Should British police be routinely armed?

[usxhe190]

I don't see how the current system is not working based on this incident.

[chuckskull]

If one has a gun and police know where he is, armed officers cannot get there in time to stop him, as shown by Derrick Bird. If one man has a gun, is willing to shoot police officers and they don't know where he is they, recall all police officers to their stations, to prevent further police casualties. A pretty open admission they can't defend themselves if you ask me.

If one man can bring all police activity over a large area to a near standstill like this, that's at the very least ineffectual, no?

Not their fault, they haven't got the tools for the job.

[peterb]

If they are the only people who guns to hand, then why not use them? Clearly I would prefer they were not the only people on hand, however we used them when the firemen were on strike and did not let people burn with there buildings. Why not use them if there is a mass killer on the rampage and they are the only ones to had, helicopter with a gun on it on an open bit of road would have been very effective.

Military personnel cannot be used in the UK except when especially authorised under the terms of Military Aid to Civilian Authorities (MACA) - there are some exceptions - protection of crown property being one, although that tends to be devolved to the Ministry Of Defence Police, which is a police force in it's own right, and is the only one in the UK where all police officers are firearms trained (althouigh they don't routinely carry firearms.

As for other police forces (as the UK does not have a unified police force) it is a matter of indvidual policy. However I think that routinely arming police would ,make a greater divide bewteen the population and the civil police - to the detriment of both.

There is certainly a case for specialist trained officers for the many and varied situations that occur, and that includes firearms training. However while there might be a case for all officers to be firearms trained, I don't think there is a compelling case for all officers to routinely carry firearms.

The siuations where firearms might be an appropraite response are (fortunately) rare and IMHO it is better to have a cadre of officers who respond appropriately to those rare occasions than to routinely train all those officers for a situation they may never encounter.

[usxhe190]

On the flip side, what happens if the police shot the wrong person like how they tasered the wrong guy in the latest incident in London?

[lancer12]

No, It should be left to specialists as a lot of training is required so they don't end up being more of a danger to each other or the public instead of the criminal element.

Just look at that incident with the training for stopping cars where one policeman shot the other one with a shotgun despite being told to point the weapon at the ground during training as it was only for stopping the vehicle.