why dont the police in the U.K. carry firearms?

Answer 1

there are special armed police officers who are called in when a situation warrants it.

Answer 2

Unfortunately a lot of them now do carry firearms. And that is a very alarming tendency.

Traditionally the British policemen is (and always was) unarmed, since he, as a person, represents the Law, and as such carries the traditions of freedom and fairness. And representing the Law in person means that this is enough power and needs no further enhancement through a mechanical instrument or weapon.

In the past the criminals had a great respect for the unarmed police, and it was extremely rare that a policeman was ever killed by a criminal. And when Britain still had the death penalty, killing an unarmed policemen would automatically incur a death sentence.

By the way, the police force in the Republic of Ireland, known as the "Garda Siochana" or - for short - "Garda", is also unarmed for the same reasons. And since Ireland is a much fairer society than Britain and has much less crime, there is no explosion of armed special police here.

Answer 3

This is a very interesting subject and following is a short summary. The source link will provide more details and seeking additional source will provide a great deal of interesting information.

Unlike the police in most other countries, the British police are not routinely armed, except in Northern Ireland, at airports, nuclear facilities, and on some protection duties. The arming of the police is a perennial topic of debate.
Officers on night patrols in some London divisions were frequently armed with Webley revolvers (and, after the Battle of Stepney, Webley semi-automatics) for over 50 years following the murder of two officers in 1884, though individual officers were able to choose whether to carry the weapons. The practice ended in July 1936, after which arms could be issued by a sergeant if there was a good reason, and if the officer had been trained.
The issue of routine arming was next raised after the 1952 Derek Bentley case, and again after the 1966 murder of three officers in London (Massacre of Braybrook Street), following which around 17% of officers in London were authorised to carry firearms. After the deaths of a number of members of the public in the 1980s, control was considerably tightened, many officers had their firearm authorisation revoked, and training for the remainder was greatly improved and later extended to include some training from the SAS. Currently around seven per cent of officers in London are trained in the use of firearms. Firearms are also only issued to an officer under strict guidelines.
In order to allow armed officers to rapidly attend an incident, weapons are now frequently carried in the secure armoury of patrolling Armed Response Vehicles (ARVs). ARVs were modelled on the Instant Response Cars introduced by the West Yorkshire Police in 1976, and were first introduced in London in 1991, when 132 armed deployments were made.
In a 1995 ballot amongst members of the Police Federation of England and Wales, over 75% of the vote was against routine arming. However, the huge increase in gun crime since the late 1990s is seen as a major issue. For the first time since 1936, the routine carrying of firearms on normal police patrols was re-introduced in Nottingham in February 2000, in response to a number of gang related shootings on the St Ann's and Meadows estates.
The shooting of an officer in Bradford in late 2005 led to the debate being re-opened. The Police Federation is conducting a repeat of the 1995 ballot. In that survey 77% of officers that responded, stated that they would not want to be routinely armed despite rising levels of violent crime and instances where police officers themselves were assaulted.
As of September 2004, all forces in England and Wales also have the Taser available, but it may only be used where a full firearms authority has been granted and may only be used by Firearms Officers although there have been growing calls quietly from within the ranks and the public for officers to be routinely armed with a Taser. The Police Federation have already called for this and is a firm position held by it.

Within the United States those jurisdictions with the most restrictive of gun control laws have the highest crime rates and those with most freedom of personal arming with guns have the lowest crime rates. In countries which have barred the personal ownership of guns, it appears that this same trend is growing with violent crime increasing and criminals having guns not reducing at all. Assuming that this apparent trend is true and that it continues, police officer lives will become increasingly at risk resulting in officers becoming armed. Of course the answer is have an armed populace.

Answer 4

It was my understanding that two years ago they all started to carry firearms.
It is no longer safe for them and we live in different times.

Hence the Spanish guy shot in the subway station. Where did they get the guns from. They carry 9mm now to the best of my knowledge.

Answer 5

Where do you get your information from? have you seen our police recently? They carry firearms, rest assured!
Have you been watching Heartbeat?

Answer 6

it wasn't necessary until the civilian population was disarmed. Since that time the incidence of violent crime increased dramatically.

Answer 7

they do. it used to be they didn't have to, but the crime increased markedly under Thatcher and they got in line with American practice. Bobbies with guns is a damn shame.

Answer 8

some do.Fire arms are illegal over here so your run of the mill criminal is no threat

Answer 9

Many of them do.

Answer 10

Because it's safe enough not too.