Chairlegs, cows and public safety
Zaskar | 11.06.2005 09:24
Recent headlines from the BBC.
“Armed police threatened to arrest a 10-year-old Wiltshire boy playing cowboys and Indians with a toy gun, his father claims.”
“A police marksman has been removed from firearm duties after a man was shot dead during a "pre-planned" operation.”
“Two police officers have been arrested on suspicion of murder, six years after they shot a man dead in east London”
“Police marksmen were called in to shoot three escaped cows that went on a six-hour rampage in a Cumbrian town.”
“No action will be taken against a police marksman who shot a 21-year-old man (armed with an umbrella) in Glasgow.”
“Armed police threatened to arrest a 10-year-old Wiltshire boy playing cowboys and Indians with a toy gun, his father claims.”
“A police marksman has been removed from firearm duties after a man was shot dead during a "pre-planned" operation.”
“Two police officers have been arrested on suspicion of murder, six years after they shot a man dead in east London”
“Police marksmen were called in to shoot three escaped cows that went on a six-hour rampage in a Cumbrian town.”
“No action will be taken against a police marksman who shot a 21-year-old man (armed with an umbrella) in Glasgow.”
A dangerous weapon.
The recent case of a Wilshire child being ‘swatted’ for publicly brandishing an unloaded toy cap gun is as absurd as it is concerning.
I am not anti police. Personally I do not think they are first and foremost our oppressors. I do not believe that they are solely used by the government to deny us our reasonable liberties. In any complex society there will be bad people who seek to rob us, to hurt us and even to kill us and the police provide security and protection to most of the people most of the time. Clearly there are many exceptions where laws are passed that appear to have a political motivation and place the police in the position of carrying out the politicians bidding. The union conflicts of the eighties are the worst and most damaging example in my experience.
That many criminals use guns against each other and us is sadly all too common and arming the police in response to this seems like common sense. We are yet to arm all our police but we do allow special units of highly trained armed police on our streets. Two such units are circulating our city’s streets at all times ready to apprehend and possibly kill criminals with weapons. Should we all feel safe because of this? Are they shooting bad people with guns intent on violent crime? It appears not.
It may be unhelpful and flippant even to look at the very stark results of having armed police on our streets, but the basic facts appear to indicate that we need a public debate on the wisdom of arming the police.
Over a period of Ten years the police have shot and killed 41 people who were not carrying firearms. These have included a five year old shot whilst in bed and the widely publicised case Harry Stanley shot in the back of the head for carrying a chair leg in a plastic bag. Each case of a police killing is investigated by the Police complaints authority, but this is widely criticised as ineffectual and is distrusted by much of the general public. It is rare for any action to be taken against police who kill people.
It is important to mote that in 28 of the 41 cases cited above either replica firearms or other lethal weapons, like chair legs or rolled up umbrellas were being threateningly brandished. In these circumstances it may be understandable that the police kill people believing their own lives to be threatened, but the stark fact remains that armed police are killing people who present very little threat to them. In many cases if the police had not been armed no one would have died.
A persuasive argument for the use of these armed units is the deterrent effect, if the criminals are armed, then the police have to be.
Perhaps a valuable deterrent effect is a good reason for keeping these armed units on our streets? The criminals don’t seem deterred as every week sees criminals shooting each other and bystanders in gun fights across the land. Perhaps the armed units are preventing a tirade of terrorist attacks? This is hard to believe in spite of the governments attempts to get us all to live in fear; it is intelligence that prevents terrorism although the use of armed police at the arrest stage does appear sensible.
As a society we may accept that 41 needless deaths may be a price worth paying for our protection, the police are bound to kill a few people in error as they slaughter those who would shoot us you might think?
So how many armed criminals have been shot by police in the last few years? If it is much more than 41 then I suppose it might be a price worth paying? Sadly and alarmingly it is actually very hard to find cases where the police have shot criminals who were armed and showed intent to use their guns. I can only find one or two cases in the last ten years. Worrying. Scary.
We are being protected from rampaging bovines though, that’s a worry off my mind for sure!
It appears we might all be much safer if the police were armed with chair legs, or have I missed something?
http://www.freedomtocare.org/page328.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4559989.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4080796.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503491.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4078176.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4603643.stm
I am not anti police. Personally I do not think they are first and foremost our oppressors. I do not believe that they are solely used by the government to deny us our reasonable liberties. In any complex society there will be bad people who seek to rob us, to hurt us and even to kill us and the police provide security and protection to most of the people most of the time. Clearly there are many exceptions where laws are passed that appear to have a political motivation and place the police in the position of carrying out the politicians bidding. The union conflicts of the eighties are the worst and most damaging example in my experience.
That many criminals use guns against each other and us is sadly all too common and arming the police in response to this seems like common sense. We are yet to arm all our police but we do allow special units of highly trained armed police on our streets. Two such units are circulating our city’s streets at all times ready to apprehend and possibly kill criminals with weapons. Should we all feel safe because of this? Are they shooting bad people with guns intent on violent crime? It appears not.
It may be unhelpful and flippant even to look at the very stark results of having armed police on our streets, but the basic facts appear to indicate that we need a public debate on the wisdom of arming the police.
Over a period of Ten years the police have shot and killed 41 people who were not carrying firearms. These have included a five year old shot whilst in bed and the widely publicised case Harry Stanley shot in the back of the head for carrying a chair leg in a plastic bag. Each case of a police killing is investigated by the Police complaints authority, but this is widely criticised as ineffectual and is distrusted by much of the general public. It is rare for any action to be taken against police who kill people.
It is important to mote that in 28 of the 41 cases cited above either replica firearms or other lethal weapons, like chair legs or rolled up umbrellas were being threateningly brandished. In these circumstances it may be understandable that the police kill people believing their own lives to be threatened, but the stark fact remains that armed police are killing people who present very little threat to them. In many cases if the police had not been armed no one would have died.
A persuasive argument for the use of these armed units is the deterrent effect, if the criminals are armed, then the police have to be.
Perhaps a valuable deterrent effect is a good reason for keeping these armed units on our streets? The criminals don’t seem deterred as every week sees criminals shooting each other and bystanders in gun fights across the land. Perhaps the armed units are preventing a tirade of terrorist attacks? This is hard to believe in spite of the governments attempts to get us all to live in fear; it is intelligence that prevents terrorism although the use of armed police at the arrest stage does appear sensible.
As a society we may accept that 41 needless deaths may be a price worth paying for our protection, the police are bound to kill a few people in error as they slaughter those who would shoot us you might think?
So how many armed criminals have been shot by police in the last few years? If it is much more than 41 then I suppose it might be a price worth paying? Sadly and alarmingly it is actually very hard to find cases where the police have shot criminals who were armed and showed intent to use their guns. I can only find one or two cases in the last ten years. Worrying. Scary.
We are being protected from rampaging bovines though, that’s a worry off my mind for sure!
It appears we might all be much safer if the police were armed with chair legs, or have I missed something?
http://www.freedomtocare.org/page328.htm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4559989.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4080796.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4503491.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4078176.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4603643.stm
Zaskar
e-mail:
markdwatson@blueyonder.co.uk
Homepage:
http://www.zaskarfilms.com