Policewomen killed in Manchester

Once a monkey wrote: geordie scarlet wrote: Once a monkey wrote: haydn_davies wrote: So does the justice system need a complete overhaul?? Taking up Geordie's last point about the guy who got shot carrying a loaded firearm in London which led to the Tottenham riots, what else do you expect to happen to you if you carry a loaded firearm?? IMO if you carry a loaded firearm in public then you should expect to be a target for police marksmen. This is why the justice system needs to be changed to protect those who work so hard to protect us day in day out, putting their own lives at risk. Crazy that the news aren't reporting that he WAS carrying a loaded weapon.   I would imagine 36 hours to question someone is long enough. We can't arbitrarily hold people until enough evidence is obtained, where do you draw the line.  If you need more time, and a judge thinks it is warranted, you'll get more time. Is that right Geordie?   No blame here on the police either, imo.   Agree Haydn about people who carry guns in public, whether real or not. You give up your right to certain privilages by putting other members of society at risk, including the police, whether that threat is real or not. Just by carrying a weapon, you are attempting to send out a message, instil fear.       Yep, if it,s warranted and agree that in most cases 36 hrs is enough. Sometimes urgent forensic work which can prove or in some cases disprove someone,s involvment can be a warranted reason for further detention     As for carrying guns, you need to be certain of your actions regardless of what the other person,s actions are. Numerous replica firearms etc in circulation and some bb guns look very real ....i for one will not carry a gun and fear for any cop who shoots someone with a replica gun      The police need better protection under such circumstances imo mate.

Agree with Geordie about carrying a gun. Have some experience of such matters, and it brings a huge responsibility, and sometimes things aren't always as straightforward as they seem. All people carrying firearms have reules of engagement, which are designed to outline circumstances whne you can use the firearm. The trouble is, that they usually attempt to define life threatening situations for their use. However, that is ultimately a subjective concept. Someone attacking you with a baseball bat for example. A blow to the head could kill you, so does this warrant use of a firearm? Personally, I'd imagine shooting someone with a bat would end with you spending some time at Her Majesty's pleasure. But there is certainly a threat, and when you consider the legal arguements behind what constitutes self defence, again a subjective concept, then things aren't very clear.

Once a monkey wrote: Agree with Geordie about carrying a gun. Have some experience of such matters, and it brings a huge responsibility, and sometimes things aren't always as straightforward as they seem. All people carrying firearms have reules of engagement, which are designed to outline circumstances whne you can use the firearm. The trouble is, that they usually attempt to define life threatening situations for their use. However, that is ultimately a subjective concept. Someone attacking you with a baseball bat for example. A blow to the head could kill you, so does this warrant use of a firearm? Personally, I'd imagine shooting someone with a bat would end with you spending some time at Her Majesty's pleasure. But there is certainly a threat, and when you consider the legal arguements behind what constitutes self defence, again a subjective concept, then things aren't very clear.

Where would you put the round ?

Seriously though, I firmly believe, that if all Police were armed, the incidents of firearms crime would increase due to the "They've got them .. I'll have one" syndrome that operates in the criminal fraternity ... Even though we hear of incidents of gun crime on a weekly basis these days, we are nowhere near the level of Gun Crime of those countries that arm their Police Forces as standard (with the possible exception of France).


Edited by scarletman - 19 September 2012 at 11:35am

geordie scarlet wrote: 82% of police officers in 2006 voted against carrying a gun and i am sure if a survey was done now it would be around the same As for protection, be a cop carry a gun, shoot someone and see how much protection you get after the event, when everyone is examining your actions

Edited by RR1972 - 19 September 2012 at 10:35pm

scarletman wrote: Once a monkey wrote: Agree with Geordie about carrying a gun. Have some experience of such matters, and it brings a huge responsibility, and sometimes things aren't always as straightforward as they seem. All people carrying firearms have reules of engagement, which are designed to outline circumstances whne you can use the firearm. The trouble is, that they usually attempt to define life threatening situations for their use. However, that is ultimately a subjective concept. Someone attacking you with a baseball bat for example. A blow to the head could kill you, so does this warrant use of a firearm? Personally, I'd imagine shooting someone with a bat would end with you spending some time at Her Majesty's pleasure. But there is certainly a threat, and when you consider the legal arguements behind what constitutes self defence, again a subjective concept, then things aren't very clear. Where would you put the round ? Seriously though, I firmly believe, that if all Police were armed, the incidents of firearms crime would increase due to the "They've got them .. I'll have one" syndrome that operates in the criminal fraternity ... Even though we hear of incidents of gun crime on a weekly basis these days, we are nowhere near the level of Gun Crime of those countries that arm their Police Forces as standard (with the possible exception of France).

Have to agree with that - we don't want to start an arms race between the police and the criminals. Incidents where police are shot are still rare in this country - and if they are going after criminals who are known to be armed, they DO break out the guns and flak jackets.

Even as it is, there are unfortunate instances where unarmed people have been shot dead by the police - in the worst cases, these have been completely innocent (like the Brazilian guy on the tube); others have been (almost certainly) criminals, who didn't have a weapon at the time they were shot - so cases where the police were trigger happy as opposed to mistaking their target.

By all means train (some) police to use guns and arm them when necessary - but routine arming of officers will lead to more deaths of police, criminals and innocent bystanders, IMO.

Thanks G !

scarletman wrote: RR1972 wrote: geordie scarlet wrote: 82% of police officers in 2006 voted against carrying a gun and i am sure if a survey was done now it would be around the same As for protection, be a cop carry a gun, shoot someone and see how much protection you get after the event, when everyone is examining your actions     did they reallY or did their reps who are semi retired vote on their behalf?   no way every police office is polled about carrying a weapon and if they did no way 86% would vote no   as for the bail system,look at the pc brigade parliament and solictors who are more interested in legal loopholes then right or wrong who are in the wrong   simple way to cut gun crime any one found carrying a loaded weapon gets 15 years with no parole and no exceptions if they are found to have fired a weapon then its 25 years and if they kill someone its life with no parole   only exception is if your home is under attack   no ifs no buts Geordie Scarlet IS a Police officer ! I also know some Rank & File who were polled & see that being armed not only makes you a bigger target for gun crime, but puts you under enormous stress should you ever have to discharge your weapon due process (in Gwent) even for a current Firearms officer is that they are withdrawn from Firearms duty after using their weapon in service, whilst an inquiry is held... !

Edited by RR1972 - 20 September 2012 at 3:02pm

RR1972 wrote: geordie scarlet wrote: 82% of police officers in 2006 voted against carrying a gun and i am sure if a survey was done now it would be around the same As for protection, be a cop carry a gun, shoot someone and see how much protection you get after the event, when everyone is examining your actions     did they reallY or did their reps who are semi retired vote on their behalf?   no way every police office is polled about carrying a weapon and if they did no way 86% would vote no   as for the bail system,look at the pc brigade parliament and solictors who are more interested in legal loopholes then right or wrong who are in the wrong   simple way to cut gun crime any one found carrying a loaded weapon gets 15 years with no parole and no exceptions if they are found to have fired a weapon then its 25 years and if they kill someone its life with no parole   only exception is if your home is under attack   no ifs no buts