Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
ChristopherM

Why does the debate about arming all officers always compare us to the Americans?

Recommended Posts

Ether
On 20/05/2020 at 19:18, Zulu 22 said:

Sorry but that comment, " We don’t shoot enough people in all honesty". is completely out of order and insults your colleagues. Do not apply to be an AFO.  Northern Ireland is a completely different situation as there  are still terrorists there who are armed and would not have a second thought in shooting them.  In my Federation days I was at St Georges, Harrogate and there was a lady there from the PSNI. She was talking about the "Shoot to Kill" policy. She said that there was a Shoot to Kill policy and it was the policy of the IRA. She went on to say "The IRA shot my man in his back one day when he was retuning from work. They shot him in the back and killed him as he put the key ion the front door. The process of the PSNI being armed is an absolute necessity. 

NI is not completely different at all, the rules of engagement are exactly the same, so the risk by and large is irrelevant. In comparison the rules of engagement for the military are the same too in peace time or on peace keeping operations. 

My point on we do not shoot enough people stands, we don’t because officers are not armed, instead they face a lethal threat under armed and totally disadvantaged. While I don’t condone the random shooting of people, I do condone the use of lethal force in the face of a lethal threat.  

Thanks for the advice on not applying, but a little late, and having been armed for years, I can honestly say I am not out there shooting at people for no reason. So keep your advice thanks. 

Ask the Officers on London Bridge fighting a lethal threat with a baton if they think they should have been armed. But that’s different of course? An unarmed Officer died at Westminster and his attacker was stopped by an armed officer. All perfect examples of the need to be armed. 

Edited by Ether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ether
11 hours ago, stewie_griffin said:

Perhaps, but I think what he's trying to say is that the only reason more suspects are not shot is because you don't have guns. In any other jurisdiction where police are armed, similar actions (for example charging at a police officer with a knife) would get you shot.

Exactly but there is an obsession in the UK that officers are expected just to put up with the risk. 

That is the attitude which holds up meaningful progress. 
 

Do I want Police shooting more people? The answer is of course no, but do I prefer Mose shot criminals than dead or injured officers? Absolutely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...