Firearms, knives, police and fellons

[IAN 2411]

[QUOTE=MMI;

Another thought: where police or soldiers fire into the air to deter a crowd or to prevent a riot, are they behaving recklessly? Someone could easily be killed who was taking no part in the public disorder.[/QUOTE]

Very few Police or soldiers fire their weapons over the heads of rioting crowds or other disorder. All police and soldiers that are armed are tested, and irrespective of how much training they have, it is a no go area, all know the consequences of a loose round. I am not saying that it would not happen in a third world country, but it would never happen in the Western free world, I don’t think any police force or army would be that stupid. While in the army my orders were if fired on, shoot to kill, public order even in Ulster only batons were used by the army.

Regards ian 2411

Soldiers, on the other hand, might not be trained to avoid this kind of behavior, especially when they are being used as an auxiliary to the police, such as in a riot. It's still unsafe, however, and the soldiers should be held accountable.

I have quoted myself in this post, because I don’t think that it was read by you Thorn before you wrote the paragraph above. Have you been in the forces? If you have then you have never done United Nations duty? All soldiers of the NATO alliance are trained in home security, IE : - rioting, looting and disorder. I would think that even your own Marines would have been taught the basics of policing, and to make that remark is insulting to your own forces and that of the UKs from where this discussion started. Firing into the air has nothing to do with not being trained to avoid this behaviour, because that order would never be given, as it is pure stupidity and is done through ignorance. Soldiers would not be accountable in the western world because it would never happen, and just to make a point. In Ulster where the British army was policing, all shots fired by the troops were at legitimate targets, but in a riot or disorders a firearm was never used because of harming innocent bystanders.

Regards ian 2411

[DuncanONeil]

I would think that even your own Marines would have been taught the basics of policing, and to make that remark is insulting to your own forces

Regards ian 2411

US troops are not taught the skills and techniques of policing, unless that happens to be their specialty, i.e. MPs and SPs. Even in the Air Force even that job is subdivided into "security" and "law enforcement"
To put it in the simplest terms possible the job of the military is to blow things up and kill people. Neither of those is the role of the police.

Peacekeeping missions are a different animal altogether!

[Thorne]

I have quoted myself in this post, because I don’t think that it was read by you Thorn before you wrote the paragraph above. Have you been in the forces?

No, I have never served in the military, though two of my brothers have. They were never trained for police-type duties, only for military duties. But I did say that they might not have that type of training, because we are talking about more than just the USA or UK armed forces, aren't we? I'm including National Guard troops in this category, which are much more extensively used for policing duties, and they do not receive the same kind of training as police. So, while I'm sure that SOME military forces may be trained for these kinds of situations, not ALL would be.