London Police Will Now Be Armed

MTT TL

New member
The murder rate has fallen a bit in the last seven years to only double what it was before the ban but other violent crime still remains pretty high.
 

Erik

New member
It is only "a new armed unit," not all of them:

Britain deploys permanently armed police in London
By DAVID STRINGER (AP) – 12 hours ago

LONDON — Wielding submachine guns and pistols, British police are making rare armed patrols in crime-blighted London neighborhoods — a change in law enforcement tactics that may prompt calls for the wider use of weapons by the country's traditionally unarmed Bobbies.

London's police department said Friday that a new armed unit is carrying out regular sweeps of districts riven by gun battles between rival drug gangs. Unlike typical police procedure, the team of about 20 officers actively seeks out criminals carrying or storing guns — rather than waiting to respond to emergency calls about incidents involving weapons.

Chief Inspector Neil Sharman said the unit began work in June to tackle pockets of rising gun crime, and will double in size from November amid concerns over the increasing use of weapons in Britain's capital.

In contrast to the United States and many European nations, British police have never routinely carried firearms on patrol, with only a limited number of specialist officers trained to use guns. Britain's Home Office said being unarmed is part of the "character of the police" in the U.K.

"In the past the police were authority figures dealing primarily with people who respected the police. However, as terrorism and crime increases in the U.K. the traditional icon of the Bobby on the beat is becoming incapable of dealing with terrorists and violent crime," said Bob Ayers, a London-based former U.S. intelligence officer.

The British public has traditionally been resistant to the routine arming of police — a skepticism heightened by the 2005 shooting death of an innocent Brazilian electrician, mistaken by police marksmen for a suicide bomber.

Yet, some argue Britain is now naive to believe that police can tackle rising levels of gun crime without weapons of their own.

"Every single police officer should have a gun," said Daniel Dixon, a 25-year-old engineer from central London. "Criminals might be carrying weapons, and the police officer is endangering himself by not having one."

In the 12 months to September, London saw a 17 percent rise in gun offenses, up from 1,484 to 1,737. According to government figures for England and Wales, there are about 50 to 60 shooting deaths in the country each year.

Scotland Yard said the new armed patrols are taking place in Brixton, a south London district with a reputation as a drug dealing hotspot, and an area of north London dogged by a turf battle between rival Turkish drug gangs.

The sweeps are being carried out about once a week by officers already attached to the specialist firearms unit. Some see the tactic as evidence the Britain may slowly be rethinking its policy on armed police. "Since 9/11 they've become much more aware of the fact that it is a violent world out there," said Ayers.

Jenny Jones, a legislator at London's City Hall and member of the oversight committee for London police, said the change in tactics is unacceptable. "I can't believe that the sight of a policeman with a machine gun will make people feel safer," she said.

London Mayor Boris Johnson's office said "armed police have a role in certain circumstances, but that should be the exception not the norm."

Dolapo Akinmade, a 35-year old accountant from Welwyn Garden City, a town just north of London, said the fact the British public rarely carry firearms means police don't need weapons. "I think society is better off without guns. If every policeman had a gun it would create a tense atmosphere," he said. "It's a question of is it necessary, and the general feeling is that it's not," said Roy Ingleton, author of "Arming the British Police: The Great Debate."

Associated Press Writer Rachel Leamon, in London, contributed to this report
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 

Chris_B

New member
In my opinion, the idea that an unarmed peace officer may appear to offer more safety or protection in time of need than an armed peace officer would, is a bogus and disingenuous notion.

I note without surprise that the gist of things went directly from 'armed' to 'machine gun toting' in the mind of one of the opponents of the idea.

If there is violent crime in the area, burying your head in the sand so that a quaint facade of days gone by is preserved serves no purpose but selfish indulgence at the expense of a firm grasp of reality. The idea seems to be that the populace would be "more afraid" of the armed police-thugs than they would of random violent criminals.

Would a criminal in that situation prefer the truncheon-sporting peace officer, or the HK USP carrying one. You only get one guess as to the answer!
 

Glenn E. Meyer

New member
I've read some studies that a majority of UK police prefer not to be armed and don't try to qualify for such.

Also, among the qualified officers, after an officer was charged in a shooting, many turned in their qualifications.

We will see how this plays out. I guess it is a sad commentary that social forces lead to the need for armed police.
 
Are law enforcement at higher risk to be charged for a crime due to their culture, Glenn? I'm wondering if this is the reason why they purposefully don't want to "qualify".
 

Tom2

New member
So much for the jello-brained hippy notion that bad guys will "play nice" if you don't any means to threaten them. Being armed sends out "bad vibes" you know, and that just causes trouble, not hoodlums! They should get spray cans of love and sunshine to dispense on the gangsters and make everyone happy!
 

Dave R

New member
Dolapo Akinmade, a 35-year old accountant from Welwyn Garden City, a town just north of London, said the fact the British public rarely carry firearms means police don't need weapons. "I think society is better off without guns. If every policeman had a gun it would create a tense atmosphere," he said.
Here is a guy who has never been mugged.
 

ltcdoty

New member
I remember, while being stationed in England, watching the news on the telly..the Police Chief of Liverpool had been shot and killed after responding to a robbery at a jewelry store. The armed robbers were still inside the store, and the police were trying to keep them from leaving by throwing things at them.

They threw garbage cans, bottles, rocks, anything they could to keep the crooks at bay until an armed police unit could arrive on the scene. The police were desperate as the crooks kept shooting at them. It was embarrassing as well as sad at the same time:(
 

Skans

Active member
Wait until one of those "unarmed" Brit-cops get injured or shot at. How long do you think it will be before all Brit-cops demand being armed too?
 

brocken

New member
I'm just amazed that they AREN'T currently armed with pistols or rifles. Just because you have one doesn't mean you have to use it. But it's silly not to have one in that situation where you face an armed robber.

England is an island but that isolation doesn't keep weapons out of the country.
Does the constable threaten to be the Uzi toting bad guy with his billy club?
 
Top