2nd Amendment for the U.K. -- long overdue

[Eddie Dane]

Regarding arming the UK police:

Having unarmed police seems like almost a symbolic measure.
The Dutch police are armed, and this place didn't turn into Somalia.
Same with Sweden.

I don't see any problem in having armed police. Why do Brits oppose it so much?

 

[Rolfe]

I don't know just how germane to your argument about guns this is, but it's something that hacks me off too. The fact that American citizens and some Government officials sponsored terrorism against their closest allies and yet now have the gall to act offended when people don't clamp down on "terror" like it was hiding under everyone's bed is a rather glaring and uncomfortable piece of hypocrisy.

The relevance to the argument was that Telaynay's G'son seemed to have moved away from the spree killer as the argument for persuading us all to go out and buy guns, to the threat of terrorist attack. However, as Darat so succinctly pointed out, the incidence of terrorist attacks has decreased markedly in the British Isles over the past ten years or so, so that's not much of an argument.

I'm not sure about the timing or the validity of the argument, but I read one op-ed piece suggesting that it was only after 9/11 that the American supporters of terrorism against Britain took a long hard look at themselves and stopped. How much this drying up of funds has contributed to the peace process I wouldn't know, but I do think it's something to bear in mind whenever Americans come over the victim as regards terrorist incidents.

But as Darat again pointed out, we're still waiting to have it explained to us what advantage we'd gain from copying America's adolescent fixation with firearms as a virility symbol.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

I don't see any problem in having armed police. Why do Brits oppose it so much?

I think it's a comfort zone thing. I know seeing armed police in America makes me feel very uncomfortable. We'd probably get used to it if it happened, but there is a feeling that if it had to happen it would be because the country had changed a lot in ways we don't want it to change. However, there is an argument that Derrick Bird could have been stopped early in his rampage if the police who got close to him had been armed.

Rolfe.

 

[zooterkin]

The relevance to the argument was that Telaynay's G'son seemed to have moved away from the spree killer as the argument for persuading us all to go out and buy guns, to the threat of terrorist attack.

Oh, is that what he/she was trying to say? It makes even less sense, then. When has an armed populace stopped a terrorist attack? I still don't get the references to WWII, though.

 

[Rolfe]

Oh, is that what he/she was trying to say? It makes even less sense, then. When has an armed populace stopped a terrorist attack? I still don't get the references to WWII, though.

Well, exactly. What use is a gun against a rucksack full of hair bleach or a car with Semtex planted under the chassis?

The references to the two wars seem to be a stock anti-Brit attack from pig-ignorant Yanks who don't know their history, when otherwise painted into a corner in this sort of discussion.

The USA. So embarrassed at being late for two world wars it's determined to be there at the start of the third.

Rolfe.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

I don't see any problem in having armed police. Why do Brits oppose it so much?

Well remember we do have a lot of armed police, especially in areas like airports.

As for why we oppose having our police force routinely armed - isn't it really the other way around i.e. why would we want them to be armed?

 

[zooterkin]

Well remember we do have a lot of armed police, especially in areas like airports.

Indeed. I've visited a few countries, and the one place that you really notice that the police are armed is Heathrow airport.

 

[lionking]

Indeed. I've visited a few countries, and the one place that you really notice that the police are armed is Heathrow airport.

I was quite taken aback when I saw an policeman (special operations?) armed with a machine gun walking past Whitehall a couple of years ago. But I also somehow felt safer.

 

[Darat]

I was quite taken aback when I saw an policeman (special operations?) armed with a machine gun walking past Whitehall a couple of years ago. But I also somehow felt safer.

It shows how subjective these things are - I always feel a lot less safe when I see the police armed in such a way, to me it's a signal of a very dangerous area.

 

[Darat]

And if we ever did decide that our police should routinely be armed I would be campaigning for the gun restrictions to be changed so that I could, if I wanted, carry a gun.

 

[Eddie Dane]

Well remember we do have a lot of armed police, especially in areas like airports.

As for why we oppose having our police force routinely armed - isn't it really the other way around i.e. why would we want them to be armed?

The thing is: I see cases in the media where the police needed to have immediate access to a firearm.

Some recent Dutch cases from the top of my head:

Football hooligans corner undercover police officers. Officers manage to keep themselves alive until relieved by mounted riot police. One hooligan/hanger-on killed.


Psychotic man walks into Amsterdam police station stabs stabs female officer behind reception multiple times, then climbs over counter and stabs another officer. Wounded receptionist manages to pull gun and kill attacker, thus saving colleague.

Two officers are called to restaurant where a man is being abusive to his girlfriend. They defuse the situation, the man is allowed to leave.
He returns waving a chef's knife at the cops. One pulls his pistol and shoots.
The attacker dies.

How does the British police handle situations like this?
Either Dutch society is much more violent, or we have it wrong and such incidents can be handled without shooting (and killing) perps.
Or you Brits are willing to take casualties, in order not carry.

 

[lionking]

And if we ever did decide that our police should routinely be armed I would be campaigning for the gun restrictions to be changed so that I could, if I wanted, carry a gun.

I see things quite differently. Our police are armed, and citizens aren't (at least not legally). There are a handful of police shootings each year, and they all make the press, and are almost all justified.

Your advocacy of citizens carrying weapons if police do is not so far from the situation in the US. It doesn't have to be so.

 

[Cosmic Roy]

I suppose British police officers might use a baton, cs spray, and maybe a taser. They may also be wearing a stab vest.

 

[Seismosaurus]

Forgive me as the image of merry old England includes scenes from Kubrick's, A Clockwork Orange so how about a little "in & out" love?

Um... are you coming on to me?

Maybe you should consider who came to your aid (aka; covered your arse) in WWI & WWII both economically and militarily.

Chamberlin's piece of paper Hitler gave him worked like a charm didn't it?

Next time, don't make yourselves look like such an easy (victim profile) target for such "criminals".

Guess the American approach worked out so much better, detering the Japanese succesfully and all.

 

[Seismosaurus]

The thing is: I see cases in the media where the police needed to have immediate access to a firearm.

Two officers are called to restaurant where a man is being abusive to his girlfriend. They defuse the situation, the man is allowed to leave.
He returns waving a chef's knife at the cops. One pulls his pistol and shoots.
The attacker dies.

How does the British police handle situations like this?
Either Dutch society is much more violent, or we have it wrong and such incidents can be handled without shooting (and killing) perps.

British police carry stab proof vests, batons and tasers or pepper spray. There would also be two of them, most likely, to one of him. They're also trained in handling such situations without killing people, by talking the guy down and defusing the situation, preferably.

The UK police also have fast response armed units; basically a car with guns locked in a safe in the trunk, which drives around a given area. When it's called upon it can be at a crime scene within that area in a matter of minutes.

Or you Brits are willing to take casualties, in order not carry.

Frankly, yes we are. Although I suspect that most people would argue that you have that backwards; A sentiment you hear often here is that if the police go armed, then the criminals will all go armed too - most criminals do not arm themselves at the moment, in part because they know that if they aren't armed, they likely won't face armed police. The thinking is that if both sides tool up for a shooting war, then that's exactly what will happen and there will be many more shooting deaths of both criminals and police.

Incidentally, the majority of the police themselves do not want to be armed, see no need to be, and have consistently said so.

 

[Eddie Dane]

British police carry stab proof vests, batons and tasers or pepper spray. There would also be two of them, most likely, to one of him. They're also trained in handling such situations without killing people, by talking the guy down and defusing the situation, preferably.

The UK police also have fast response armed units; basically a car with guns locked in a safe in the trunk, which drives around a given area. When it's called upon it can be at a crime scene within that area in a matter of minutes.



Frankly, yes we are. Although I suspect that most people would argue that you have that backwards; A sentiment you hear often here is that if the police go armed, then the criminals will all go armed too - most criminals do not arm themselves at the moment, in part because they know that if they aren't armed, they likely won't face armed police. The thinking is that if both sides tool up for a shooting war, then that's exactly what will happen and there will be many more shooting deaths of both criminals and police.

Incidentally, the majority of the police themselves do not want to be armed, see no need to be, and have consistently said so.

Well, since you put it that way, the Dutch choice of carrying a deadly weapon is probably way too extreme for most situations. In how many cases do they need to use deadly force?

It's actually quite weird that we are having a discussion about the police getting tazers, when the cops are packing a 9mm.

Another thing I like about the UK model: The armed response teams are presumably actually good at what they do.
There are a lot of cases here of cops not getting their practice at the range, fumbling with their firearm etc.

I knew a guy who was in a police "arrestatie team" (specializes in arresting dangerous suspects). these guys spend all their time training. There is simply no comparison to a normal police officer.

 

[ponderingturtle]

How does the British police handle situations like this?
Either Dutch society is much more violent, or we have it wrong and such incidents can be handled without shooting (and killing) perps.
Or you Brits are willing to take casualties, in order not carry.

And we accept that the police now and then shoot some one because they got scared and didn't know what was going on. I mean what is more scary than a black man with a wallet? So we take casualties in order to carry.

It is a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

[Rolfe]

And if we ever did decide that our police should routinely be armed I would be campaigning for the gun restrictions to be changed so that I could, if I wanted, carry a gun.

I entirely disagree. If we did go down the road where the police were routinely armed, I'd still see them as being armed so we don't have to be.

Rolfe.

 

[Dave Rogers]

A sentiment you hear often here is that if the police go armed, then the criminals will all go armed too - most criminals do not arm themselves at the moment, in part because they know that if they aren't armed, they likely won't face armed police.

And also, I suspect, because they know very well that if they do go armed and get caught, the prosecution's case will be very much easier to establish and the sentence will be very much harsher.

Dave

 

[Travis]

The idea of unarmed police is so foreign to me. My stepdad was CHP for 30 years and he would have been dead many times if not for being armed. One time he was walking up to a car he pulled over for littering and the guy just opened up on him with a .45. He took two bullets in the shoulder returned fire and killed the guy. They never did figure out why the guy started shooting at him.