Guns/Police?

Question

Is it now time for the police to carry fire arms with the option to shoot on Threat ie charlie pulls any fire arm out with a threat to the life of the officer

Bomastic and all who critasise my qiestion my BROTHER IS IN THE POLICE

CGI76 my name is not charlie in england we use this a a name term

kimt the police havebetter fire power than the thugs on the street but are not allowed to use it

cjhemm2000 if you wish to argue your point contact me on my messinger and i bet i'll win hands down

Bear yes i do mean arm every officer rank and file

Answer 1

Yes, the day of the unarmed British Bobby on the street is very sadly long gone. The officers on day to day patrol are being subjected to threates from armed offenders (not just guns) on a daily basis and there are not enough armed response vehicles to deal with the threat.

The option to shoot is never a blanket option, the decision has to be made on the spot after weighing up the threat level.

Yes the police federation did a recent survey and the police did vote against routine arming, however if they would have limited the survey to response officers who deal with the day to day issues the reposne I am sure would have been different.

The public, the CPS and the courts all see the police as fair game and there is no support in the justice system for the people who go out day after day and put our necks on the block.

Gun crime wouldn't go up that much, the criminals already have guns and gangs see them as status symbols.

In fact it would probably go down, most criminals know that 90% of the police are unarmed and if they point a gun at a police officer responding to their criminal activity they point the gun at the police officer who either backs off and lives or intervenes and risks getting shot. If they point guns and start to get shot they might think twice.

Dont get me wrong there are coppers I wouldn't trust with a sharp pencil, let a lone a 9mm pistol, but the policing needs of the UK have changed and the police need to change to meet them

Answer 2

First of all each force has armed police.....so they are already armed..... or do you mean all police, as in every officer?

Secondly the Police Federation did a survey not too long ago and the vast majority of police officers were against being routinely armed with firearms. Some officers would not by their own admissions be suitable for carrying firearms. There would also be implications in training and keeping those officers current and competent.

The incidents involving firearmes are becoming more prevelant, however are still low. There is more likelihood of coming up against someone with an edged weapon, which can be equally as deadly.

I think the current set up we have is sufficient for now, with a limted number of armed officers responding to incidents in ARV's. I do however think that the issue of Taser for all officers would be beneficial. This is something that is currently being looked into.

There have been examples recently where officers have lost there lives in the line of duty. Some of these would not have benefitted from being in possesion of firearms. In one case the officer was in possession of a firearm but had no time to react to the threat. Often the threat comes when you least expect it and at incidents where there was no forwarning of what was about to happen. We do not run around with pistols drawn nor fire shots for the sake of firing. Using a firearm is a last resort where all others methods have tried and failed or would be unlikely to succed in the circumstances.

Gun crime in the UK is nowhere near as bad as it is in the USA. I think the vast majority of my US counterparts would be extremely surprised if I told them that in the 20 odd years that we have carried firearms the police in my force has only shot one person.

Answer 3

I don't have a problem with that at all. A threat is still a threat, and police already carry guns.

Where's your link that backs up your claim? Normally if an individual is making a threat or not following police orders, they'll get tasered, not shot.

And unless you've been a police officer, you're really in no place to make judgements on whether or not they can make the right decision when it comes to dealing with law breakers, a person with a weapon, or one making threats. Bottom line, they've got the training and experience to make the right decision.

Answer 4

I wish the police had better fire power for them self's what they are up against on the streets is child's play, just my thought.

Answer 5

That is exactly how it should be. That is how the laws are written however liberal judges have gutted them with case law. In my opinion if you shoot at a police officer your death certificate should read suicide.
The legislation should be explicit that judges have no choice but to dismiss charges against a police officer when anyone pulls a gun and shoots at him.

Answer 6

We live in Spain and the police here carry guns. Does not seem to make any difference to the gun crime figures though.

Answer 7

Certain police are armed if all police were armed then crooks would arm.So from me it is NO.

Answer 8

Charlie?. Nothing against you, but it sounds like you're having a flashback.

Answer 9

they do it all the time

Answer 10

who knows these days, keep safe, all the best