All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Now is the time to do it though. Not in a few weeks when people have forgotten. Set the wheels in motion, make the announcement now when there's least resistance and then the actual roll-out is just a formality.
  3. It boils down to public perception. Nobody's life is more valuable than anybody else's but each set of people have a different role and different protections. The public go about their lives and when they're in trouble they call the police. The police turn up and confront the trouble head-on because that is their job. MPs have an important job and their mass place of work is always going to be a target, therefore it gets round the clock police protection. Any reasonable risk assessment can see the need for police to be armed for their protection and the protection of others. They are the heroes that run towards danger when others run away. It's only right they shouldn't have to conpromise their life and in the act of doing their duty as PC Palmer did. Not when there is a simple solution that is not acted on due to perception and cost. If I were the Federation, I would be using this tragedy to illustrate how vulnerable police officers are and that a basic duty of care and breach of a human right to life is being breached by a constant failing to equip officers. We've been conducting reassurance patrols today and I've never had so many people approach me and thank us for what we do. I've also never felt so useless. These people felt reassured by us and if the worst had happened, again, there is little we could do to stop it.
  4. The issue around that is then what happens if those officers are off sick on annual or whatever. Much the same I would image as we have now with TASER. I can see the case for TASER coming forward now. the only issue being is there the will to do it or the money to do it.
  5. I think routine arming is a long way away, personally I'm for it. Why can't we at least have quasi-arming? I mean, for example, certain response officers being authorised to carry sidearms, and then eventually maybe have 1 in 2 cars armed.. and then maybe eventually have a fully armed police force. It's a bit like the "foot in the door technique". Even Norway has a better system than us, guns are stored in their patrol cars (not ideal, but still offers more protection to officers than here). I read that starting last year or something, officers in Norway have been allowed to holster their weapons on them due to the increased terrorism threat. This is a temporary measure. If they allow that there due to the increased level of terrorism, why aren't measures being taken here? Especially as the UK seems to be at higher risk of terrorism than Norway!
  6. Today
  7. I visited the insides of the houses of parliament in November as part of a university trip. Most police officer guarding the exterior and interior are unarmed. I remember that the officers at the gates were unarmed, and that there were about 1, 2 or 3 pairs of armed officers walking around, but close to the interior roads and main door. Inside the houses of parliament, there weren't many armed officers, there were unarmed officers and security guards. There isn't much info available yet but it seems that this is somewhat a failure in security, for instance, the officers who shot the attacker weren't even stationed there permanently. They were the defence minister's protection officers.
  8. I can remember as a probationer having to carry out a hospital guard along with DPG. I was expected to deal with visitors to the suspect initially and if they pulled a gun out then the DPG would have then stepped in and dealt with the subject. I remember thinking at the time, "How does that work then?" But carried on regardless. The same it would seem applies here. Whether things will now change remains to be seen..
  9. It's bizarre that we trust officers to go out in public with all manner of powers and bits of equipment to do their job but don't trust them to carry a small leatherman or similar.
  10. https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/keith-palmer
  11. Nothing's changed or been clarified. I'd point the police to the caselaw and get them to either change their minds or clarify.
  12. We're heroes this week but by the time the next overworked officer loses their rag on YouTube, we're back to being oppressive thugs. But, Keith - I will not tarnish your death. I am proud to wear the same uniform as you and look forward to visiting the memorial at NSY, to pay my respects, when I'm next in town.
  13. To be honest,as someone whose knowledge of firearms policing is ,they go bang ,they hurt,stand behind them I was surprised that an officer so close to the entrance to Parliament was unarmed
  14. I was where? I don't follow I'm afraid. Anybody sitting on a jury could be biased, we might as well do away with the entire jury system if we're that worried about it. You could get somebody who hates the police sitting on one who could automatically assume that the police are making it all up and the accused is innocent. If it was found that they knew one of the witnesses I'd expect the same to happen; thank them for their service, dismiss them then move on with the trial. At the end of the day there is a reason a jury is made up of more than one person! I think there is potential to challenge the fact that a police officer could sit on a jury but that is normally done before they are sworn in and there is no way that alone will render a conviction unsafe as you suggest. Would you include those who have previously served in the police as well? Do you think that you are completely incapable of looking at a case objectively?
  15. I know loads of cops who have been on jury service whilst serving, couple ended up with a conflict but most didn't. From speaking to them they were more like to be critical of the police if anything. As has been said, a lmao officer on the jury is not grounds alone for an appeal. That said even if it was it's not the officers problem.
  16. I couldn't agree more this issue has already got my blood boiling and being a mod I am choosing my words very carefully. I for one am not impressed by the platitudes towards the police, words are cheap if MP's value the fact we put are life's at risk to protect others then why do they continue to undermine us? Or is it they only value the risks we take when it's in direct defence of thier own safety? Why is thier safety so much more important than the masses? Sorry rant over for now.
  17. Bosses aren't interested in good, new ideas from a PC as they think it's not possible for them to see the bigger picture. Which is why part of me thinks direct entry might not be a bad idea. Admittedly a very small part.
  18. Hi all, sorry for more thread resurrection! I'm wondering if anyone knows of any updates on this front as I'm working as an event medical provider at an event where the local police are specifying that we must provide blue-light capable rapid response cars with paramedics, but obviously that's now a bit tricky with the current case law! The local NHS trust won't "request" us in any way, so it's becoming a bit of a headache...
  19. Went over to work in NI for G8, those guys are just something else. Not sure I'd want to have to think about IEDs going to every single job.
  20. If you are trying to suggest that the security of the site was successful then you and me will never agree. Lets not get silly and argue for the sake of it, I have already said you can never fully negate the risk of an attack. But access points will always be an obvious weak points, especially for unsophisticated attacks. Yes he could have climbed the railings which takes time, they are also monitored which would in turn alert officers who would have responded appropriately given what was seen. This is not a criticism of anyone at this point, let's see what any investigation concludes, but we must learn from this or risk inviting another attack of this nature.
  21. At the end of the day, in a lot of cases the police are involved in a peripheral way only. They collect any evidence, take statements etc It's not that often they are there when Billy Burglar breaks into Mrs Miggins house. , or when Desperate Dan hits Denis the Menace over the head ,yes they are sometimes witnesses to events and then their evidence is more relevant ,but a juror with integrity should be able to determine the facts , I can see that in something like assault police then the presence of an officer on the jury may be prejudicial to a fair hearing but a conflict should be declared at the start As an aside ,what if you get a juror who is anti police? They won't give an unbalanced opinion will they ?
  22. And, to repeat my earlier point, rescue scissors/screwdrivers/window punches/seatbelt cutters are all still pointed/bladed articles so to be really safe people should leave them at the police station also.
  23. Hello Andy_UMX On behalf of the Police Community Team I would like to personally welcome you to our forum. Please feel free to say hello and introduce yourself, tell us a little bit about you, what brought you to Police Community and what you hope to use the site for as we would love to hear. If you have any questions that you would like to ask the Police Community Team please feel free to drop one of us a message. Best Wishes Chief Rat
  24. I've raised them whilst on my soapbox with my direct line management and also raised several with the Command Team on our regular Q&A sessions. Problem is, once you float the idea once...you can't keep bringing it up or you look like a crackpot.
  25. Fair point. I find a penknife convenient to carry most of the time - or did until I lost it. Personally I don't have a problem having a multitool about my person on duty, they'll both be available and to hand depending on what job I need them for. I have asked if there is any official policy for our region but haven't had an answer yet.
  26. If this had been almost any of the other bridges in London and almost any other iconic target the death toll would have been far higher. I think everyone has performed admirably: MP Tobias Ellwood, the protection officers who dealt with the terrorist, the medical staff including ones who made their own way from St Thomas' but also importantly a small core of the public who aren't trained or experienced but saved lives. Those who haven't impressed me; the public finding time to record the scene whilst there are still casualties not being tended to, the press leaving it less than a day before starting to blame the police and MPs for within a day starting to hold their own lives as more important than the masses. I think that is as polite a post as I can make at the minute.
  27. I'm not certain security was breached. But I guess it depends on how you look at it. In one way you can say he got inside the gates so he's breached it. of course he could have climbed over the railings and the situation could still have ended the same. Alternatively you can look at it and say that security wasn't breached as the attacker was stopped. before getting to the Houses of Parliament
  1. Load more activity