Is it now time that our police are all armed?

Why do a lot of you think having police armed will end with them shooting someone for nothing? PSNI are all armed and you don't hear of them shooting the place up.

It would be interesting to see a thread like this if an attacked happened in a small town because someone decided to shot up the place and ARU are 15 minutes out.

That's a lot of dead bodies that might not have died if an officer had been trained and carried a gun.
 
Last edited:
They probably should arm a few more on the ground in sensitive areas but not the whole force. Just a couple that say are in the area of "name a public building here" that could be radio'd to get into action by others policemen
 
I think a civilized society relies on the police to enforce the law and the army to go to war. The separation between the two should be high and giving the former guns doesn't make too much sense for me.
 
jimjamuk said:
They probably should arm a few more on the ground in sensitive areas but not the whole force. Just a couple that say are in the area of "name a public building here" that could be radio'd to get into action by others policemen
Click to expand...
Isn't that already in place, hence the 8 minute response time for the London incident?
 
teaboy5 said:
It would be interesting to see a thread like this if an attacked happened in a small town because someone decided to shot up the place and ARU are 15 minutes out.
Click to expand...

and that is perhaps where the argument about police cuts might have a bit more merit to it too... the two recent attacks in both London and Manchester were responded to rather well by the emergency services and they weren't exactly short of manpower. Sure there was the whole show of force/PR move with the Army afterwards (but I suspect that would have happened regardless of police numbers as it did under Blair at Heathrow)
 
teaboy5 said:
Why do a lot of you think having police armed will end with them shooting someone for nothing? PSNI are all armed and you don't hear of them shooting the place up.

It would be interesting to see a thread like this if an attacked happened in a small town because someone decided to shot up the place and ARU are 15 minutes out.

That's a lot of dead bodies that might not have died if an officer had been trained and carried a gun.
Click to expand...

Pah, so easy to disprove in a few seconds.

Charles de Menezes.

Oh and somewhat less controversial (due to the suspect), but Mark Duggan as well, caused rather a lot of damage in the aftermath, ohh deary me who was home secretary?
 
Arming the police just means the political elite and the royals will have their very own paramilitary to guarantee they never have an uprising from an oppressed public.

Religious terrorism. Problem, reaction, solution.
 
stopper said:
Arming the police just means the political elite and the royals will have their very own paramilitary to guarantee they never have an uprising from an oppressed public.

Religious terrorism. Problem, reaction, solution.
Click to expand...

Can't they just use the army for that anyhow?
 
teaboy5 said:
Why do a lot of you think having police armed will end with them shooting someone for nothing?.
Click to expand...


reduced training standards, theres no way you can train the entire police force to the same standard as our armed officers are now quickly.

we will end up with an American system of "8 rounds on target" and your done kinda thing (iirc people have passed the standard state police tests over there blind folded)
 
SPG said:
Central london.... why so special... before you know it every city center... then every town then every village and blink every officer is armed and it's police state.
Click to expand...

don't be so dramatic, the UK is very unusual in having an almost totally unarmed police force. Pretty much the rest of Europe isnt a a police state despite the police being armed
 
Last edited:
jimjamuk said:
Those guys are driving around like the A team in vans. Just suggesting at say covent garden and the like that say a pair are carrying within the team that cover the area
Click to expand...

they do do this.

if you ever go to euston station theres always at least 2 armed officers there.
 
StriderX said:
Pah, so easy to disprove in a few seconds.

Charles de Menezes.

Oh and somewhat less controversial (due to the suspect), but Mark Duggan as well, caused rather a lot of damage in the aftermath, ohh deary me who was home secretary?
Click to expand...

you clearly know very little about the circumstances of either cases. Both were shot by highly trained firearms officers and on Dr Mendez case the officers shooting had a fully justified (if incorrect) belief that they were dealing with a suicide bomber.

arm police and people will be shot and occasionally 'innocent' people will be shot much like allowing police to drive quickly and go through red lights sometimes causes collisions were members of the public are seriously injured or die.

I'm not for universal arming of the police but the belief by some that if you armed all the mainland UK police that we would become a police state over night with random members of the public being shot left right and centre is palpable nonsense.
 
They dont have the money to arm all police officers.... lol

Sadiq Khan: Met Police could lose thousands of officers
Posted at7:39

Reuters

The Metropolitan Police is facing the loss of thousands of front-line officers under Conservative spending plans, London mayor Sadiq Khan has warned.

He told BBC Breakfast: "Under a new Theresa May government, as a consequence of the cuts to our policing budget, we'd have fewer police officers and all the experts say that one of the ways we counter terrorism is by fantastic policing in the community.

"The Conservative plans mean another £400m of cuts to the Met," he said. "I'm simply not willing to stand by and let this happen."
 
Forget arming the police, they did nothing. These terrorists were on a list. They were known. Despite all the talk of high alert and everything thats gone on in recent weeks they were still left to roam the street. Allowed to get in a van mowing people down and then stab others. I'll repeat known people. The police dont need guns they need the power to take these people off the street. To remove their passports and send them home. In these times it should be simple, suspected or terrorism? Rolling in the wrong circles? You your family and your friends are gone. The government time and time again are refusing to give these powers to the police. If they arnt interested I say its time these lists were released put the power back into our own hands its time this war on terrorism got messy
 
teaboy5 said:
Why do a lot of you think having police armed will end with them shooting someone for nothing? PSNI are all armed and you don't hear of them shooting the place up.

It would be interesting to see a thread like this if an attacked happened in a small town because someone decided to shot up the place and ARU are 15 minutes out.

That's a lot of dead bodies that might not have died if an officer had been trained and carried a gun.
Click to expand...

Yea this is the issue. London is sucking up the funding and resources for EVERYTHING. They moved police from other towns to protect London, leaving smaller towns completely vulnerable. If they move armed police away from an area they should at least fill the gap with troops. Otherwise someone could go on a rampage and there is no one to stop them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom