UK Police? Routine firearms? Not yet.

The UK Police have one hell of a problem on their hands. Public image is probably at rock bottom.

If the Police had a better image, then I'd be more open to them having firearms but, under todays circumstances, I reckon it should never happen.

Now, we'll firstly take a look at the case why they shouldn't have firearms. This starts with two videos and some other assorted accounts.




One of the main problems here is a shoot to kill policy by trained officers. Even people brandishing swords are not incapacitated, but lethally shot. Some people have been shot while unarmed and even naked. I still don't know if Mark Duggan was actually in posession of a firearm; one was later found at the scene but Duggan's fingerprints weren't on it and it wasn't seen before he was fatally shot. (as far as I can ascertain)

The leaked accounts of the DeMenezes incident does show that the police weren't as sure as they damn well should have been, before murdering DeMenezes.

Away from the emotive stuff, if you look at the figures from Inquest then you'll conclude that the police aren't having to shoot people all that often.

In a heated discussion recently on Inspector Gadget's blog, lirish commented, "Don I am a current nationally acredited police firearms instructor and I agree with what MIchelle says, there would be a failure rate far in excess of what was sustainable and what then would we do with those officers? Office jobs? What about the officers who joined an unarmed service and didn’t want to carry? More office jobs?" So if we did decided to arm every officer, the failure rate would see our force decimated by perfectly compitent officers, who can carry out their duties without the need for firearms, forced out of a job.

The vocal response from some people was that because I hadn't worked as a serving officer, my opinion didn't count. The view was also expressed that anyone who couldn't handle a firearm shouldn't be a police officer. Personally, I interpret this as testosterone talking, and while we're at it, talking a load of rubbish which only serves to prove the point; the people behind those words clearly think that they are better than me and that I should just shut up and do what they say. Well, when faced with that kind of elitist nonsense, I have to ponder as to what the hell such people are doing entrusted with warrant cards, let alone firearms.

People wielding a firearm don't engender respect, they engender fear and that is not a state of affairs that I wish to be policed under in a state where respect for some officers is at a considerable low.

Let's look at the last but one comment on Inspector Gadget's blog before comments were closed. debscupboard wrote "It’s not about fitness to carry… It’s about admitting to the world that we are WRONG… “our bobbies carry guns like Johnny Foreigner? Never!” As I say on my blog… “WE WILL NEVER CARRY FIREARMS. WE ARE JUST NOT SEEN AS WORTH IT”"

There WAS a time when the police were seen as worth it and Wikipedia sums up the situation in the 1980's as "As a result, around 17% of officers in London became authorised to carry firearms. After the deaths of a number of members of the public in the 1980s fired upon by police, control was considerably tightened, many officers had their firearm authorisation revoked, and training for the remainder was greatly improved. As of 2005, around seven per cent of officers in London are trained in the use of firearms. Firearms are also only issued to an officer under strict guidelines."

One of these was the shooting of a five year old boy, John Shorthouse.

So. Are the British Police, "worth it?" Let's take a look at some behaviour reported when firearms aren't involved.

Carmen Valino was reported by the NUJ as being an identified press photographer operating outside a cordon when she was threatened with arrest and her photos were deleted.

A photographer and videographer were awarded compensation after being illegally prevented from doing their jobs.

Heck, just follow this search link to find out how police think so little of the law that they think they're above it. It's not only photographers, just use this search for police abuse of power and have a good read.

And you're going to love this report from The Register which details "The agency says that officers' misdeeds included boasting of having roughed up members of the public during recent protests/riots, attempts to befriend victims of crime, inappropriate comment on "others' wives", and harassment of former partners and colleagues. That perennial Facebook favourite, inappropriate pictures, also led to many bobbies' downfall.

One Hampshire plod was reportedly sacked without notice for posting a racist comment on Facebook and another was booted off his force for abusing a fellow officer and harassing a female colleague. Seven other cops resigned following complaints regarding their online behaviour." ... the only upside from this mayhem is that the police officers involved were sanctioned to various degrees.

For consideration is that armed police are already deployed in areas where they feel it is needed...

It is reported by this BBC article that police in Notingham (as at 2001) were in fact routinely armed in areas where the reputation of the areas justified it.

Statistics in that report, listed the results of a Police Federation survey at the time...
A survey (1995) of police attitudes to armed patrols found:
*) 79% of police officers said they were not in favour of being routinely armed
*) But 40% said more officers should be trained to use firearms
*) 42% felt their life had been in serious danger as a result of personal threat in the previous two years
*) 39% had been threatened with firearm, knife or other weapon in the previous two years
*) In the event of a decision to arm all officers 43% said they would be prepared to carry firearms on duty or all of the time
*) 6% said they would resign from the police service if they were ordered to wear a firearm

So, statistically, 19% of officers thought more officers should be trained for firearms; just that it shouldn't be them.

-----

Now the other side.

The police do a tough job. They feel under fire on the streets. Cuts aren't helping either.

A major point in the story was the Massacre of Braybrook Street where three police officers were killed. The people they stopped had guns; the police didn't. The officers didn't stand a chance.

I think it would be right to state that any police officer who goes on to the street, shouldn't have to accept the risk of being shot as being a hazard of the job.

You've got to face that it's going to happen. Fire personnel go in to risky situations where a building could collapse or gas canisters blow. Door staff have to be on the look out for the occasional disgruntelled punter carrying a weapon. A nurse could wreck their back lifting a patient. I could end up getting electrocuted as part of my job.

In other words, there is always a risk factor in everything we do. It is unreasonable to say something along the lines that even one death is unacceptable, because it is going to happen.

The police are facing a tough time out there. I mean, what kind of thing are the police facing when they have to tazer a 15 year old boy while executing a search, where they happen to later find a firearm.

Let's go back to some of the statistics in that 2001 survey...
*) 42% felt their life had been in serious danger as a result of personal threat in the previous two years
*) 39% had been threatened with firearm, knife or other weapon in the previous two years

The lone officer felt, even as far back as 2006, that if they needed armed backup, that it wouldn't get to them in time. That's from this 2006 Police Federation survey which details...

Officers at greater risk
*) Almost half of the 47,328 police officers polled have felt that their lives were placed in serious jeopardy on at least one occasion since the last survey was released.
*) This equates to approximately 23,000 officers across England and Wales facing extreme levels of violence from members of the public at some point over a two year period.
*) Over 40% have been assaulted whilst arresting suspects by as much as eleven times in some cases in the same period. However, the figures the Home Office use to gauge the dangers officers face are currently unavailable following errors made in the HM Inspectorate of Constabulary’s annual report.
Arming the Police
*) Despite the threat of terrorism and increase in gun and knife crime 43% of officers are not confident that armed support would be available should they need it.
*) Since the 2003 survey was conducted there has been an increase in the numbers of authorised firearms officers from 5,763 in 2002/03 to 6096 in 2003/04. However, ACPOs recommended figure of 5-8% of AFO officers nationwide has failed to be met by more than two thirds of forces in England and Wales.
*) The Police Federation want to see a 5% rise in the total number of officers in England and Wales trained in the AFO role and this appears to represent the views of our members with 43% of officers supporting moves to increase the numbers of officers trained to use firearms.
*) When asked if a decision was made to train and arm all police officers whilst on duty, 70% of officers would be prepared to do so. However, out of the 6,516 (13.8%) respondents who stated that they would never carry a firearm on duty, a staggering 56% claimed they would resign from the force rather than accept an order to carry a firearm.
*) Taser gained support from 44% who felt that that appropriate training should be made available to enable all front-line officers.

56% of 13.8%, is 7% of officers saying they would resign if forced to carry a firearm, a slight rise from the 2001 survery if we assume (and assumptions are always dangerous things) that the same number of officers were surveyed each time.

It also means that, statistically of course, there must be a 2009 survey somewhere and a 2012 survey will be just around the corner. However I can't find the results on the Polfed site.

Police are facing dangerous situations where, despite their body armour and equipment of 2006, 32 officers every day across England and Wales face extreme violence from mops. Also, 22 officers feel that their lives are in jeopardy every day (Almost half of the 47,328 police officers polled have felt that their lives were placed in serious jeopardy on at least one occasion since the last survey was released.), which is half the respondents (23664) since the survey three years previously (7888) then per day that's 22.157...something that feel that their lives are in jeopardy.

That's a minimum because the same officer could have felt that on more than one day during that three year period.

For officers to feel this way is unacceptable.

Stated in the, Home Office Statistical Bulletin (PDF of Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/9) "Handguns were used in 4,275 offences during 2008/09, a rise of two per cent on 2007/08. There was a large fall in the use of imitation weapons, which fell by 41 per cent to 1,511" so the statistics bear out that there are serious numbers of firearms offences going on. (12 every day; if two officers attended one of these incidents, then that justifies the officer serious jeopardy statistic)

There is serious stuff going down out there.

-----

Conclusion

Like it or not, the police currently have a public image which shows them as having contempt for the law that they are sworn and paid to uphold. The public image seems to be that when a police officer does obviously and willfully break the law, they are not seen to be properly held to account and punished for their actions.

There will always be the incident of Ian Tomlinson; the image living long in the public mind of Tomlinson, walking away from the officers with his hands in his pockets, being pushed to the ground by PC Simon Harwood.

The image of incidents to the present day is of the police shooting to kill instead of incapacitate. The image of currently trained firearms officers is not good.

The police have got to rectify this image before the public can ever trust in an increase in firearm officer numbers even to 1980's standards, let alone to have every single officer armed.

To take another few paragraphs from that 2001 BBC report...

“A significant majority did not want to be permanently armed,” says Federation chairman Fred Broughton.

“But they did want proper risk assessments. They specifically wanted back up, and they wanted mobile armed-response vehicles. They also wanted better training and they wanted better management of armed situations.

“Many of us want to see the unarmed service and the traditions of British policing maintained. But for how long we can maintain them is the question.”

There is an uneasy feeling by those with long experience in the law enforcement business that Britain may be moving gradually towards an armed police service.

From the 2006 statistics, 70% of officers would be prepared to be armed. As stated by lirish (if he is as he stated, a current nationally acredited police firearms instructor) it wouldn't be practical; too many would fail the current standards. (It matched with the account I read in a police officer magazine a few years ago, so I've got faith in what Lirish is saying) Also, officers in present service who are trained to the current standards are shooting to kill in incidents where perpetrators are carrying knives; even despite the 41% fall in imitation weapons in 2008, there is a 1 in 5 chance that the weapon that a firearms officer is facing, is fake but they still shoot to kill, not incapacitate.

It isn't going to work.

According to the statistics from the Police Roll Of Honour Trust the actual number of police deaths is quite low as a result of criminal acts; a little more than 1 officer every year. Even those low numbers are improving more recently.

I won't stoop as low as to compare services against each other. Statistics are hard and it is an especially difficult subject when we're talking about the lives and deaths of people who are in the service of this country.

I wouldn't like to have to inform any of these officers families that they have lost their loved one; yet that is a duty that many of our officers have to carry out on a frequent basis; delivering such devastating news to families throughout our country.

The statistics do say, however, that despite facing odds which leave our officers feeling like their lives really are in danger, they still manage to come out on top of the situation. They nevertheless feel like they are not valued and that if they call for backup, it wouldn't come; and that is a situation that has to be fixed.