John Worne
:Why Soft Power Is Hard for Governments
Matthew Reed
:The New Anti-Social Behaviour Bill Risks Criminalising Children for Being Children
Naomi Westland
:Why Spain Must Investigate Franco-Era Crimes
Peter Little
:Why the UK Should Avoid Arming the Syrian Rebels
Gabriel Byng
:Why Parliament Ought To Be Grand
The tragic deaths of two unarmed policewomen in Manchester yesterday will inevitably lead to calls from some quarters for on-duty police in the UK to be armed. But before we pursue such a course of action, we need a proper examination of the facts.
We should listen to those who know best - the police themselves. A 2006 Police Federation survey showed an overwhelming majority (82%) of police opposed the routine arming of on-duty police officers. Despite a rise in terrorism and gun-related crime since similar surveys in 2003 and 1995, officers questioned remained steadfast in their opposition to armed policing.
Interestingly when asked if a decision were made to train and arm all police officers whilst on duty, out of the 13.8% who said they would never carry a firearm on duty, an incredible 56% claimed that they would resign from the force rather than accept an order to carry a firearm. That would have a dreadful impact on the ability of the Metropolitan Police to serve Londoners.
It is also worth looking to examples from other police forces around the world to see if arming the police would keep them safer. In the United States 511 police officers were killed between 2000 and September 2010. Of those officers killed 51 were slain when they own gun was turned against them.
Male or female, armed or not armed it would not have made a difference in this situation. Tragically these two dedicated officers were deliberately lured into a trap. This awful event should not be used to devalue the many occasions on which we have seen female officers outperform their male counterparts in their ability to defuse tense standoffs and persuade agitated individuals to act reasonably.
We should resist pressure at these incredibly difficult times to arm the police when it could in fact put our officers in more danger.
Arming the police would be a step in the wrong direction and would go against policing by consent and the history of unarmed policing in this country. I hope the Mayor & other politicians will resist pressure on this.
Rather than dwelling on the idea police with weapons or the fact that the officers killed were female, we should focus on what officers need: on risk assessment, training and when needed specialist backup. Let us not forget in this debate that the Met and other forces already have well trained specialist backup squads who are armed with guns and taser who should be called upon in potentially fatal shootings.
Follow Jenny Jones AM on Twitter: www.twitter.com/GreenJennyJones
Police.uk - Local crime, policing and criminal justice information for ...
Law enforcement in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free ...
Police | UK news | The Guardian
Police officer killings: What media has to say
Police chief trial report indicates Bo Xilai may be charged
A troubled time for policing in the north of England
Killed policewoman's father speaks out after deaths
What is not said is that you are including all Officers:
The Sergeants and Inspector ranks are included within the Federated ranks.
Officers involved in non operational departments and policing tasks.
Ask those who patrol the streets or are involved in direct policing, then see what your answer is.
Lastly you said, "Let us not forget in this debate that the Met and other forces already have well trained specialist backup squads who are armed with guns and taser who should be called upon in potentially fatal shootings."
Unfortunately if you are the unarmed officer responding and, you are the potential fatality, having a back up ten minutes away is uno comfort. Sadly you have not answered the question nor offered a solution, you have said nothing new or remotely inventive.
Police are paid to protect our streets through mutual respect not fear.
No of course not. So lets do that survey again, after all it was last done in 2006 - and see the result this time. Also, lets break it up into those that actually work on the from line and those that don't.
Let's have a debate based on facts - not lies.
What would be more realistic is to up the number of routinely armed officers on the beat. Whether it is only one in ten or one in twenty the risk that an officer may well be armed would be enough to make many criminals think twice. Not only would it double the reaction time by the police to heavily hostile situations, but it may well reduce the violent crime levels in the majority of UK cities. Facts are clear that most criminals are utter cowards, hence the reason burglaries against the elderly are far higher than that of middle aged couples.
Really? I guess we will never know but i wonder if the shooter would have devised such a plan if he knew that the officers attending the scene would be armed. Raol Moat shot an unarmed couple, killing one, shot an unarmed police officer and declared war on the police. Until they tooled up of course, at which point he vanished.
"Arming the police would be a step in the wrong direction and would go against policing by consent..." Speak for yourself. It's a thorny issue which the police themselves have to resolve but for what it's worth i do hereby give my consent to the police being routinely armed.