Two-lane Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 1 minute ago, P.K. said: As you clearly have the SOP's for police firearms officers would you please share them I do not have the Standard Operating Procedures for firearms officers. It is irrelevant to the point I made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 47 minutes ago, P.K. said: With it's deliberately broad-based recruiting policy the police simply reflect UK society at large. which is why it is now over populated with ego driven power mad wankers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelmutX Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 @WTF... you forgot to mention they think they are "entitled" too.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 6 minutes ago, Two-lane said: I do not have the Standard Operating Procedures for firearms officers. It is irrelevant to the point I made. Your point was what exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 A Met. firearms officer shot someone. A judicial process started, and he is now accused of murder. Several other Met. officers handed in their weapons as a protest. Clearly, they do not believe he should be in court. They are attempting to manipulate the judicial process by handing in their guns. If they believed that he was innocent, they would surely let the process continue (unless they do not trust the law, of course). The case is, I assume, sub judice. Maybe 10 years ago in what I think the police call a hard stop, a car with a suspect was stopped by a police car, the police officer walked over to the car and shot the driver. I do not recall any details of this case. But I do remember that within some official document produced as a result of that case, it was recommended/stated that the police should not use techniques that require a split-second decision to be made when guns are involved. I see that over the years the police continue to use this technique. Occasionally on YouTube I see a news broadcast from America where the police have stopped a suspect in a car. The police tend to stand back with a gun pointed at the car, or even behind their own car, and shout "Show me your hands". Nevertheless, in my opinion, no one should be above the law. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Ten Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 19 hours ago, Gladys said: https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/investigation-launched-into-unacceptable-police-facebook-post/?fbclid=IwAR3TjLVfNBD3UKpWbavGNCuLw7s4oMO1hNh0cEIohVO1NUIhWWFt3efo0H0 Thanks Gladys The radio reports says this: “A social media post by the Isle of Man Constabulary's Roads Policing Unit which has been described by the Manx force as 'unacceptable' has been referred to the police's professional standards department.” If I am reading this correctly that’s an internal section of the Police, in other words in-house!? (I may be totally wrong). So I wonder if the Police Complaints Commissioner has or should be involved? https://www.gov.im/categories/home-and-neighbourhood/police-complaints-commissioner/ Maybe @Derek Flint could tell us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 27 minutes ago, Two-lane said: Several other Met. officers More than 100 officers stepped back from armed duty. The MoD put army on standby to cover. The officers have now recommenced their duties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 7 minutes ago, Two-lane said: A Met. firearms officer shot someone. A judicial process started, and he is now accused of murder. Several other Met. officers handed in their weapons as a protest. Clearly, they do not believe he should be in court. They are attempting to manipulate the judicial process by handing in their guns. If they believed that he was innocent, they would surely let the process continue (unless they do not trust the law, of course). I think that's utter rubbish. Police officers obviously know that external actions like officers handing in their weapons is going to make no difference at all to the legal process that has been started. If you know differently I would like to know how it would...? Like you I don't know the details of the SOP's of firearms officers. The thing about clear SOP's is that they should protect the people operating under them. The murder charge sent out a clear message that the SOP's were perhaps not as watertight as they should have been. Hence we can't do our jobs without putting ourselves at risk so I'm not doing this job any more so you can have the gun back... I suspect that officers can open fire if they have reasonable grounds to think they are at risk. Which is more than a little subjective. I guess we'll find out. The atrocity at the MEN Arena showed how SOP's can fail the people operating under them. Firstly there was only one officer in charge, not a very senior one at that, getting swamped with an awful lot of confused information. Clearly there should have been at least two and probably three at a minimum with a very senior officer in charge. He received a report that after the explosion a gunman was seen at large in the complex. His SOP's said that emergency services could not be given access until any threat had been neutralised. Kippered. The MEN is absolutely massive so clearing it all was going to take ages. Rock and a hard place... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 2 hours ago, HelmutX said: @WTF... you forgot to mention they think they are "entitled" too.... sorry about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thommo2010 Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 The officers handed in their weapons not in protest but because why take the risk, you get no extra pay so there's no real point in doing it especially if there's a chance you're copping a murder charge for doing your job 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelmutX Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 2 minutes ago, WTF said: sorry about that. 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 26 minutes ago, thommo2010 said: The officers handed in their weapons not in protest but because why take the risk, you get no extra pay so there's no real point in doing it especially if there's a chance you're copping a murder charge for doing your job Would he have shot if it was a white man ? It’s a very difficult job but they’ve got to be held responsible although I think manslaughter at tops if guilty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted October 1, 2023 Author Share Posted October 1, 2023 1 hour ago, thommo2010 said: The officers handed in their weapons not in protest but because why take the risk, you get no extra pay so there's no real point in doing it especially if there's a chance you're copping a murder charge for doing your job Only worth it if you're allowed to shoot unarmed non-suspects yeah? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 1 hour ago, thommo2010 said: especially if there's a chance you're copping a murder charge for doing your job Your job, as a representative of the police is not to shoot an unarmed man, after pursuing him for fifteen minutes without activating lights or sirens. Your job, as police, after being informed the vehicle may have been previously linked to a firearms incident a few days earlier, is to pursue, with a view to question, and if, necessary, arrest a suspect. Your job, as police is not to shoot an innocent, unarmed man. That is not dong your job Thommo, that is murder, and the more police who are charged with murder when it is a case of murder, the more likely the rest of them will follow procedures and not be so damned trigger happy. Chris Kaba was not a suspect and never had been a suspect. He was shot and murdered because he was black. Metropolitan Police data suggest Police are four times more likely to use force against black people compared with the white population, a BBC analysis report in 2020 suggested. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two-lane Posted October 1, 2023 Share Posted October 1, 2023 28 minutes ago, Roxanne said: He was shot and murdered because he was black. The case is sub judice - but I think you are wrong in attributing this to racialism. The Met. shoot white people too. The fellow with the wooden table leg was white. The one in a mini at Hyde Park was white (that was the one where he was shot several times and was writhing in agony - but the police said he was not writhing in agony, he was going for a gun. So they shot him a few more times. Didn't kill him, though). 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.