|
Fair few criminals don't have guns but many criminals have blades on them. In any case, I doubt the
police would use these guns that I also think they should be carrying around unless it was their
last resort. People would feel safer in society and not intimidated by yobs and drunks on the
streets that have nothing better to do than stab each other and such. What is their to be afraid of
if we have done nothing wrong by handing more powers to the police including firearms? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
They should be allowed because they will probably never use them and when push comes to shove and
they are been threatened by a violent criminal they could use the guns. This would increase an
officers skill of using a gun as well as knowing what to do in certain circumstances. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yes definitely because a lot of police have been killed in Britain by lack of protection |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Police should always carry guns for security reasons. The British police are also included in that.
Every police officer must carry the firearms not only to protect themselves but also to protect the
general public too. If they do not be allowed to carry the guns, then how would they survive if a
gang of criminals attacks them with firearms? This is quite absurd to fight with those criminals
without having the guns. So this is a serious issue and I must say that police officers must be
allowed to carry the guns. Unless there would be no such power with them and they would be ignored
by the criminals in every now and then. The chief duty of a police is to protect people and I
don’t know how it would be possible if the police himself do not carry a single gun with him. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
For the safety of the police officers and the general public, i believe the police should be able to
carry guns. What would they be able to do if there is a gang of kids with weapons and they are free
handed?
They need weapons to show control and power over the minority that carry guns and knives around with
them thinking they are invincible.
Why should the police not be able to use self defence or protect themselves from armed criminals?
They have the right to feel safe and a duty to protect the public and are to prevent these criminals
getting away with what they do. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I had no idea that British officers couldn't carry firearms. This seems like an incredibly bad thing
to me, as they could be easily overwhelmed by their likely better-armed counterparts. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
For protection yes. I was watching cops and this guy had an axe how do the police defend
themselves???
They need some kind of protection or they could be ended up shot wounded or killed |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Law enforcers like policemen are allowed to carry guns and that is why criminals fear them. Without
the fear of a weapon a policeman is just an ordinary person trying to make sure everyone is
following the rules.
When criminals regularly carry guns how do you expect the police to fight back or stop them without
regularly carrying guns. British police personnel should carry guns on regular basis for their own
protection and also for the protection of others. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The British police should carry handguns. In fact, to be honest, there is one part of the UK, where
the police regularly carry weapons, in Northern Ireland. Although this is being minimalised now,
police with weapons aren't frightening or intimidating, instead, you feel rather safe around
them.
Once upon a time, the argument was simple. If you arm the police, then the criminals will arm
themselves. The problem is that whilst the British were being self righteous about this attitude
and pretending that it was good and fair, right and proper, the criminals on the other hand - by
their very nature didn't play fair, they didn't want to play 'cricket' at the Brits say. Why would
the criminals be expected to play by the rules? So, terrorists, robbers, thieves, drug dealers etc
armed themselves and our police force... Got pepper spray because a blinded criminal with a weapon
is much safer than a dead one!
The threat of terrorism has increased and has made the world a difficult place to imagine as safe.
Again, the terrorists have not agreed to play by the rules. They are armed with weapons and
explosives and they have not agreed to attack the military or the government only, they have
dedicated themselves to wholesale slaughter. How have we armed our police in response? WIth tazers.
One of the big problems is the hysteria about the shooting of the Brazilian in London. They were
highly trained police officers operating in an environment of hysteria and let's face it, they
screwed up massively. However, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't arm the police against the
threat of real terrorists and we know it's real, because of 7/7, because of 9/11 and its always been
there.
If you can't trust a policeman, then who can you trust? Surely, one can trust the police to use
their weapons responsibly. After all, they are supposed to be the law and order, well at least the
order part most of the time. I wonder how officers would feel having the power to protect
themselves. We trust professional soldiers to use weapons correctly, why not the police, surely
they would be better protecting us from criminals and terrorists by being armed with weapons that
can at least challenge the ferocity and lawlessness of the contemporary criminal.
If they spent a decent amount of training and selection, the police would be more effective in
protecting the British against criminals and terrorists. Weapons would make them more of a threat
to those terrorists and criminals and therefore might act as a deterrent. This is the opposite of
the old idea of no guns for the police means no guns for the criminals. It is true that there is
far less gun crime in this country than others, but as well we might know, guns are not legal in the
UK and therefore no one can legally buy a handgun or other gun weapon.
Guns are only dangerous in the hands of dangerous or untrained people. At present, criminals are
using weapons more and more and our police have to respond with batons, fists, tazers and pepper
spray, it just doesn't make sense. This is based on foolish old fashioned ideas that criminals will
behave fairly when challenged by the police. These days, instead, they shoot first and ask
questions later. The unarmed policeman stands little chance, the average Britain stands even less
of a chance. Now I'm not expecting Briton's to suddenly take up arms, but why shouldn't the
protectors of law and order have a chance to prevent dangerous and armed criminals. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
No, we're not gun-obsessed dribbling idiots. Luckily, fairly few criminals have guns, so they have
no need to be armed. We don't want to have the US's gun culture imported onto our soil, thanks. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No way, only the most highly trained should have guns, most of them cant even use pepper spray
without blinding themselves |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don't think firearms should be available to anyone. In the same year that 400 people were killed
by firearms in Great Britain, 11,569 people were killed by firearms in the United States. The
British should pride themselves on a law that makes sense, as opposed a country who bases most of
their laws upon 300 hundred year old doctrine. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No, the police in the UK should not routinely carry weapons. Firearms should only be issued to
properly trained firearms officers when the need arises.
I shudder to think what would happen in this country if every copper were given a gun. Most do a
sterling job, but there are numerous bozos in the police service you wouldn’t trust with anything
more deadly than a pencil sharpener. These police officers already have an inflated sense of
self-importance without adding to their delusions by letting them pack a piece as well.
There’s a time and a place for everything. And carrying firearms is one of them. Arming the police
would only serve to escalate the number of guns in circulation and encourage more criminals to arm
themselves too. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I disagree.
In some cases yes the police should be able to carry guns but in the normal course of duty I don't
think that they should.
We don't want a society like America were guns are a 'normal' part of life, look at the problems
they have there and arming their police hasn't improved gun crime at all. Guns in some states are a
way of life - do we want that in a society that's already seeing the death rate increase through gun
crime?
It doesn't matter how often they train and how skilled they are as we've seen too often mistakes
happen and drastic ones they've been. This is nothing to do with trusting policemen and women. They
are human and make mistakes too and a deadly is impossible to rectify.
In situations where there's a real threat , for example in the face of terrorism or direct threat
to life , yes it's reasonable to have armed police but not as a routine . |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
28 Dec 2007 21:24
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
