UK: Crisis Unless Police Receive Protection

[Oldbillplod]

The former leader of Britain’s senior police officers has warned that the service could face difficulties finding enough policemen and women willing to carry firearms unless those officers are given greater legal protection following shooting incidents.

Chris Fox, the former President of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and ex-chief constable of Northamptonshire, told an audience of security experts while officers were willing to be fully accountable and understood that they had to be able to justify their actions, they did not seem to get the same levels of protection that other members of society received.

Asked whether police officers were no longer willing to come forward to take up firearms, Mr Fox said: “Certainly that’s an issue, and it will become more of an issue if officers cannot be given some level of legal protection.”

Examining the consequences of fatal shootings by police officers, Mr Fox continued: “When a Crown Prosecutor or a coroner looks at a case and decides that the shooting was lawful, the prosecution stops there. But because we are seen as an agent of the state, or of security, this is somehow seen as the police not being accountable enough, as the prosecutor or coroner is viewed by some as being part of the same state organisation.
“There are plenty of other incidences of prosecutions not going ahead because a prosecutor has decided that certain actions are lawful, but when it involves police firearms officers some people don’t seem prepared to accept that. In reality police officers aren’t even getting the same level of protection as other members of society.”

Mr Fox was speaking at the Counter Terror World Conference in London, where more than 300 delegates from around the world gathered to discuss and debate the latest techniques and technology involved in combating terrorism.

The conference ran alongside London’s largest ever security exhibition, featuring more than 150 leading companies including SecurityOracle.com, the website for the security industry. Andrew Greenfield, SecurityOracle.com MD, said: “The standard of debate in the conference was matched by the innovation and technology on display in the exhibition, and we had a fantastic response over the two days from delegates and exhibition visitors alike.”

[canuckofapeach]

Most calls on the street are not clear whether a fire arm or knife is in use therefore you have unarmed officers walking straight into a potentially deadly and volatile situation.
People have to let go of the idea of the local constable with his truncheon and face the truths of the 21st century; crime is advancing and police should too. A well trained Police Officer should be quite able to defend his/her actions to use lethal force. Stuff the political correctness.

[Stan Switek]

I'm not sure what that says when officers are more concerned about liability that their personal safety. It does not sound like an enviornment for effective policing and public safety.

[fatboyjim154]

I'm not sure what that says when officers are more concerned about liability that their personal safety. It does not sound like an enviornment for effective policing and public safety.

Please remember that most are not armed over here. Infact only 5% of the LEOs in my country carry routinely or have access to firearms, beit in lockers in their vehicles. Here you are trained to use the gun, but should you use the gun, senior management very rarely back you up public. I can't remember when they have.

Also the media hang you before the facts are in, and never show the full story (the same there I imagine), it has been known for individual reporters to side with the scrotes.

If you knew that you would stand a very, very, very good chance that you would be investigated, cleared, re investigated. Prosecutors again decide there are no charges to face, only to be arrested at dawn after all this and be interviewed again, to then be cleared by an American firearms/ballictics expert who finds evidence that your own forensics people missed twice which proves your story.

Then only to wait to face the family who are now suing you for the wrongful death. Would you want to carry a gun?

Jim

[ChesCopPodz]

Yes

Because if all of that happened, it meant that carrying a firearm is the reason I'm alive to go through all of that.

[ObMax1212]

Your country sucks when it comes to being able to protect yourself. They treat you like a criminal because you did what comes naturally to all humans? That is so ridiculous.

[oscarmitre]

Well what does Fox suggest?

[Stan Switek]

Please remember that most are not armed over here. Infact only 5% of the LEOs in my country carry routinely or have access to firearms, beit in lockers in their vehicles. Here you are trained to use the gun, but should you use the gun, senior management very rarely back you up public. I can't remember when they have.

Also the media hang you before the facts are in, and never show the full story (the same there I imagine), it has been known for individual reporters to side with the scrotes.

If you knew that you would stand a very, very, very good chance that you would be investigated, cleared, re investigated. Prosecutors again decide there are no charges to face, only to be arrested at dawn after all this and be interviewed again, to then be cleared by an American firearms/ballictics expert who finds evidence that your own forensics people missed twice which proves your story.

Then only to wait to face the family who are now suing you for the wrongful death. Would you want to carry a gun?

Jim

How does that saying go? Better to be tried by 12 than carried by six....