Resident Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Pastypies

  • Rank
    Relative Newbie
  1. Should officers be armed with Tasers?

    I would agree despite what people might think from my previous postings I have a great deal of respect for the police who are expected to do the impossible on ever dwindling resources. Often dammed if they do and dammed if they don't often kicked about by left and right for political capital. The trouble with an organisation all pulling together as one unit the entire force gets tarred by the actions of the few, Hilsbourgh, Thomas Hamilton, Pleb Gate etc. etc. On the whole I think we have a good police force under the circumstances.
  2. Should officers be armed with Tasers?

    This is part of the problem, UK criminals (and a good proportion of the law abiding public) have no respect for the police or indeed care what will happens to them. In a lot of other countries you resist arrest at your peril and I'm not talking about dictatorships or in the third world. Just like teachers in the classroom once you loose respect and control it is all but impossible to get it back. I blame to political correctness and left wing liberalism and not the police as the main contributor for the state we are in. Not sure how you put it right now without a real shake up.
  3. Should officers be armed with Tasers?

    Fact is personal protection should be a human right but that is something denied to the British public. You have the right to defend yourself but you can't carry anything to do it with, not even a no lethal product like a pepper spray. I think though you hit the nail on the head regarding this whole debate. 'It's not down to the police to dictate or decide policy' that is a job for parliament not the police. I happen to think that the police are stuck in a 1960's era trade union kind of mentality where they think they have the say on everything that goes on. Can the armed forces, fire services, NHS, teachers etc. dictate to parliament their terms and conditions, no they can't so why should the police be any different. Fact is thanks to the our countries immigration policies over the last thirty odd years the criminality and mentality of the public is passing the police by. Accept it, modernise, move on. I think there are too many senior police simply kicking this issue down the road instead of dealing with it direct, a kind of 'I'll be retired in ten years so it will be someone else problem' and so it goes on and on, a problem that is rife in the entire public sector.
  4. Should officers be armed with Tasers?

    Quite right they are illegal, they fall under Section 5 of the Firearms Act just like machine guns, assault rifles, handguns etc. In theory at least the default sentence for possession of a prohibited weapon is five years, I happen to think if it where ten or fifteen years it would make little difference as legislation only works on the law abiding so why should firearms law be any different. I disagree with the analogy that if the police had side arms so to would all these criminals because if you get the same sentence for possession of a tazer as you do for possession of an assault rifle or a pistol which is the case now then why not tool up already, luckily the later are still harder to come by at the moment. Like it or not this is an arms race and law enforcement must be winning at all times. The government has failed to stop the country being flooded with tazers so it's too little too late. I really don't see why the British police are so reluctant to carry a side arm, after all they don't seem to have a problem in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece etc. etc. Dare I say it the police must 'modernise' or fall behind. When the public were disarmed so to speak in the 80's and 90's it gave the police 30 years or so of breathing space to stay as you were but the Internet has come along and changed all that. Having said this you do see a lot more armed police around despite there supposedly being less gun crime, which is odd :)
  5. Should officers be armed with Tasers?

    If you can believe the report on BBC One London Inside Out London this evening then the police are already out gunned in the tazer/stun gun arms race or getting very close to it. What do you do when almost every serious crim has a tazer? I would suggest that it is time to do like ever other police force has done certainly throughout Europe and most probably the rest of the world and give police side arms by default, you can't keep putting it off forever. How can you protect yourself and the public around you when a gang of youths or criminals has tazers ten or twenty times more powerful the the one tazer you carry. Thanks to black gang culture and the immigration tsunami from eastern Europe Dixon of Dock Green tactics can no longer keep order I would suggest. Just think what it will be like when the next EU tidal wave come over from such lovely places as Serbia, Albania and Kosovo, I would think tazer smuggling into the UK will be the least of your worries. I for one do not envy your position in the next few years, that said you need the tools to do the job and I would issues every non office based police officer with a tazer as part of a program to later arm them with a side arm like a Glock for example. Despite the police spin put on this a few months back it is not the police forcing the law onto people at gun point I see it as protecting yourself and the law abiding public.
  6. Pistol Shooting

    Don't take my word for it read up on the history of UK firearms legislation I'm sure you could even google it. We have a rich history of going to other people's countries, disarming them and then bossing them around. That same practice started here after WWI when people came back from the trenches after spilling their blood for king and country only to find they were still the underdog and treated with the same contempt by the ruling classes (the political right) as before. You then had the unnerving situation where people had lots of guns, knew how to use them and weren’t shy about killing people, aka trouble. It wasn't long before a group of armed anarchists (extreme left) had a shoot out with the police and the government introduced the Firearms Act. From that day to this the political right has always had one eye on the left and when it looks like they are getting too militant or out of line they step in. The mini coup where the army took over Heathrow (or was it Gatwick) and shut it down for a day back in the mid sixties without any instruction from the then far left Labour government is one such example. It's always a case of nip it in the bud before it gets out of hand, I believe the Firearms Act Amendments 87 and 97 were in part just continuing this ongoing risk assessment. You only have to look back since the conception of the Labour Party and right and left have been biting chunks out of one another. The Conservatives crush the trade union movement in the 80's or strike it a mortal blow at least so the Labour Party ban fox hunting in retaliation just before they are booted out of office. The official reason was because of animal cruelty but it is common knowledge it was nothing other than retaliatory legislation. I don't like fox hunting BTW and never have. Anyway this thread is wondering off topic. What is more useful would be if there was any serving or retired police here who think that the .22 pistol ban should be amended. Every officer I have spoken to regarding this matter ether thinks it should be or at least accepts it was politically motivated and nothing to do with public safety, it would be good to hear your views for or against.
  7. Pistol Shooting

    Gun ownership and the shooting sports has generally always been a left right issue and the UK is no different. I'm not suggesting a plot they are your words not mine although you are correct that the major firearms bans have been instigated by the Conservatives. As with all firearms bans and restrictions they are introduced by the government not to protect the public but to protect the government from the public. I would suspect the rise of the left in the 80's and the pitch battles with the miners etc. might have had something to do with it. I would suggest the bans in 87 and then later in 97 had a dual purpose otherwise logic would dictate we would also have a shotgun ban by now but we don't. The threat of armed civil unrest has been greatly reduced in the space of about ten years and of course it makes it look like you have done something positive in the eyes of the public when these already known criminals go on the rampage with a licenced firearm. Blame the type of firearms used rather than the person or how they came by it, win, win.
  8. Pistol Shooting

    I think it just depends how you go about it seeing as politics has crept in every crevice of police life now. The police do make a rod for their own backs though at times and when it goes wrong you all get tarred with the same brush, if you take on the government you are going to loose I’m afraid, welcome to our world! I'm sure something could be done to get the word out without damaging peoples careers and/or chances of promotion, it's not what you do but how you do it. There is a common perception amongst the public the all police officers down to the last man and woman are anti shooting sports and gun ownership and share the same gaols as the Labour Party and the labour sponsored quango that is the Gun Control Network which is a total ban on all publicly held firearms regardless of type or for what purpose. For some this is indeed the case but I know first hand there is a sizeable proportion who are quite the opposite in their views.
  9. Pistol Shooting

    I've noticed there have been a few people on here saying that the gun laws in this country have become so tight now that it is simply illegal to partake in some shooting sports. One assumes by this these people are referring to the .22 calibre pistol ban introduced by the Labour Party. I don't think anyone here is naïve enough to believe this ban was introduced for anything other than pure political capital and to take a swipe at those on the centre right which make up the vast majority of the shooting community. In the clubs in which I shoot and have shot in over the years a good proportion of the members are serving or retired police officers and ex services. At times we often joke there are more police than civilians, I don't think many members of the public realise just how many police partake in the shooting sports. Every police officer I speak to who is also a shooter wants to be able to shoot pistols again all be it just .22 calibre, they are no different than all the other civilian shooters who also want the same thing. The trouble here is nobody seems to want to do anything about it or to be more realistic they think nothing now can be done about it. I have to say I disagree with this approach and believe something not only can be done but also should be done but ironically I think it will take the police to do it. If thirty thousand people sign a petition to the Home Secretary suggesting that .22 pistols should be reclassified back to Section 1 it will get put straight into the bin. On the other hand if three hundred or even just thirty police officers do the same thing and at the same time inform the media of what they have done things might just start moving. I would propose a trade off in as much as bringing back the .22 calibre pistols but at the same time getting rid of the high powered long barrelled revolvers which are not handguns only by a legal technicality, who needs a .44 magnum LBR to shoot targets, what is more who can afford to shoot targets with a .44 magnum? You can own a .50cal sniper rifle or a Sagia 12 with a 20 round drum loaded with slugs on a Section 1 licence but not a .22 calibre pistol, politics has simply barged common sense out of the way here.
  10. US School Shooting

    As a UK resident I would have to say I'm all up for gun ownership, having said this there is no way I would ever like to see the ease in which you can get a firearm in the US here in the UK. If you could simply prove your age, mental health and criminal record or rather lack of to get your hands on military spec firearms the streets of the UK would be a blood bath, worse I would say than the US. I'm all up for bringing the government and police to book when they get things wrong but on this one I would say they have got things almost right here, one could argue they have gone too far in some cases but on the whole it's not that bad. I can walk out of my front door with my family and know there is a very small chance indeed I will get shot possibly 1000's to 1 that can't be said for the US. End of the day the US has a legacy it must live with, it's a different country with different laws and mentality, having said this there are many things the US have got right which we here in this island have not, gun control is not one of them however.
  11. US School Shooting

    Coming from someone who is nether an American citizen nor a British police officer I would say this debate is six of one half a dozen of the other. I have worked in the UK gun trade for a long time and I am now retired from the industry. True enough there is a huge problem with easy access to firearms in the US, what's the point of going through police checks and having checks on your mental health, being finger printed etc. etc. if you then leave a gun in every room of your house loaded and ready to go so that your crazy drug fuelled son can go on a killing spree. The gun culture is too deeply ingrained into US society now I can't think it will ever change all that much and many will literally fight to the death to keep it that way. Unlike here back in the 80's and 90's when we were disarmed the shooting bodies of the UK simply capitulated without putting the slightest resistance. If you recall the rhetoric from the police and politicians was if you question any gun ban or how people like Thomas Hamilton had a gun licence in the first place then you were condoning their actions, in short put up and shut up! I would have to say though I don't think any British police officer has the moral authority to lecture anyone on gun control and how people from other countries should behave. Interesting that in all three major shootings we have had in the last twenty five years all the shooters were known criminals who were given a gun licence by the police, Ryan committed rape prior to his shootings and had illegal firearms and explosive, despite being tipped off to the police they did nothing, end result self loading rifle ban. Thomas Hamilton was a know homosexual paedophile yet given a gun licence by the police, no coincidence then that almost all his victims where children, end result pistol ban. Lets not forget Derek Bird was also a known criminal given a gun licence by the police, end result should have logically been a shotgun ban but as you can't really take on the police and army with only shotguns nothing was done. One also has to consider the livelihood of all the wealthy land owners who have shoots etc. Just like the Hillsborough football disaster which was made secret in order to protect the integrity of the police so to was the Dunblane inquiry, I think in time this will also come out and be yet another stain on the reputation of the British police force. Had the police vetted the above as they should have done none of these shooting should have ever taken place. Since the miner's strikes back in the 80's all centre fire self loading firearms have been removed from public access. One has to remember we have gun legislation in this country introduced by government not to protect the public but to protect the government from the public.
  12. European Firearms Course.

    Interesting post there Trojan and of course the default position of ACPO 'The public must be disarmed'. Oddly enough elsewhere in Europe there doesn’t seem to be the same level of fear and hysteria that you get in this country but then again they all arm there police by default what is more they haven't just had 13 years of a left wing socialist police state dictating over them. Maybe if the police took a little more time looking at who could have a firearms licence in the first place this country would undoubtedly be a safer place the names Derrick Bird and Thomas Hamilton spring to mind immediately. Two men given gun licences by the police and yet both known criminals, the later without even being vetted despite being a known homosexual paedophile, and that sir is simple criminal negligence. With regards to you MP5 snipe I disagree. If what you say is true then all the people with MP5 replicas chambered for .22 rimfire on section 1 which are dimensionally the same other than the bore, chamber etc. are if fact in possession of .22 semi automatic pistols. Fact is a firearm of this size constitutes as a carbine rifle which is why you can own one on S1 and if it where chambered for pistol calibre ammunition it would come under the definition of a gallery rifle in UK law even though it would then be S5.
  13. European Firearms Course.

    Hi Tony, I think your idea might have some kind of merit but not here in anti gun anti shooting sports socialist Britain. I'm not in the police but have certain insider knowledge through various channels and when it comes to firearms it would seem some forces believe that less knowledge of firearms is better than more. Indeed one firearms licensing department I know employed all of it's staff based on the criteria they had little or no knowledge of firearms. The logic it would seem if they had an interest or knowledge they must be some kind of gun nut or maniac. I ask you, have you ever heard anything quite so ridiculous, I heard that some of them didn't even know the difference between an automatic pistol and a revolver, someone else between a shotgun and a rifle! These people are issuing licences to the public, must be the only job in the country where you get the job by knowing nothing about it and having no experience. I happen to know there are a group of people offering courses to the shooting public in France similar to the one you talking about I happen to know a few people (UK shooters) who have gone on it and said it was worth the time and money. If nothing else you get to have a pop again with the stuff you could use all the time before the police and the government starting getting worried and took it all away. Someone mentioned all you need is to take a three week course on firearms instruction in the police force and you get the all clear to use a handgun, sub machine gun (all be it semi auto, so more of a self loading gallery rifle) or SLR. Surely if its good enough for the police then logic dictates it must also be good enough for members of the public who are gun owners? Perhaps someone here could post the requirements for this course and how someone meets the vetting requirements and maybe how you qualify, can't think its all that difficult. I've always believed where there is a will there is always a way, not sure however the police and government have the will though to hand back the stuff they were so eager to take away.
  14. Arming Police

    Interesting subject without a doubt. From someone who has an interest in this field but is a member of the public and not a police officer I say arm the police and stop gimping around and putting it off. Someone said earlier that there simply isn't the crime level here in the UK to warrant arming the police. Tell that to the victims of Derrick Bird where you had the police chasing a man round the countryside like the scene from the Benny Hill Show powerless to act as he shoots people down with little more than a section 2 shotgun. Don't get me wrong I have a lot of respect for the police and all the rubbish they are forced to put up with every day but at the same time they need to pull there finger out on this one. If officers can't be trusted with a firearm because they are likely to shoot first and ask questions later that then you can no longer be a front line officer or even an officer, period. End of the day though that's just poor training. If your skills at marksmanship are so poor that you cannot be trusted with a side-arm then the same applies. You could go on and on but at the end of the day you have to do something some time. As far as cutting down on gun crime such as the incident mentioned above, and this is one that can be squarely leveled at the senior police, stop giving gun licences to known criminals or people with criminal records. Derrick Bird who had a conviction for theft and Thomas Hamilton who was a known homosexual pedophile, no coincidence almost all his victims where children. To this day nobody has ever been brought to book for giving Mr. Hamilton a gun licence instead you have a politically motivated gun ban and then the whole sorry issue swept under the carpet. Like someone said before this issue is so politically charged I'm not sure it will ever get resolved. Sadly I think it might only ever change when a group of officers are gunned down in the street because they were powerless to defend themselves and the public. BTW great forum, very interesting...