Poll: Should UK police be given guns as standard issue?
- Thread starter miketehmage
- Start date
Recommended Videos
just no, adding guns to a riot in any context is not a good idea, gunning down people would only lead to more riots and more which would lead to more death etc
I totally agree the riots have nothing to do with the shooting but it gave criminals the opportunity to blend in with the protest and start the riots.So giving the police firearms would just cause more riots when they fire at the rioters.thelonewolf266 said:
Consider that the first supposedly "riot" was about a protest about a guy shot dead by the police I believe it would be like adding oil to a fire instead or water.
I think they should be given tear gas and tazers for the next possible riot.
I think they should be given tear gas and tazers for the next possible riot.
OH GOD NO! Please for the love of god stop trying to arm the police here in the UK we don't need it. As so many people have already pointed out we already have an armed division for when they are need (rarely) and again no offence to the yanks but look at the US for number of gun related deaths caused by officers in error.
And as for firearms to stop riots I think people recently tried that, its why libya now has far more craters in it.... riot police yes, maybe even water cannons/mounted police etc but never armed police for riots and never armed police in general.
sorry for the rant but since I am English I really never want to see a peeler with a pistol.
And as for firearms to stop riots I think people recently tried that, its why libya now has far more craters in it.... riot police yes, maybe even water cannons/mounted police etc but never armed police for riots and never armed police in general.
sorry for the rant but since I am English I really never want to see a peeler with a pistol.
Awkward standing with guns. I think that by all means the police need more equipment (tasers, bean bag cannons, etc) or maybe guns with rubber bullets (never seen one being used but ive heard they're quite effective), because things like that could really help. But with live firearms, theres gonna be massive media firestorm along with serious repercussions.
becuase arming them with machine guns would be a better idea to deal with rioters. im assuming your very very young, or uneducated enough to not know about bloody sunday, tianaman square, or peterloo. arming the police would NOT help put down the riots.miketehmage said:
our police have tazers. and the american police have firearms becuase the common civilian has access to firearms. you CAN'T compare two ENTIRELY seperate forces like that. the americans are in a entirely different country and culture.miketehmage said:
you've never been near the police in action have you? again, im willing to bet your some white middle class person whose closest interaction with the police has been when they come to your school. the police have access to firearms, they carry (as a matter of course) CS spray, batons and handcuffs. again becuase we are in ENGLAND not the US there is no need for them to carry .45s. british police also aren't armed force becuease they want to be able to interact with ordinary civilians.miketehmage said:
that police officer won't be charged. the officer who shot charles de menzize is still working. armed police regularly shoot people who are armed and firing on them. they DON'T get kicked out the force. its what armed police are for. we don't live in a country where you shoot at police and don;t get repurcussions.miketehmage said:
how exactly would this work? they would see someone going into the house and pump a .308 round through their kidneys so the "criminal" can roll on the ground in agony before dying? yes, becuase THAT is a reasonable response. arming police DOES NOT put down riots. all it leads to is the criminals arming themselves. then we would be like the US.miketehmage said:
Let's tally the scores
Britain: Guns: None. Rioting, check. Looting, Check. Property destruction, check. Assault, battery, and murder, check.
America: Guns: Lots. Rioting, none. Looting, also none. Property destruction, none again. Assault, battery, and murder, not even close to the same scale.
The police are unarmed, and they're outnumbered. All the body armor and riot sticks they have aren't going to save them when they have to get within arms reach of a mob that wants to tear them limb from limb. Business and home owners are being looted, assaulted, and murdered in their owh businesses and homes because they can't defend themselves.
You people talk about how if you introduce guns then suddenly all of the bad people will have guns. From what I'm hearing, some of the people rioting already have guns, and the rest don't need them. The mob has control and there's no one, nothing, that can stop them.
Britain: Guns: None. Rioting, check. Looting, Check. Property destruction, check. Assault, battery, and murder, check.
America: Guns: Lots. Rioting, none. Looting, also none. Property destruction, none again. Assault, battery, and murder, not even close to the same scale.
The police are unarmed, and they're outnumbered. All the body armor and riot sticks they have aren't going to save them when they have to get within arms reach of a mob that wants to tear them limb from limb. Business and home owners are being looted, assaulted, and murdered in their owh businesses and homes because they can't defend themselves.
You people talk about how if you introduce guns then suddenly all of the bad people will have guns. From what I'm hearing, some of the people rioting already have guns, and the rest don't need them. The mob has control and there's no one, nothing, that can stop them.
Yes. Then we should give the fire brigade flame throwers instead of hoses, because hoses aren't nearly as powerful as flame throwers.
We should only encourage people who can use guns responsibly to hold them. I wouldn't trust the police not to abuse the power. Thats not even considering what the criminal elements would do in response, and how much easier it would make aquiring a firearm in the UK. Right now it's still pretty difficult to aquire a gun in most parts of the UK, lets not make that any easier, lets not create more of a demand. Some people are just desperate to recreate 90's LA in the UK.
Hah, bull fucking shit. How about you go check the stats first? On average, there are around 50 deaths by shooting per year in Britain. In America it's closer to 2,000. America has one of the highest murder and crime rates in any country in the world.ShadowKatt said:
I'm fairly sure that we have armed police in Denmark and it works out quite well - You'd need all officers well trained before you ought to hand them out however.
Utilizing firearms in riots isn't viable however. Crowds need to be pacified via non-lethal means, though if everyone is suddenly fine with the state exterminating its own citizens I would recommend pre-emptive nuclear strikes on all major cities. It would form a credible deterrent in the remainder of the country.
Utilizing firearms in riots isn't viable however. Crowds need to be pacified via non-lethal means, though if everyone is suddenly fine with the state exterminating its own citizens I would recommend pre-emptive nuclear strikes on all major cities. It would form a credible deterrent in the remainder of the country.
The US has plenty [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_riots#21st_century] of riots, although I'm not sure how it compares to the UK which has most of their riots in Northern Ireland, not England proper.ShadowKatt said:
Assault and murder? The US has the highest homicide rate [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide_rate] in the Western world, you know.
Besides, what are you even suggesting? Using guns against rioters? That just fucking insane.
There isn't a single Western nation - even the US only uses body armor and riot sticks - that just guns down rioters and thankfully so.
Now that the demonstrations are worse then ever you want to give people guns?
Gee I do wonder how that will end...
Gee I do wonder how that will end...
Let's tally your post.ShadowKatt said:
Murder in Britain? NONE last night. America? 81: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/04/21/weekinreview/20070422_MARSH_GRAPHIC.html
Riots in America? Dare I say "Rodney King"?
All the looting has happened to big empty stores. No-one has been murdered, Few have been assaulted.
Not a single gun was fired by the rioters. Not a single gun was found on the rioters.
The Police didn't use Tasers, CS gas or anything more than nightsticks.
I invite you to do some research next time. Or simply leave.
You acknowledge yourself that the police are outnumbered, then somehow equate their ineffectiveness to the lack of firearms. The reasons the riots continue is because they are occurring over too wide an area for the relatively small amount of police to control, which is why recently there was a massive increase in the number of officers. Giving them lethal weapons isn't going to magically make things better anymore than it will magically give other people guns. Indeed, if you had bothered to look at history or, I don't know, similar situations occurring at this very moment, you would see that responding to civil unrest with violence only makes things more violent. Syria demonstrates that quite well.ShadowKatt said:
The police aren't doing as good a job as they should, and they lack the tools and training to deal with such a large scale situation. But there is nothing - NOTHING - to indicate that firearms will make anything better.
Like it has anything to do with that. Europeans aren't as docile and tranquilized as the American populace, yall have a good history of deposing corrupt leaders. We (Americans) have grown apathetic to our nation's decline as we've lost hope that anything can be done about it without having billions of dollars and lobbyists.ShadowKatt said:
There's more than one, tasked with dealing with different incidents, and to make it confusing for foreigners watching British police shows.Dresos said: