Jump to content
×
×
  • Create New...

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


ChristopherM

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ether

    9

  • Radman

    7

  • BlueBob

    3

  • stewie_griffin

    3

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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

In my view, everybody should own a weapon, especially if a member of the state armed is dangerous to the citizenry. No UK national has any real right to defence, especially against somebody over the t

Wrong! The biggest danger in this ludicrous fantasy scenario would be the hordes of untrained idiot's running around armed to the teeth. Not only a danger to themselves, but also other members of the

Radman
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, BizzieBee said:

Sure,

If the homeowner isn't cooperative or there is obvious circumstances which present themselves as being highly suspect (such as homeowner is in possession of an unlicenced shotgun or burglar shot away from the premises in the back or the house resembles Takeshis castle for booby traps...) yeah make the arrest.

Full cooperation from victim?

Consents to property search?

Wants to give an account?

Hands over weapon used in defence of their home?

Why are we AUTOMATICALLY arresting them?

Why is it the likes of Canada and the US manage these kind of investigations far better than we do? Should we make a habit of arresting persons of good character/victims of crime?

Edited by Radman
Link to post
Share on other sites
Radman
1 hour ago, Reasonable Man said:

Typical approach in the after the event evaluation. Unfortunately the patrol cop who turns up at 3am, or his Sgt, or even the night duty DC isn’t best placed to decide what has ‘obviously happened’.  That attitude will lose the crucial ‘golden hour’ chance to collect and preserve evidence. 

In the vast majority of these cases it is the obvious that has happened. Home owner has lawfully defended their property from a violent criminal and thankfully came out on top.

I've been involved in investigations on my own patch where we have made the decision not to arrest a suspect out of compassion, one that sticks out in my mind involved the death of an infant with an elderly relative clearly at fault. 

Could we have gotten that person passed a custody sergeant? 100% yes.

Would that have been the right decision to have made? No. 

1 hour ago, Reasonable Man said:


Sure it’s not nice for the person who has genuinely acted in self defence to be scrutinised but they have to be scrutinised within the law in order for justice to ultimately be done. 
Despite what the Daily Fail headlines like to promote very few people who defend their property are ever charged but a short period of inconvenience is necessary. 

That proves my point perfectly "very few people who defend their property are ever charged" exactly.

The automatic process is at fault here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueBob

The debate on why the UK should / should not be routinely armed is way more complex than a quick couple of lines on a forum, just the same as a couple of scant examples from far off or significantly differing social and cultural systems may be better for arming but do not relate to the systems here.  
I'm wholly in favour of stopping officers being hurt, however, under the prevailing conditions, I am equally wholly opposed to officers being imprisoned for making sound judgements that if/when they go wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Radman
1 hour ago, BlueBob said:

 I am equally wholly opposed to officers being imprisoned for making sound judgements that if/when they go wrong.

Being realistic that would likely happen more than we'd perhaps like to admit... In this day and age especially. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
notapoliceforum

While I don't think people should be arming themselves with a tiny pistol, considering how somebody may find the UK police a bit over reaching, I wouldn't blame somebody for wanting one. The problem is, then they have them, and then everybody else is packing.

But no, there is no real self defence clause, just as there is no warrant protection from the court wanting somebody in custody/over suspicious evidence.

The police can use weapons, they can force entry under the Police powers. And a resident/national can't really defend themselves, even if it looks out of place to do so. Its obstruction, even if they lie, and everybody can lie to them, because there is no law against that.

This what I notice of crimebodge's perception is, and the American system always shows that those that have authority over somebody else can abuse it, that was the reason for warrants, ownership of weapons. of course it is more than one reason, Native history, slavery, but if you ignore that, one can understand the reasons for those systems in place.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ether
9 hours ago, notapoliceforum said:

While I don't think people should be arming themselves with a tiny pistol, considering how somebody may find the UK police a bit over reaching, I wouldn't blame somebody for wanting one. The problem is, then they have them, and then everybody else is packing.

But no, there is no real self defence clause, just as there is no warrant protection from the court wanting somebody in custody/over suspicious evidence.

The police can use weapons, they can force entry under the Police powers. And a resident/national can't really defend themselves, even if it looks out of place to do so. Its obstruction, even if they lie, and everybody can lie to them, because there is no law against that.

This what I notice of crimebodge's perception is, and the American system always shows that those that have authority over somebody else can abuse it, that was the reason for warrants, ownership of weapons. of course it is more than one reason, Native history, slavery, but if you ignore that, one can understand the reasons for those systems in place.

 

What are the real stats of police misusing those powers in the U.K.? 
 

Police can’t lie, that’s a misrepresentation.

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

Police Community is a forum that is supported financially through advertisements. It is a breach of our standard use policy to use Adblock plugins/software on our site. 

In order to continue using our site you will need to disable Adblock across our site. Alternatively you can purchase a membership package from our online store to remove adverts as part of the membership subscription. 

https://police.community/remove-adverts/

Thank you for your support.

I have disabled Adblock