Firearms, knives, police and fellons

[DuncanONeil]

It is unfair to make the comparisons that your are making. There is a quantum difference in the "rules" of use between the military and police. There are specific rules for the military and when those rules are in place action can be taken. And that action is shoot to kill.
It is not the same with police. Also all of the stories about "police error" never have all the information. We never hear about how long this situation went on and what the police did prior to shooting nor what the victim did or did not do. If the deceased had followed the instructions of the police there would have been no shooting. Police firing their weapon is in the same category of the country putting its military in harms way, last resort.

One other point I would like to make about the British police carrying firearms; and it is that in the short time they have done so they have carried out far too many mistakes. There have been several times that more than one officer has fired at a supposed gunman, and when it has been one firearms expert there has been more than one shot fired, proving yet again overkill, and trigger happy police.

I was out in Belfast with the Special Forces; we were carrying at the time Belgian 7.62 FNs. They were more powerful than most assault rifles that the armies of the world have now. If you could see and aim that far with the naked eye, this weapon had the killing range of 5 miles. Put 6 people 6feet apart and with one shot you would kill them all, it would go through a half inch of steel at 100 yards and 6 feet of packed sand. I like others in my section and battalion kept my rifle loaded but ready at a seconds notice. We had no need to ask for permission to shoot, it was written in black on a yellow card for us to read, and it was in our pockets at all times. I cannot remember a time when we abused the card and fired the weapon without being fired at first, and the reason was, that weapon was part of us, we trained with it and we slept with it, and we respected the firepower we held in our hands.

The police however don’t have this luxury, and are a very unstable to be using a firearm, unless you have a certain mentality in the army, you will not get to hold a position of responsibility with a firearm.

Regards ian2411

[IAN 2411]

It is unfair to make the comparisons that your are making. There is a quantum difference in the "rules" of use between the military and police. There are specific rules for the military and when those rules are in place action can be taken. And that action is shoot to kill.
It is not the same with police. Also all of the stories about "police error" never have all the information. We never hear about how long this situation went on and what the police did prior to shooting nor what the victim did or did not do. If the deceased had followed the instructions of the police there would have been no shooting. Police firing their weapon is in the same category of the country putting its military in harms way, last resort.

I would like to point out that two times that were talked about afterwards the supposed terrorist shot three times on the train in London, by the Met Police. They gave him no chance, and all because the idiots hadn't seen him leave the flat, they had not done their homework. The people in the train spoke against the police saying that there was no warning. Please for god sake dont come back and say well he could have been, it was safer to be sure than sorry. It is like hanging someone for murder, and then finding out the man had the right name but it was a different man with that name that carried out the crime.

The man on the station with the wrapped up table leg, the police shouted out, [now listen carefully] put the rifel on the floor and step away, second warning if you dont put the rifel doown i will open fire, Bang, one man dead carrying a wrapped up table leg. Now the reason for this is, if you are not carrying a rifle then there is not a lot of chance that you know what trigger happy plod is talking about. The police were only there because a member of the public said they thought he had a rifle.

The army over in Northern Ireland were on security roll and that of policing the province, at no time were the army on a war footing with them, we were nothing more than armed police.

Regards ian2411

[DuncanONeil]

I would like to point out that two times that were talked about afterwards the supposed terrorist shot three times on the train in London, by the Met Police. They gave him no chance, and all because the idiots hadn't seen him leave the flat, they had not done their homework. The people in the train spoke against the police saying that there was no warning. Please for god sake dont come back and say well he could have been, it was safer to be sure than sorry. It is like hanging someone for murder, and then finding out the man had the right name but it was a different man with that name that carried out the crime.

Entirely possible. Never said mistakes do not happen. But at the same time you can not extrapolate on the basis of the exception. And the previous message was posulating generalities based on a very small sample.

The man on the station with the wrapped up table leg, the police shouted out, [now listen carefully] put the rifel on the floor and step away, second warning if you dont put the rifel doown i will open fire, Bang, one man dead carrying a wrapped up table leg. Now the reason for this is, if you are not carrying a rifle then there is not a lot of chance that you know what trigger happy plod is talking about. The police were only there because a member of the public said they thought he had a rifle.

Regardless of what the inquest said I will fault the citizen in this case. If he was so obtuse as to believe that his package could not be perceived as something other than what it was. If, perchance, the citizen thought the reference was to someone else to just stand there was also foolish. Either responding to the officer, or getting out of the line of fire of the "rifleman" by going prone would have altered the outcome.

The army over in Northern Ireland were on security roll and that of policing the province, at no time were the army on a war footing with them, we were nothing more than armed police.

Regards ian2411

Security role or not they still have rules of engagement. Military does not go live ammo with out a briefing on what they can do when. Even snipers in Iraq are not on free fire. They must call up chain for permission.