Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah, but I can't see these 3 sections having something that seems totally unrelated folded in.

They arn't exactly ambigious classifications like Domestic Violence or Public Disturbance.

Actually there are quite a few degrees of separation in even what could be considered "niche crimes" in the UK. Again, I can't remember the specifics and can't really be bothered to look, but if you fancy going through the crime report to see for yourself how the various crimes are broken down, help yourself

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/research-statistics/crime/crime-statistics/
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/science-research/research-statistics/crime/counting-rules/

I think this page has the full pdf report of the 2008/2009 year: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crimeew0809.html

Ok, I don't see any strange inclusions in those particular catagories compared to other nations.

 dæl wrote:

 Kaldor wrote:
You've literally got no idea what you're talking about here, and it shows.

I can assure you I have a far greater knowledge of British culture and whether it would be a good idea for police officers to be walking the streets of this country armed, how this will affect peoples view of the police and whether the police will abuse this power, than someone from an entirely different culture.

Possibly, but without a career in law enforcement or welfare I very much doubt it. But I was talking about your obvious lack of knowledge about operational policing and use of force.

If you wish to quote a piece of peer reviewed research then please do, I would be interested to read such. Every bit of sociological research I've seen has concluded that arming police, much like the death penalty, makes a society more violent.

Oh, so that's your argument? Where's your evidence? If you want to assert that armed police cause a rise in violence and homicide, you're going to have to back it up.

 Jackal wrote:
Why arm police?
People see it as a threat and seem to feel the need to arm themselves in the same way.

Citation needed.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
If someones coming at you with a knife, chances are they're knifing you by the time a gun is out anyway.

Bu...but... magical protection from guns!

lol, there's obviously a lot more to it than that. A wild-west style showdown with the knife guy running down the gun guy is pretty unlikely, although highlights the utter stupidity of relying on tasers (and English police don't even get those, do they?) to protect yourself from an assailant.

 Jackal wrote:
If a criminal knows that police officers are armed, why would he use a knife instead of obtaining a gun instead?

If a criminal could quickly and easily obtain a firearm, he's going to do it regardless of whether the police are armed or not.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Ok, I don't see any strange inclusions in those particular catagories compared to other nations.

A lot of crime surveys go off victims reports and include crimes that were never reported to the police. A lot of other ones don't. So when you're talking about relatively minor crimes where some people won't bother calling the police (Someone took your iPod on the bus, or you got punched at the local nightclub for example) you can end up with large discrepancies between various surveys.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
If a criminal knows that police officers are armed, why would he use a knife instead of obtaining a gun instead?

If a criminal could quickly and easily obtain a firearm, he's going to do it regardless of whether the police are armed or not.

Except that when he commits a crime with a gun it is no longer the standard bobbies after him but trained marksmen from the Armed Response Unit, who will shoot him if he puts up resistance.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
If a criminal knows that police officers are armed, why would he use a knife instead of obtaining a gun instead?

If a criminal could quickly and easily obtain a firearm, he's going to do it regardless of whether the police are armed or not.

The problem is if he goes a fair way out of his way to obtain a gun because he knows that the officers will be armed

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Kaldor wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
If a criminal knows that police officers are armed, why would he use a knife instead of obtaining a gun instead?

If a criminal could quickly and easily obtain a firearm, he's going to do it regardless of whether the police are armed or not.

Except that when he commits a crime with a gun it is no longer the standard bobbies after him but trained marksmen from the Armed Response Unit, who will shoot him if he puts up resistance.

If he's planning on getting caught, he's just going to stay home.

In the crooks mind, he's going to be in and out before anyone can stop him. And he can always just run away if the coppers do catch up with him, same as if he was using a knife. Except he might even know that the armed response unit has to be called, giving him more time to make his getaway.

No data at all supports the position that arming police leads to an armed populace, and if anyone wants to assert that, I'd really like to see some data backing it up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:

 Kaldor wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
If a criminal knows that police officers are armed, why would he use a knife instead of obtaining a gun instead?

If a criminal could quickly and easily obtain a firearm, he's going to do it regardless of whether the police are armed or not.

The problem is if he goes a fair way out of his way to obtain a gun because he knows that the officers will be armed

Or if he goes a fair way out of his way to obtain a gun because he knows that the officers will be unarmed. Isn't knowing that the police aren't equipped to deal with a firearm more likely to make criminals obtain a firearm to give themselves an edge?

Who knows? Maybe someone trying to assert that an armed police leads to an armed criminal element should try finding some supporting evidence. Just a thought.

There is also no data that shows that arming police reduce police casualties. Ultimately the only thing that matters is whether or not the populace what their police force armed.

No, we have specially trained officers for such occations. I do not doubt the police's ability to protect us but I do not doubt the fact that not every policeman is good (although small minority) and this is why I say no.

So... here's a wild thought, instead of giving the british police guns, maybe upgrade their stab vests to bullet proof vests? Cheap, simple, doesn't arm them, increases one's life expectancy.

What police forces really need are vests that are both knife and bullet resistant. Currently they kinda have to pick one.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
So... here's a wild thought, instead of giving the british police guns, maybe upgrade their stab vests to bullet proof vests? Cheap, simple, doesn't arm them, increases one's life expectancy.

And another example of the shocking ignorance of operational policing.

While I absolutely agree that covert ballistic vests should be issued to all operational officers, they are a safety net at best. There is a wide range of injuries they won't prevent.

 Kaldor wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
So... here's a wild thought, instead of giving the british police guns, maybe upgrade their stab vests to bullet proof vests? Cheap, simple, doesn't arm them, increases one's life expectancy.

And another example of the shocking ignorance of operational policing.

While I absolutely agree that covert ballistic vests should be issued to all operational officers, they are a safety net at best. There is a wide range of injuries they won't prevent.

Thank you for jumping to conclusions, I'm well aware of the realities of police work and I'm all for police officers having guns, I in fact carry a pistol every day and encourage others to do like wise. What I was suggesting... and this is insane I know, is called a compromise! and trying to take the discussion in another possible direction as it seems the only possible solution suggested for the police forces in Britain is to arm themselves which clearly the citizenry as represented in this thread doesn't want. So I made a suggestion, again a compromise, that might save a few lives and increase response capabilities without arming regular beat cops.

text removed.
Reds8n

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
So... here's a wild thought, instead of giving the british police guns, maybe upgrade their stab vests to bullet proof vests? Cheap, simple, doesn't arm them, increases one's life expectancy.

In a country where it is more likely for a suspect to be carrying a knife?

Why would you forego protection from the most commonly used weapon in order to gain protection against a weapon which is nowhere near as common?

For any American posters (or other countries) that don't know of recent events in the UK, I'll repeat what I said in an earlier post.

In the last two weeks, a report was published about the Yorkshire police that showed they conspired to cover up their ineptitude in handling the Hillsborough disaster. Victims were slandered, witnesses were intimidated and a PR campaign was launched by the police to shift blame away from the police. It goes without saying that confidence in the UK police is not that high. When you add this to other high profile events concerning the police, then you can see how the idea of the UK police being armed is not something that finds support with the majority of the public.

Kronk said it best when he mentioned he never comments on these sorts of issues. This may stifle debate but the UK and the USA will never agree on this sort of thing. Your country, your rules.

Police in the UK are much more likely to be stabbed than shot, and body armour is generally good at protecting from either bullets or knives, but rarely both. Therefore it's much more important to have stab vests than ballistic ones.

96 - YNWA.

 Surtur wrote:
Police should be armed. Period. There is no debate to be had here. You cannot put an officer on the street without a weapon unless you want a big painted bullseye on em too.

Well it depends on what they should be armed with. I vote for one or more of the following:
1. Games Workshop Whippy sticks. My name Enrosto Montoya and you killed me father. Prepare to die. whip whip whip!
2. Round head uniforms replete with helmet, matchlocks and rapiers. Alternatively Three musketeer outfits will suffice.
3. Cricket uniforms and cricket bats.
4. They may come armed with soccer hooligans, but only if those hooligans are stored safely in the trunk and with ammo separate (beer) prior to usage. Utilization of soccer hooligans may only occur after approval from the sergeant on duty.

Under no circumstances may a bobby be armed with haggis.

I don't know about hooligans, they might set the cop car on fire while they are still in the trunk.

 d-usa wrote:
I don't know about hooligans, they might set the cop car on fire while they are still in the trunk.

I admit its not a perfect solution, but separting them from the active ingredient of BEER has proven to be helpful.

Now that I think about it, if the big weapon is knives, then the roundhead armor might not be a bad idea actually.

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I don't know about hooligans, they might set the cop car on fire while they are still in the trunk.

I admit its not a perfect solution, but separting them from the active ingredient of BEER has proven to be helpful.

Wouldn't the beer take too long to kick in?

Might be able to jump start it by spray painting the target in the colors of the rival team.

 d-usa wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I don't know about hooligans, they might set the cop car on fire while they are still in the trunk.

I admit its not a perfect solution, but separting them from the active ingredient of BEER has proven to be helpful.

Wouldn't the beer take too long to kick in?

Might be able to jump start it by spray painting the target in the colors of the rival team.

Now thats capital thinking.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
So... here's a wild thought, instead of giving the british police guns, maybe upgrade their stab vests to bullet proof vests? Cheap, simple, doesn't arm them, increases one's life expectancy.

In a country where it is more likely for a suspect to be carrying a knife?

Why would you forego protection from the most commonly used weapon in order to gain protection against a weapon which is nowhere near as common?

I hate to be WILDLY optimistic but we live in a time of massive technological innovation, I'm certain there's a way to do both things with one item. Hell take the stab vest, stitch a pocket to the backs of the front and back portions of the vest and add ballistic plates. Or just add kevlar panels, that should handle most firearms or at least give you a better chance until you reach rifle calibers.

Not long ago I watched a BBC documentary about this old guy in Texas who patrols the border with Mexico on his horse. He's always on the lookout for drug smugglers and illegal immigrants. He's been shot like 100 times, and for reasons beyond me , he's prepared to die to help protect Texas.
Anyway, I can understand why he is armed. I can understand why people like Frazz and other Texas citizens would want to arm themselves against ruthless drug gangs. I can understand why the US police would be armed when there is on average 4 guns for each of its 300 million plus citizens.
But the fact that the original story about Manchester dominated the news speaks volumes about the cultural differences between the two countries. As somebody once said, we are two people seperated by a common Mcdonalds!

Plus it was not only guns used against those two officers in Manchester. The psycho also used a grenade. Maybe some of the militarily experienced people here on dakka could tell us how effective a kevlar vest is against a fragmentation grenade.

SO no one's for cuirass, armored gauntlets, steel helmet, rapier and matchlock then? Come on, if you're a Brit with an apple cutter, would you mess with that?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Plus it was not only guns used against those two officers in Manchester. The psycho also used a grenade. Maybe some of the militarily experienced people here on dakka could tell us how effective a kevlar vest is against a fragmentation grenade.

Actually it's pretty effective at keeping your vital bits unsullied by hunks of metal. Range dependent of course.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Plus it was not only guns used against those two officers in Manchester. The psycho also used a grenade. Maybe some of the militarily experienced people here on dakka could tell us how effective a kevlar vest is against a fragmentation grenade.

Actually it's pretty effective at keeping your vital bits unsullied by hunks of metal. Range dependent of course.

Can't say the same for the shockwave which is more dangerous then the fragmentation.


And I vote for encasing officers in 18th century cavelry armor

 Grey Templar wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Plus it was not only guns used against those two officers in Manchester. The psycho also used a grenade. Maybe some of the militarily experienced people here on dakka could tell us how effective a kevlar vest is against a fragmentation grenade.

Actually it's pretty effective at keeping your vital bits unsullied by hunks of metal. Range dependent of course.

Can't say the same for the shockwave which is more dangerous then the fragmentation.


And I vote for encasing officers in 18th century cavelry armor

WE NEED ROBOCOP

 Grey Templar wrote:


And I vote for encasing officers in 18th century cavelry armor

FInally someone understands.

How about this be the new british police anti-knife technology: