to think all police were armed?

[strawberrygate]

I'm really not seeing why this would now be a bad thing. There were police right there at the London attack, and if they'd been armed then some lives could have been saved.
If someone drives a truck through a crowd in somewhere random like Sheffield, there will be police there, but currently not armed. How would they stop them? they would have no option but stand and wait until armed response arrived, which in most areas would be a hell of a lot longer than the 5 mins. or so it took in central London.
We're sitting ducks.

Current system is fine
try telling that to the people at the London Bridge attack

Let's examine that logically. Time to police turning up was two minutes (kudos.) time to the three jihadis being shot dead, roughly 8 mins.
What material difference would universal arming if the police have been in this situation? Do you think they would have had sufficient boots on the ground, in the correct place, to react and save everyone who was injured?

'Tell that to those who died' is an illogical argument mode. It's using emotion as a lever. The argument is not about emotion. The question is 'would universal arming have made a material difference at that place and that time?'
Probably not. Or there'd be no massacres in the USA. It relies on there being an armed police officer at the right place at the right time - even if there had have been someone there it was one vs 3.

I've spent time in the USA and for every dedicated public servant there's a cop who shouldn't be anywhere near a water pistol, never mind a gun. It's not a situation we want.

Logistically it's a nightmare - training etc
The police don't want it
The system we have now ensures that the police with the guns are well trained, accountable etc. They are the creme de la creme.

Universal arming is not the answer. Fund and resource the police properly, reverse the recent cuts and give them the tools they need.

Huge admiration for our police force - they put themselves on the line daily.

Cressida Dick did a piece to camera (with the Mayor).

She ruled out the routine arming of police as she does not believe it would be effective. I think that'll turn out to be the actual view of the Met, even if there are groups of officers within it who see it differently.

Maybe I have become desensitized to crime, however I never lock my house or car here because I feel safe, whereas in the UK I wouldn't have dreamed of doing that.

I think we should have the army patrolling the streets with guns like in France, I voiced my opinion when talking with the armed police in Manchester last weekend and they agreed (two police officers). They were lovely saw my DC looking at the guns all worried so came and talked to them. My kids are used to armed forces so see this regularly but haven't seen guns on our street before.

Toy guns shouldn't look like real guns either, I have to say if I saw a man or woman running around with a toy gun ATM I'd be worried, would call the police who may also think it's a real gun and they may shoot them. I can see the negatives to armed officers but after all the regent attacks I'd feel safer with them been armed.

My experience of the US has been that there is less crime than the Uk

That may be your perception but it is demonstrably wrong.

So in true MN style, the obvious answer is.... bollards.

Yes it is - or trees ideally! (although less easy and quick, obvs).

And it's happening on Westminster Bridge right now - someone just tweeted it. www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/security-barriers-installed-london-bridges-10562041 Hopefully the permanent solution will look a bit more attractive....

God no, I'm proud to live in a country that uses other ways to de escalate situations.

God no, I'm proud to live in a country that uses other ways to de escalate situations.

Yes, me too. And, ftr, I would really like to say I was so proud of our police on Saturday night.

There was a tweet going round a while ago - and it was tagged something like "the difference between US and UK policing".

It was a film of UK police surrounding a man who was having some sort of breakdown, and swinging a knife wildly in the street. The situation was managed peacefully. The consensus was that in the US he would have shot within seconds.

consensus was that in the US he would have shot within seconds.

Maybe. But then again we only see the worst snapshots of the US police. I imagine there are as many men and women over there doing a fantastic job the same as police officers the world over.

Just normal people trying to do their best for their communities.

I think we should have the army patrolling the streets with guns

As a very short-term measure of last resort possibly but no more. The army are not trained for domestic policing nor is that scenario a consideration when they are recruited - a good squaddy is someone who can be trained to follow orders efficiently and effectively without thinking too much, a good policeman is good deal more sophisticated. Don't read that as me having any less respect for our troops than our police but they are fundamentally different tools for different jobs. Putting combat troops on the streets only served to cause a massive escalation in Northern Ireland and you only need to look at Bloody Sunday to see just how badly things can go wrong when you task combat infantry with domestic policing.

Blindly throwing vast quantities of guns at the problem, no matter who's carrying them, is not the solution. We need effective intervention before potential terrorists are inspired or get as far as launching an attack. Once they do, it's too late for anything other than body count reduction at best.

Mimsy And which streets would you have the Army patrolling? Which cities are deserving of the added protection and which are not? And then which streets within those particular cities are more deserving of added protection?

@ShoesHaveSouls I have an American friend whose uncle had a mental breakdown due to the wrong kind of meds being prescribed with others. He went outside in his underwear brandishing a knife and ranting incoherently. He was shot and killed by police in just a few minutes of them getting there. Almost no effort to talk the very clearly disturbed man down, he was just killed right out for not complying with the police.

A ranting man in his underwear is clearly in need of help, not a bullet.

I'm happy to live in the UK where that is unlikely to ever happen.

Anyone remember the crazy lengths the police went to to arrest Raoul Moat instead of killing the clearly dangerous armed man? His death was the result in the end but they were not wrong to try.

I think we should have the army patrolling the streets with guns

Previous experience of this within the UK indicates that this is a very bad idea. Unless you actually want to antagonise disaffected people who already feel alienated within their own country and leave them identifying more and more with the terrorism that the army presence is meant to be combatting.

Figaro Police in the UK get 2 years training before becoming a constable (about 6 months before they get to be a supervised probationer).

Rural areas of the US, it's still pretty much "here's your badge and gun", though places like New York it's about 6 months in total, but that still focuses more on guns and way less on defusing situations.

ShatnersWig we really don't hear about every police shooting in the US. 963 people were shot and killed by police in 2016...based on news reports, public records, social media and other sources because they don't collate the information

HerOtherHalf I agree.

ThouShallNotPass

That's tragic. I've found the video:

www.cbc.ca/news/caught-on-video-u-k-police-disarm-distraught-man-wielding-machete-1.3278419

I'm not saying US cops = BAD, UK cops = GOOD. Perhaps it's not purely the guns the US police have, but the training too. British Police are so well trained in de-escalation and are just not trigger happy.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

People shot dead by police in the US were 1092 in 2016, 1146 in 2015 according to the Guardian's database.
For reference, there were 574 homicides in 2014/5 in the entire of England and Wales, a population 1/4 the size, compared to 15,696 in the US in 2015 (FBI figures) - and presumably the killings by police are in addition.

So nearly 30x the chance of being killed in the US, though that national figure is pretty meaningless as there's so much variation across the country and demographics. Crime is pretty low when your nearest neighbor lives 20 miles away...

There was a really interesting documentary a couple of years ago. I'm afraid I can't remember which channel. A police chief from a city in the US came and spent time with police officers in Glasgow. They showed him how they used deescalation techniques rather than force and he was really impressed. However he insisted it just wouldn't work in the US which was really depressing. It wasn't long after the events in Fergusson, Missouri.
I'm not sure if this point has been made already but a lot of police officers don't want to carry guns. It does require a certain temperament. My aunt and uncle were both police officers. My aunt was a firearms officer at one point (very unusual in those days!) and was apparently an excellent officer but my uncle was terrified of the thought of using a gun!

For some reason I thought all police already were armed. Not with the huge guns, but I thought all police had a hand gun. I must have been watching too much American TV.

db is a police firearms trainer, he takes great pride in the fact that the UK police are probably the best trained in the world. The training is intense and requires frequent updates, those who choose to carry arms in the UK are highly trained professionals.

It would not be possible to train all police to carry arms to this standard, they struggle to keep those that opt to do it up to date. What is needed is more police on the beat, a lot more instead of the cuts they have had in the past and continue to face.