Recession, what Recession?
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Comparison with police practice in the USA seems odd. Is anybody really saying their approach to the police use of firearms is a model we should follow? Strange also to suggest the police here should adopt military methods when some of those who do seem to do so seem to deplore the possibility that the army may be used to supplement or replace the police
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Who is suggesting the police should adopt military methods? What is being suggested is that the police shouldn't use types of ammunition that are banned for military use.thirdcrank wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 4:25pm Comparison with police practice in the USA seems odd. Is anybody really saying their approach to the police use of firearms is a model we should follow? Strange also to suggest the police here should adopt military methods when some of those who do seem to do so seem to deplore the possibility that the army may be used to supplement or replace the police
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Recession, what Recession?
I'm saying that the Hague Convention is irrelevant to policing in this country. Of Course, all police use of firearms is regrettable: it's better if it doesn't happen. However, the days of Give me the gun, sonny, and nobody will get hurt" are gone.
If I've misunderstood what you were saying, try re-wording it
If I've misunderstood what you were saying, try re-wording it
-
- Posts: 3930
- Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am
Re: Recession, what Recession?
The danger if they don’t is that there will be “in one side and out the other” incidents, with bystanders getting hit.What is being suggested is that the police shouldn't use types of ammunition that are banned for military use.
It’s surely one of those “devil and the deep blue sea” issues.
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Ok I'll put it in simple terms. If a type of ammunition is considered too harmful to be used by trained professional soldiers being shot at by trained, professional soldiers then police officers certainly shouldn't be allowed to use the stuff to shoot members of the public.thirdcrank wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 5:53pm I'm saying that the Hague Convention is irrelevant to policing in this country. Of Course, all police use of firearms is regrettable: it's better if it doesn't happen. However, the days of Give me the gun, sonny, and nobody will get hurt" are gone.
If I've misunderstood what you were saying, try re-wording it
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Thanks. And I'll point out that Steve76 dealt with that above before youpete75 wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 7:22pmOk I'll put it in simple terms. If a type of ammunition is considered too harmful to be used by trained professional soldiers being shot at by trained, professional soldiers then police officers certainly shouldn't be allowed to use the stuff to shoot members of the public.thirdcrank wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 5:53pm I'm saying that the Hague Convention is irrelevant to policing in this country. Of Course, all police use of firearms is regrettable: it's better if it doesn't happen. However, the days of Give me the gun, sonny, and nobody will get hurt" are gone.
If I've misunderstood what you were saying, try re-wording it
I think "into other people" is likely to be worse than "other things" but it covers the issue. (I've no idea of Steve76's standing here)Which is a nice example of ignorance being involved in exacerbating matters. Police using hollow points is intentional and desirable and has nothing to do with whether their actions in terms of the shooting itself were appropriate. The bullet needs to be stopping in the target, not going straight through and into other things at still potentially lethal speeds.(My emphasis)
-
- Posts: 3930
- Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am
Re: Recession, what Recession?
If you accept that the police should be armed in some situations, and should in some circumstances shoot people, I’ve got a nasty feeling that using billets that don’t travel beyond the first person they hit, and which are almost guaranteed to stop that person in their tracks, are the logical choice.
Nobody wants it to be necessary for the police to be armed, nobody wants them to have to shoot anyone, and everybody wants the police to “get it right” on any occasion when they do shoot someone. But, the first is probably necessary, the second probably necessary too, and the third asking the impossible, given that human beings are involved.
None of which is pleasant.
Nobody wants it to be necessary for the police to be armed, nobody wants them to have to shoot anyone, and everybody wants the police to “get it right” on any occasion when they do shoot someone. But, the first is probably necessary, the second probably necessary too, and the third asking the impossible, given that human beings are involved.
None of which is pleasant.
-
- Posts: 36776
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Recession, what Recession?
My only reservation would be that I believe in England and Wales, unarmed police is situation normal. My experience is not recent and the perception seems to be that armed police is becoming more common. I cannot imagine who would expect an unarmed police officer to deal with someone suspected of being armed.Nearholmer wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 7:40pm If you accept that the police should be armed in some situations, and should in some circumstances shoot people, I’ve got a nasty feeling that using billets that don’t travel beyond the first person they hit, and which are almost guaranteed to stop that person in their tracks, are the logical choice.
Nobody wants it to be necessary for the police to be armed, nobody wants them to have to shoot anyone, and everybody wants the police to “get it right” on any occasion when they do shoot someone. But, the first is probably necessary, the second probably necessary too, and the third asking the impossible, given that human beings are involved.
None of which is pleasant.
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Fully agree. Arming the Police is a necessary evil, gun crime is extremely rare and we're still policing by consent. I think the balance is about right. The ammunition used is designed exactly for that purpose, to stop the target but also have no collateral damage. Police firearms courses are massively intensive, shooting a suspect is considered an absolute last resort.Nearholmer wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 7:40pm If you accept that the police should be armed in some situations, and should in some circumstances shoot people, I’ve got a nasty feeling that using billets that don’t travel beyond the first person they hit, and which are almost guaranteed to stop that person in their tracks, are the logical choice.
Nobody wants it to be necessary for the police to be armed, nobody wants them to have to shoot anyone, and everybody wants the police to “get it right” on any occasion when they do shoot someone. But, the first is probably necessary, the second probably necessary too, and the third asking the impossible, given that human beings are involved.
None of which is pleasant.
Re: Recession, what Recession?
The requirements for firearms and ammunition for the police vs. the military are different. In war weapons which inflict severe injury can be as effective - or even more effective - than those which are likely to kill outright. If a soldier is wounded, one or more of their comrades will probably have to cease firing themselves in order to care for and evacuate the wounded soldier. If a soldier is killed, the rest of the unit will likely continue shooting and fighting. A requirement for military ammunition can be the ability to 'knock down' and severely wound, rather than maximum lethality. The separation distances between opposing forces are generally so large that a severely wounded soldier is no longer a significant threat.pete75 wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 7:22pm Ok I'll put it in simple terms. If a type of ammunition is considered too harmful to be used by trained professional soldiers being shot at by trained, professional soldiers then police officers certainly shouldn't be allowed to use the stuff to shoot members of the public.
I think the rules of engagement for police would typically be that firearms may only be used when there is reasonable belief of immediate threat to the lives of others or of the armed officer. In that situation military ammunition which may be more likely not to kill/completely incapacitate may not be suitable, because it may result in an unaccceptable risk that the wounded person will still be able to use their weapon and kill someone, especially given the likely close proximity of a hostage, other civilians, and/or the firearms officer to the wounded person.
I think it is also a legal requirement in the UK that hollow point ammunition is used for killing some game, presumably to ensure a 'clean kill' and avoid causing needless suffering and pain. Occasionally police firearms officers will themselves need to kill a dangerous animal, e.g. dangerous dogs or large animals which have escaped and pose a danger to the public.
I am not concerned about the types of ammunition used by police, because the choice should be determined by the operational requirements, and it should be relatively straightforward to assess whether it is unsuitable. What concerns me are the intangibles surrounding police firearms use. For example, the use of presumably hollow point ammunition in the back of the head to kill Jean Charles de Menezes to ensure that he was killed and could not detonate a suicide belt, was appropriate based on the threat that suicide bombers posed and the procedures the police formulated for dealing which such incidents (Operation Kratos). The problem was not the type of ammunition, but everything else about that killing was indicative of a command and officers who were unfit to be trusted to use firearms and to be trusted with the authority to make decisions on the use of firearms. That is unlikely to have changed given that no one was disciplined, let alone prosecuted, despite it reportedly being apparent from his clothing that he was very unlikely to be wearing a suicide vest, despite Met officers lying about that and telling the press that he was wearing a coat. The fact that the Gold Commander overseeing the operation went on to become Commissioner gives me little confidence in the accountability of the Met.
-
- Posts: 3930
- Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Precisely.The problem was not the type of ammunition, but everything else about that killing
I’m less confident. It might be right in the context of a well-run, properly accountable police force, but we seem to be in a place where both of those conditions are open to too many questions.I think the balance is about right
Re: Recession, what Recession?
I am not so much concerned about the type of munitions used, moreso the increased frequency of armed response (we had an armed response unit cover our area in 2019, the offender was 'armed' with a replica Samurai, which was probably sharp enough to cut a loaf of bread) and the heavy duty of weapons used. The political situation is fractious, and only likely to get more fractious as winter deepens. It's the politicians who decide policing response.Nearholmer wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 9:25pmPrecisely.The problem was not the type of ammunition, but everything else about that killing
I’m less confident. It might be right in the context of a well-run, properly accountable police force, but we seem to be in a place where both of those conditions are open to too many questions.I think the balance is about right
Handguns are usually Glock (17 and 17m) and SIG Sauer, whereas machine guns are Heckler and Koch MP5 and MP7, both lightweight German weapons used extensively in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and capable of between 800-950 rpm, redesigned several times to defeat Kevlar body armour. A simple review of the H+K website states that they are only used by the ordinary Czech, Norwegian and British Police forces. They are also used by various Antiterrorism Response units including Ireland and France. Their proliferation seems to be greatest in the United Kingdom.
In France for instance, it's normally the job of the Army, or specialist units within the army to respond to terror threats and they appear to do so with great skill and efficacy. It's Army who patrol airports and sensitive locations of government in Paris for instance, which makes me feel a lot safer. I've a colleague who's son is with the Legion and from him I've learned that these protection forces are all drawn from men with active military service, who have served under active fire situations.
I wouldn't imagine that many British policemen have come face to face with an 'active shooter', and this does concern me. It's only recently that the Gendarmerie in France have started to recruit personell from ex soldiers who have not seen active service. You can see the benefits of having ex servicemen and women in situations of high stress like terrorism activity where their experience is invaluable.
What I'm saying is that i would prefer ex service personnel (or the army) to respond to situations facing an armed threat, than policemen. However well trained. As stated above it was not the type of bullets used, but the manner in which they were used which instigated a near nationwide (in England at least) riot.
I see trouble ahead. Especially if there's mass organised protest at fuel poverty and/or electricity rationing/inflation/recession over the winter months. There are several, experienced small protest groups clearly waiting in the wings to exploit these frustrations. How the police react, and how proficient/sensitive they are to what may be very large scale demonstrations will determine whether there are potential riot scenarios. Like it or not, we're almost certainly in for a 'winter of discontent ' as never before.
And we have someone the calibre of Bravermann in charge of it all... I've always championed the police forces: they do a job most of us would rather not even contemplate, but they have to respond to and obey the whims and perhaps ill informed wishes of politicians. Who, in this socio-economic climate, seem less than capable to do the job. Of course the Tories may well exploit this situation in order to restore their 'law and order' status, I'm not certain if they aren't already stoking the fires deliberately at the moment, but that is a very risky, dangerous activity.
It worked for Thatcher though, but only temporarily.
Re: Recession, what Recession?
Most US police forces use hollow point bullets as standard issue. Some have done so since the 1970s
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html
https://www.americanprogress.org/articl ... t-control/
The US military also use them in handguns.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/che ... mmunition/
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Re: Recession, what Recession?
from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56834733thirdcrank wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 4:25pm Comparison with police practice in the USA seems odd. Is anybody really saying their approach to the police use of firearms is a model we should follow? Strange also to suggest the police here should adopt military methods when some of those who do seem to do so seem to deplore the possibility that the army may be used to supplement or replace the police
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Re: Recession, what Recession?
AFAIK its only US SWAT teams who use hollow point, by nature they are a special response team, not regular police.Vorpal wrote: ↑22 Nov 2022, 8:53amMost US police forces use hollow point bullets as standard issue. Some have done so since the 1970s
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html
https://www.americanprogress.org/articl ... t-control/
The US military also use them in handguns.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/che ... mmunition/