK is statistically per person the most violent European location, and if the Good old BOBBIES are unable to protect themselves , how can the protect the public.
Yes the Police has bad apples in it, were all human after all, and eventually they will all be found out and removed. I read the comments about what if that copper at the riots who pushed the guy who dies had a gun what would he have done then!!! probably still pushed him you cretin!! please, as armed officers we know the consequence of using our weapons and no wriggle room is given.
I feel that the great British public, and I mean the normal everyday hard working public,( not the sponging, drop out, cant be bothered, entitled arseholes and ASBO accumilating scum and their lawyers ) would be able to adapt to armed officers as if it was always the norm. Remember when we were given the new batons and CS the first time, everyone was shocked for about a week and the left went on for a while longer but it was fine.
No Upper echelon senior command weenie or Politicain is willing to admit the streets are too violent as this admits they are wrong and then they may not get promoted or offerd a position on a new high paid position because of it. The Government and Senior command have no spine and never will till you get Police Officers back in charge and a Government that cares about its population.
I wish you all the best my brothers and sisters in Blue and god rest those two brave amazing ladies who gave the ultimate sacrifice in protecting a sometimes very ficle public.
The days of unarmed cops is over
The world has change from when I worked the streets. Today, cops have to be able to defend themselves. The crazies are out there and so are the cops. The nut jobs have guns. Nuf said.
The world has change from when I worked the streets. Today, cops have to be able to defend themselves. The crazies are out there and so are the cops. The nut jobs have guns. Nuf said.
SC, I am not saying that AFO's don't receive training in these subjects, just that there is not enough of it. There are too many other disciplines which the department has to put officers through, to allow in depth training in some. I appreciate that I wasn't in the force which has by far the greatest amount of armed officers and has many departments within, due to the weight of work they have to take on.
Forces outside the MET have much less resources and tend to have to make their smaller number of AFO's fit many jobs, thus training may appear watered down. Any small amount of knowledge I have about what an AFO does comes from being one for 19 years, mainly operationally, but also involved in the training department for a period of time. I was also seconded out to other forces on a number of occasions, so experienced other training processes as well.
Steve Collins
Longterm Registered User
Then please accept my apologies. I often get hot under the collar over this subject. Having been an AFO in a county force prior to transferring to 19 everything you have said is true, which would make the arming of the police across the board a monumental task.
Heck, no need to apologise - I'll go all wishy washy:~) I have a good friend in 19 and know that the unit receives top class training - and extensive too.
In fact, here's a specific aspect of training (or lack of it), based on the actual risk to threat ratio. I lobbied my force for many years to include an element of instinctive shooting in training. My belief was/is that, as rural forces arm steadily more officers and let them loose on the streets, there is an increasing chance of armed officers coming into contact with 'someone, armed or otherwise so dangerous.' Those are the words in the policy for if an AFO has to 'self arm,' i.e. draw weapons without seeking authority from up high. (That's 'self arm, not self harm, although the result might be the same:~)
Now as rural forces dont have much money to throw around, we found that armed officers were tasked with dealing with many of the task that unarmed officers did - pub fights, domestics etc., so the chance of the above was increasing IMHO. However, the ACPO manual has a couple of paragraphs on the subject of using a weapon in close quarters, when time and distance are against the officer. Soooooo - the powers that be decreed that the subject doesn't need practicing.
So the closest that most AFO's get to the targets is 7 metres and at that distance they have a two second time to raise the weapon from 'weapon ready' position - or three seconds to draw and fire. AND the only pressure is peer pressure.
As you surely know SC, drawing and firing as the threat gets rapidly closer than 7 metres is another world to drawing and firing in three seconds, but they still done practice it, unless you are a CPO, who will probably never need the skill.
To date, a handful of forces have practiced the skills required, which are a skillset which most instructors don't have - in fact don't even know about.
Now, if such an important aspect of firearms use isn't being explored, you can see why I am a tad cynical about firearms training - albeit in rural forces. I mean - the skillset takes a couple of hours to teach and the occasional refresher, but it could be really important to those officers out there, who are being placed in vulnerable positions by the control room operator.
Rant off - sorry. I'll go back to marking
In fact, here's a specific aspect of training (or lack of it), based on the actual risk to threat ratio. I lobbied my force for many years to include an element of instinctive shooting in training. My belief was/is that, as rural forces arm steadily more officers and let them loose on the streets, there is an increasing chance of armed officers coming into contact with 'someone, armed or otherwise so dangerous.' Those are the words in the policy for if an AFO has to 'self arm,' i.e. draw weapons without seeking authority from up high. (That's 'self arm, not self harm, although the result might be the same:~)
Now as rural forces dont have much money to throw around, we found that armed officers were tasked with dealing with many of the task that unarmed officers did - pub fights, domestics etc., so the chance of the above was increasing IMHO. However, the ACPO manual has a couple of paragraphs on the subject of using a weapon in close quarters, when time and distance are against the officer. Soooooo - the powers that be decreed that the subject doesn't need practicing.
So the closest that most AFO's get to the targets is 7 metres and at that distance they have a two second time to raise the weapon from 'weapon ready' position - or three seconds to draw and fire. AND the only pressure is peer pressure.
As you surely know SC, drawing and firing as the threat gets rapidly closer than 7 metres is another world to drawing and firing in three seconds, but they still done practice it, unless you are a CPO, who will probably never need the skill.
To date, a handful of forces have practiced the skills required, which are a skillset which most instructors don't have - in fact don't even know about.
Now, if such an important aspect of firearms use isn't being explored, you can see why I am a tad cynical about firearms training - albeit in rural forces. I mean - the skillset takes a couple of hours to teach and the occasional refresher, but it could be really important to those officers out there, who are being placed in vulnerable positions by the control room operator.
Rant off - sorry. I'll go back to marking
MC222. My rural force gives us developmental shoot time on close range from the holster and last session was carrying & firing from the Sul position. Not sure if this is down to individual Forces just training what the Manual of Guidance tell them to or some instructors actually thinking outside the box a bit & adding in some real life stuff??
What is your point?
Just because the general population in UK is not armed, the Police can not be armed?
Is that what you are saying? If yes, this is just Bullshit!
Whatever gun regulations a country has, should have nothing to do with if their Police is armed or not.
It is about Officer safety, plain and simple.
As a side note, most of the Police Officers around the World are armed. No major problems with safety issues etc.
I' ll be damned if a UK Police Officer can not be trained to handle his sidearm in a safe manner.
Are the Police Officers in UK so retarded there that they can not achieve the same as the rest of the 98% of the World's Police Officers? Is the fear real that they will end up shooting each other in Teamrooms and firing at inocent bystanders? Or is this just some sort of urban legend myth ?
There is a surprising number of legally held firearms in the UK , from shotguns to full bore sporting/hunting rifles. The public `out-gun` the Police by a long chalk , not to mention the increasing amount of illegal firearms in the hands of criminal gangs. I wouldn`t like to see every officer down to PCSO level armed but an increase in Armed Officers would only be a good thing.
RocketDodger
Longterm Registered User
How is the General Public 'needing' weapons or otherwise in any way relevant to this thread?
They don't need weapons to deal with the 'public'. they need weapons, as do our cousins world wide, to deal with nut jobs with MAC 10s, AKs, hand grenades and Glocks.
I read what Steve Collins posted and he seems to be against the arming of the police en masse but it will have to happen at some stage. To be honest, I'm surprised some knob end in Brussels hasn't insisted on it. But there is a huge gap between teaching Mr Plod to handle a Glock 19 safely and the sort of rapid intervention stuff Steve has been taught. But, I firmly believe, in the not to distant future, this will happen. As for the 'Old n Bold' who will refuse to handle a firearm, fine, they can be gradually phased in and them, when they retire, phased out.
I'll be perfectly straight, in my time in the police I can catergorically state there were at least two incidents where I would have drawn and used a firearm had I had one. In my mind, and in todays H&S world, today that would be judged two incidents too many
It is down to individual instructors. And to make it more difficult, training departments will set out periods where the 'required' lessons have to be taught (veh stops, slow methodicals etc), which give little time for the development shoots. I'm glad to hear your guys stretch themselves, because my old lot didn't.
Not a big fan of SUL, but that's just me and I realise it's a method bourne out of a need to be overly 'safe' in this century of ambulance chasing solicitors.
That's more than a shame, because, like in any other police subject, the experience is what matters - in fact it's the thing which can keep people alive more than any other part.
And anyway, be it a dynamic entry, a fast entry to secure evidence, or a slow methodical, the building tends to dictate the tactics to a large degree. What works in a school or office block has to be adapted for a two up two down terrace.
One thing though, we did some practice, comparing a 'speeded up, but not too much' slow methodical and compared it with an evidence entry and the difference was seconds, but the slow methodical was much safer. So maybe one form of generic search method could work.
Forgive my ignorance - what is the 'sul' position???
Thanks for that!