The Taser issue .....

I'd far choose being tasered than being shot tbh.

I'd have no problem seeing our police walking around with these on their belts.
However.... TERRORISM !!! Quick Get the Tanks *shrug*

I think it would go down far better if it was brought to the table explaining it was being implemented in general to assist with the safety of officers and the diffusal of certain situations. Rather than relying on the old catch all "Terrorism"
 
I would carry a Taser but I doubt I'd ever have the need to use it. Like has been said, they have their limitations: can't be used on thick clothing, you need to get two good contacts for it to work which is difficult when people are moving etc.

With that said, CS/PAVA also has limitations and is very similar to Taser in it's supposed use - and we all carry that.

As long as people realise it's not a replacement to a firearm - or even a substitute. Tasers are not used in the same circumstances that a firearm would be.
 
Its a less lethal option that can and will be deployed in firearms situations. However it does not take the place of a conventional firearm, i.e. there will always be a conventional firearm at the ready if a taser is drawn in a firearms situation.
 
Unbeliever said:
Its a less lethal option that can and will be deployed in firearms situations. However it does not take the place of a conventional firearm, i.e. there will always be a conventional firearm at the ready if a taser is drawn in a firearms situation.
Click to expand...

I don't think people realise where Taser is supposed to be used. It gets used in the same situations as CS/PAVA - i.e. before baton or even arm/leg strikes - well before officers even consider lethal force.
 
Will21st said:
don't think so, officers need the tools to do their jobs adequately and protect the public. How unarmed officers can do that I have no Idea.
Click to expand...

Last time I spoke to a officer about it, they didn't want a taser (or a gun).

I also quite like living in a country where most of the police force is unarmed.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
I don't think people realise where Taser is supposed to be used. It gets used in the same situations as CS/PAVA - i.e. before baton or even arm/leg strikes - well before officers even consider lethal force.
Click to expand...

Which is very interesting in itself because when they were first brought in they were "only" for armed police and to be used in situations where firearms would usually be used.

Mission creep anyone?

This is the reason so many are against the idea of more weapons for police. We know from history what we are told at the time is essentially just a smoke screen to allow the door to be opened and a type of weapon/tactic onto the street.

EDIT: http://www.acpo.police.uk/ThePoliceChiefsBlog/201302TaserBlog.aspx

2004 - authorised firearms officers instead of a firearm
2007 - authorised firearms officers in multiple situations wher firearms would not be used
2008 - specially trained non firearms officers

The head of the Union suggested that police should have tasers to protect THEM specifically against terrorist attacks aimed at them personally, not other violence or because they are carrying out their duty but to stop a lee Rigby style attack. If that's the case then why aren't the general public allowed to be armed to stop terrorist attacks against them personally? There have been far more civillians killed in terror related events than police.

That's a rhetorical question obviously but the point stands. Why differentiate police from civilians when it's not to do with violence in the line of duty, rather (supposed) targeted violence against them? Last time I checked we didn't arm people who have had real death threats made against them.
 
Last edited:
The public are under no more threat now than they were decades ago from the IRA threat. This growing militarisation of the police must be resisted. Give in now and in another five years they will want to be armed with guns. Scotland already has some police officers wandering around with guns.
Stop giving the oxygen of publicity to these dangerous, dangerous people calling for the arming of our police. They are the threat to British society.
 
A great man once said

"We start carrying semi-automatics, they buy automatics. We start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor-piercing rounds"

Tasers yes, guns only in threat of life situations.

This was in the paper yesterday when the chief of police Scotland apologised for putting armed police on patrol in public areas without properly alerting the public.
 
garak112 said:
Sounds cheap until you factor in that there are apparently 100k frontline police staff in England and Wales so it's still in the order of millions to pay for.
Click to expand...


so it is pretty cheap then....and not all the 120k or so police officers are going to be out on a regular patrols in uniform where they may be a target
 
do_ron_ron said:
The public are under no more threat now than they were decades ago from the IRA threat. This growing militarisation of the police must be resisted. Give in now and in another five years they will want to be armed with guns. Scotland already has some police officers wandering around with guns.
Stop giving the oxygen of publicity to these dangerous, dangerous people calling for the arming of our police. They are the threat to British society.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, it's as bad as the government calling for more powers for spying when every successful terrorist attack we've actually known about just not done anything about it.

Quite a few of our officers (mainly RPU etc) carry tasers barely read about them using them.
 
I think it is probably a good thing for officers in cities, large towns - not just because there is that small chance of a Lee Rigby style attack (very low probability event for any particular officer yes but with serious consequences and something we know people are planning to attempt) but also for other armed situations:

silly situations like this - I'm glad they resolved it peacefully and was very brave of them but for the sake of £300 they'd not have to be in such a ridiculous situation:



also things like:


the officer on the scene could actually do a bit more than run at the guy then run back to his car
 
Tasers were originally issued to the UK Police Force as an 'Alternative to Deadly Force', they were only to be used in the same situations a firearm would otherwise be used. This is NOT the case. Even children have been Tasered in the UK.

Fortunately the UK is not yet as bad as the USA where Tasers are regularly used as compliance torture devices and even used repeatedly on subdued and restrained but uncooperative suspects, but given the growing Militarisation of both Police Forces and the continuing use of US methods and practices by UK Forces it is only a matter of time before the same stuff happens here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom