Two Police Women Killed in Manchester

[Parafox]

The poster I was originally responding to was advocating arming all police officers as standard, making the above and the rest of your post irrelevant. Obviously I can appreciate the need for armed response teams but that is not what is being discussed

WHAT???

Did you actually read what you wrote?

[1964FOX]

What happened was terrible and it would appear the two officers were attacked by a mad man. It is sadly a reality that any job no matter how routine can go very wrong for any police officer. These two officers didn't stand a chance armed or not if the initial reports are correct. Every police officer knows the reality that each job they attend could be their last.

It is fact that the vast majority of police officers do not wish to be armed and those that are receive very extensive training. In fact these select officers even drawing their guns has reduced greatly with the introduction of tasor which gives a less than lethal option to deal with most instances that would previously have been granted a firearms authority by the authorising officer.

No matter what people's view on the police in general, and there are some bad ones, this case is a tragedy and are thoughts rightly go out to their families, friends and work colleagues.

It should not change the way police are armed as thankfully it is a very rare occurrence and probably could not have been avoided.

[davieG]

BBC

Bringing back the death penalty for those who kill police officers should be considered, Conservative peer Lord Tebbit has said.

He said he was reluctant to see the routine arming of police officers, but the "deterrent effect of the shadow of the gallows" should be reconsidered.

It follows the fatal shooting of two police officers in Greater Manchester.

Lord Tebbit has long supported a return of the death penalty in certain circumstances.

As an MP he voted a number of times to bring back capital punishment for murderers, including those who kill police officers.

'Violent criminals'

Writing on The Daily Telegraph website, he said: "The murder of two unarmed women police officers is bound to reignite the debate over whether our police officers should be armed as a matter of routine and whether there should be a return to capital punishment for limited categories of murder, such as that of a police officer, or more generally."

The former chairman of the Conservative Party rejected calls for the arming of police because it would "widen the gap which has grown between the police and the public in recent years".

But, he said, there had been "far too many killings" recently where it was impossible not to wonder if the threat of an "early dawn walk to the gallows" would have changed the actions of the perpetrator.

"The hard fact is, as violent criminals know perfectly well, a credible threat that a man will lose his life unless he complies with a demand usually results in obedience."

Lord Tebbit said concerns that such a penalty would lead to miscarriages of justice - with the innocent executed - would be mitigated by the care juries would take deliberating when they knew a person's life was at stake.

He said: "I have kept track year by year since the death penalty was suspended, then abolished, of the number of people who have been killed by persons previously convicted of homicide.

"It has averaged three people a year. About 150 people killed because their killers have been freed to kill again.

"Would our courts have sentenced to death three innocent people a year, year in year out? I doubt it.

"I think it is time we thought again about the deterrent effect of the shadow of the gallows."

[Ilkeston_Fox]

Very good question, I don't know, I think it is known as "getting away with murder".

If you don't believe Wikipedia, which is now one of the most thoroughly researched and credible sites on the web, it is no longer the free for all editing affair it used to be how about the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.u.../uk/4175432.stm

http://news.bbc.co.u.../uk/7761652.stm

Or this one which has the actual CCTV footage of him going through the ticket barrier (follow the slide show) warning final slide shows his dead body, for those that don't want to see that kind of stuff:

http://news.bbc.co.u...629/7073125.stm

It doesn't, but it is reason for not giving more guns to police officers.

Which is something I've stated myself and I completely agree with you. I said tasers should be more readily available to front line officers. No matter what is debated, there will always be a divided opinion - which again I think is good, it keeps the option to implement new ideas in the future. Our society is evolving - many of you have said as much in other threads, shouldn't the police evolve with it and move with the times? Surely they should be able to fight fire with fire?

[Bellend Sebastian]

Which is something I've stated myself and I completely agree with you. I said tasers should be more readily available to front line officers. No matter what is debated, there will always be a divided opinion - which again I think is good, it keeps the option to implement new ideas in the future. Our society is evolving - many of you have said as much in other threads, shouldn't the police evolve with it and move with the times? Surely they should be able to fight fire with fire?

Here's a genuine question for you, and please don't think I'm being difficult or trying to undermine your argument. In the incident where the lad was brandishing a knife, which, incidentally, is exactly the sort of thing that makes me not want to be a policeman, I'm sure you would have felt better able to deal with that situation if you had a firearm and he didn't - I know I would have done. But if it was a choice between the exact situation you were in, and the same situation but with you both having firearms, how would you feel about that?

[Reynard Bleu]

Arming the police just isnt the answer. Carrying a fire arm and even being trained to use it is only the half of it. Deliberately, selecting a target and shooting it, and shooting to kill (because you don't do it for any other reason), is something else. In combat the adrenaline rush under fire is hard to control, months of training go some way to helping a soldier do this, selecting the taget and squeezing off rounds to kill the target. For most people the actual act of killing will not come easily.

Modern weapons are incredibly powerful, rounds fired from assault rifles or big hand guns will breach the paper thin walls/doors of modern houses/buildings and go on to hit anything or anybody in the way.

These unfortunate police officers were attending what they thought was a routine call, unlikely they would draw a weapon before knocking the door. If this guy was waiting for them I doubt they would have time to draw and arm a weapon before the suspect started shooting.

Guns are bad news, they don't solve many problems, we don't need any more on the streets in anybody's hands say I.

[davieG]

Arming the police just isnt the answer. Carrying a fire arm and even being trained to use it is only the half of it. Deliberately, selecting a target and shooting it, and shooting to kill (because you don't do it for any other reason), is something else. In combat the adrenaline rush under fire is hard to control, months of training go some way to helping a soldier do this, selecting the taget and squeezing off rounds to kill the target. For most people the actual act of killing will not come easily.

Modern weapons are incredibly powerful, rounds fired from assault rifles or big hand guns will breach the paper thin walls/doors of modern houses/buildings and go on to hit anything or anybody in the way.

These unfortunate police officers were attending what they thought was a routine call, unlikely they would draw a weapon before knocking the door. If this guy was waiting for them I doubt they would have time to draw and arm a weapon before the suspect started shooting.

Guns are bad news, they don't solve many problems, we don't need any more on the streets in anybody's hands say I.

Arming all would lead to virtually ever contact between the police/public with the police already having their weapons at the ready other wise we'll end up with cases of armed police being shot even though they had guns on them, what would people be asking for then?

[Captain...]

Which is something I've stated myself and I completely agree with you. I said tasers should be more readily available to front line officers. No matter what is debated, there will always be a divided opinion - which again I think is good, it keeps the option to implement new ideas in the future. Our society is evolving - many of you have said as much in other threads, shouldn't the police evolve with it and move with the times? Surely they should be able to fight fire with fire?

Fight fire with fire?

This guy had fvcking hand grenades, should police carry them too, this incident was a horrible sad, tragic incident, but it was also an isolated incident.

Unfortunately sometimes shit just happens, but using it to call for more armed officers or death sentences for people who kill police is just ludicrous.

What hasn't been called for, yet, is tougher sentencing/bail requirements, the man accused of it was on bail for another firearms related incident. That is what I would be looking at, he is accused of killing another man with a gun, why was he released on bail?

[Saigon Fox]

http://www.rippdemup.com/2012/08/mentally-ill-black-man-shot-46-times-killed-saginaw-police/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19138754

I was in the US on tour with my band and these two events occurred. I was only a few miles down the road at the time of the Sikh temple shooting.

Let us hope that the UK doesn't go down this route and that we don't have a need to arm all police or allow civilians to own guns anymore than they are now.

[Ilkeston_Fox]

Here's a genuine question for you, and please don't think I'm being difficult or trying to undermine your argument. In the incident where the lad was brandishing a knife, which, incidentally, is exactly the sort of thing that makes me not want to be a policeman, I'm sure you would have felt better able to deal with that situation if you had a firearm and he didn't - I know I would have done. But if it was a choice between the exact situation you were in, and the same situation but with you both having firearms, how would you feel about that?

Well luckily 9 times out of 10 the people that the police encounter that are armed with knives aren't skilled with them - in a martial arms sense, so the police are able to tackle them a bit more effectively, CS works well, taser works well, to go baton vs knife is risky as you have to get in to close quarter combat. Now, I don't carry a taser and as a Special Constable I'm unlikely ever to do so (which is right in my opinion, unless I had the proper training and up keep in training), so I had CS and a baton. Thankfully, my gob solved that particular incident and I talked him down to throwing the knife away.

I've been in for just about 2 years and I've only ever drawn my CS twice and used it once. I've only ever drawn my baton in a confrontational incident once, I didn't use it. The threat, stance and commands usually works. Obviously this is good, but what if my CS fails? I'm then left with my gob and a baton (I'm using me as an example but I mean any officer that doesn't carry a taser), an officer/anyone around the incident is then left vulnerable to the threat, and vulnerable because the nearest taser/armed unit could be minutes away - and believe me that's a bloody long time if you need to go hands on.

Personally I'd feel several things; sorrow that our society has come to this kind of incident, anger for the same reason. But I'd like to feel confident that I (or any other officer) had the correct tools for any given job. That's not to say give us all AK47s and let us run wild, not al all. Just stop cutting corners here and there, what's more important to the public; to the government, money or peoples lives?

[Ilkeston_Fox]

Fight fire with fire?

This guy had fvcking hand grenades, should police carry them too, this incident was a horrible sad, tragic incident, but it was also an isolated incident.

Unfortunately sometimes shit just happens, but using it to call for more armed officers or death sentences for people who kill police is just ludicrous.

What hasn't been called for, yet, is tougher sentencing/bail requirements, the man accused of it was on bail for another firearms related incident. That is what I would be looking at, he is accused of killing another man with a gun, why was he released on bail?

Sorry, I think I used the wrong phrase. Of course I don't think that the police should have grenades etc. No no, far from it. I'd love to go back to the days where officers didn't need to even wear stab/bullet proof vests, they just had a tunic, a baton, a helmet and a radio. Unfortunately they've had to move with the times because they changed. Do you not think that times are starting to change again? I mean the generaly public only get to hear of these types of incidents when something drastic happens, how many times do these incidents happen where the public don't get a whiff of it? I think it happens more times than people might think.

Thankfully you're quite right in that this was an isolated incident, and you're also spot on that calling for the death sentence wouldn't solve anything. Armed officers is another thing, it's not only the armed police (the ones with bullets) that carry tasers, I'll not say who else does, but other units do, but again there aren't enough of them, this is just my humble opinion from my experiences as a special. I can only go on what I've seen/experienced and other officers war stories when they've needed assistance etc.

And as for you last paragraph, have a great big +1 from me, couldn't agree more with you. It's about time this country got very tough with things like this. That though, doesn't have a lot to do with the police, more the courts and CPS, all the police can do is put recommendations in and wait for the courts to rule....I think it's time that the courts and CPS take heed of some of these recommendations when they are put in court.

[ADK]

Trouble with tasers is, they arnt a magic bullet and they can actually be lethal too.

The taser should imo be carried only by the armed police and used in a situation where lethal force may have been used.

There have been too many cases of tasers used on people for being simply uncooperative.

[ADK]

We would literally cut crime in half in this country if we didn't keep releasing/bailing criminals it really does my head in.

[Mack]

Absolutely dreadful crime.

However Sky News don't half know how to milk every drop... Soft voices.. live from the local Church memorial..Interviewing the local window cleaner.. It's really not needed.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

Trouble with tasers is, they arnt a magic bullet and they can actually be lethal too.

The taser should imo be carried only by the armed police and used in a situation where lethal force may have been used.

There have been too many cases of tasers used on people for being simply uncooperative.

what do you want to do instead? tickle them FFS

[Guest MattP]

Absolutely dreadful crime.

However Sky News don't half know how to milk every drop... Soft voices.. live from the local Church memorial..Interviewing the local window cleaner.. It's really not needed.

Was thinking the same thing.

[Ilkeston_Fox]

Trouble with tasers is, they arnt a magic bullet and they can actually be lethal too.

The taser should imo be carried only by the armed police and used in a situation where lethal force may have been used.

There have been too many cases of tasers used on people for being simply uncooperative.

Agian, there are strict policies regarding tasers. Unless a subject is posing a substiantial threat, the use of tasers has to be authorised by an Inspector. A taser certified officer can 'shoot' someone without authorisation but he will have to justify the use of force, if it is deemed unproportional then they will be disciplined, the same way if an officer struck someone with a baton, or put a subject in an arm entanglement hold etc etc, it all has to be justified.

I have to ask, how have you come to the conclusion that people get tasered just for being uncooperative?

[Bob Weasel Fox]

Agian, there are strict policies regarding tasers. Unless a subject is posing a substiantial threat, the use of tasers has to be authorised by an Inspector. A taser certified officer can 'shoot' someone without authorisation but he will have to justify the use of force, if it is deemed unproportional then they will be disciplined, the same way if an officer struck someone with a baton, or put a subject in an arm entanglement hold etc etc, it all has to be justified.

I have to ask, how have you come to the conclusion that people get tasered just for being uncooperative?

Just sent you a message buddy. Keep up the good work

[ADK]

Agian, there are strict policies regarding tasers. Unless a subject is posing a substiantial threat, the use of tasers has to be authorised by an Inspector. A taser certified officer can 'shoot' someone without authorisation but he will have to justify the use of force, if it is deemed unproportional then they will be disciplined, the same way if an officer struck someone with a baton, or put a subject in an arm entanglement hold etc etc, it all has to be justified.

I have to ask, how have you come to the conclusion that people get tasered just for being uncooperative?

A couple of videos on youtube plus newspaper articles. The one i watched the man was drunk and the police were struggling to get handcuffs on him so they used a taser. This would be fine if tasers didn't have the potential for causing sudden death in a minority of people. I see tasers as great in a situation where a bullet might have been used but not as an item of everyday policing.

[Ilkeston_Fox]

Ahh right with you, I think I know the video you're talking about. I think (if it is indeed the one) it's in Nottingham city centre, I seem to remember watching a series about the police and this incident being brought up. The officer was saying that he was being bitten at the time, I can't be sure, but hadn't this chap already been tasered, then they tried to cuff him, he kicked off again - and biting people, so he got another dose?

If I personally was being bitten and depending on the situation etc I'd be thinking of a strike to the head, striking them with the bottom of the baton or something similar - anything to get that person from biting me. I'd have to then justify my use of force obviously, but these strikes are all taught, it's not as though an officer makes it up as they go along. Now, I'd guess that a baton strike to the head would/could have far longer lasting injuries that being shot with a taser. I've seen people who have been tasered and they recover far quicker than someone who has been sprayed with CS or received a baton strike to a key area.

I agree that in an ideal world, there wouldn't be any need at all for tasers, guns etc but it's not an ideal world, and I don't see it improving unfortunately.

[Bellend Sebastian]

Sorry, I think I used the wrong phrase. Of course I don't think that the police should have grenades etc. No no, far from it. I'd love to go back to the days where officers didn't need to even wear stab/bullet proof vests, they just had a tunic, a baton, a helmet and a radio. Unfortunately they've had to move with the times because they changed. Do you not think that times are starting to change again? I mean the generaly public only get to hear of these types of incidents when something drastic happens, how many times do these incidents happen where the public don't get a whiff of it? I think it happens more times than people might think.

Thankfully you're quite right in that this was an isolated incident, and you're also spot on that calling for the death sentence wouldn't solve anything. Armed officers is another thing, it's not only the armed police (the ones with bullets) that carry tasers, I'll not say who else does, but other units do, but again there aren't enough of them, this is just my humble opinion from my experiences as a special. I can only go on what I've seen/experienced and other officers war stories when they've needed assistance etc.

It's a tricky one, isn't it? There's always going to be a gap between the threats faced by officers and the means available to counter them. The introduction of tasers and CS spray in recent years was presumably an effort to reduce that gap, in a (hopefully) non lethal way. If the level of violence being used by criminals against the police is escalating and the gap widening then obviously this needs to be looked at, but personally I think that if beat coppers have firearms then a line is crossed, the outcome of which is going to be more criminals with guns and a lot more bullets flying around from both sides, making it more dangerous for the police and public alike.

The BBC reporter on the news last night quoted a senior copper (I think it was probably the GMP Chief Constable) that said AFTER the murders yesterday, that they were already concerned that even stab vests and CS spray etc were in some cases undermining local policing and creating a barrier between officers and the communities that they're supposed to be serving, or words to that effect anyway. It's a tricky one, for sure. The hard thing to gauge is the difference that arming officers would actually make - even if they felt safer and more confident, if ultimately they are exposed to more danger as a result, then it's counterproductive, I'd have thought

[Bob Weasel Fox]

Ahh right with you, I think I know the video you're talking about. I think (if it is indeed the one) it's in Nottingham city centre, I seem to remember watching a series about the police and this incident being brought up. The officer was saying that he was being bitten at the time, I can't be sure, but hadn't this chap already been tasered, then they tried to cuff him, he kicked off again - and biting people, so he got another dose?

If I personally was being bitten and depending on the situation etc I'd be thinking of a strike to the head, striking them with the bottom of the baton or something similar - anything to get that person from biting me. I'd have to then justify my use of force obviously, but these strikes are all taught, it's not as though an officer makes it up as they go along. Now, I'd guess that a baton strike to the head would/could have far longer lasting injuries that being shot with a taser. I've seen people who have been tasered and they recover far quicker than someone who has been sprayed with CS or received a baton strike to a key area.

I agree that in an ideal world, there wouldn't be any need at all for tasers, guns etc but it's not an ideal world, and I don't see it improving unfortunately.

spot on buddy

[Smudge]

I've never heard of a hand grenade being used as a weapon by a civilian before and rarely are guns used against the police. That doesn't say it isn't going to happen in the future but changing the police arming laws over one isolated incident seems a bit previous.

Having said that, I agree with Ilkeston Fox that having something more effective than CS gas and a baton is necessary as deterrent.

I have said it before on this forum, the police presence in the UK seems to me to be invisible. CCTV, which seems to be the preferred method of monitoring events, is only useful after the event and I believe, a poor substitute for the physical presence of the police in force.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

I've never heard of a hand grenade being used as a weapon by a civilian before and rarely are guns used against the police. That doesn't say it isn't going to happen in the future but changing the police arming laws over one isolated incident seems a bit previous.

Having said that, I agree with Ilkeston Fox that having something more effective than CS gas and a baton is necessary as deterrent.

I have said it before on this forum, the police presence in the UK seems to me to be invisible. CCTV, which seems to be the preferred method of monitoring events, is only useful after the event and I believe, a poor substitute for the physical presence of the police in force.

and this current bunch of sewer rats (government) want to reduce numbers yet further - great idea NOT

[Guest MattP]

and this current bunch of sewer rats (government) want to reduce numbers yet further - great idea NOT

If you think it's bad now wait until the real cuts start, we are still spending more than we bring in at the minute.