I know that most British police officers do not carry guns. I recently saw a BBC show (it was Torchwood, not a show I watch for accuracy) in which a British police officer is shown to have absolutely no knowledge of how to handle a firearm. Is this accurate? It seems ridiculous to not at least train new officers in use and safe handling of firearms, at least to a level of familiarization.
Torchwood (AFAIK) is not a documentary, but it gets this detail correct. Unless a British Poilce Officer is attatched to a specialised unit, they will never have to use a firearm and so there is simply no need to have firearms training.
Do American police have training for assault rifles and RPGs?
Sometimes and no.
I may be wrong on this but I always understood that most, if not all UK police stations, kept a certain number of firearms and that some of the officers attached to that particular station were trained in the use of them.
Torchwood incidentally is an anagram of Doctor Who
A few broad statistics from the Police Federation, albeit two years old.
There seems to be a lack of volunteers within the police force for firearms training because of the stress involved in so doing.
Source: The Observer 20 November 2005.
Why would British police need firearms training?
The prevailing mood here is anti-gun, especially after Dunblane and Hungerford.
I appreciate that the US has the ‘right to bear arms’ clause, a history of massive gun ownership and the NRA lobbying - but we have none of that.
The public here are not allowed handguns.
You can only get a shotgun licence if e.g. you are a farmer shooting vermin.
From the Metropolitan Police (they patrol London) site:
CO19 is the branch name given to the Specialist Firearm Command branch of the Metropolitan Police Service that provides firearms-related support to our unarmed colleagues. The branch is comprised of a small number of officers who are highly trained and motivated in dealing with all aspects of the criminal use of firearms. Operationally, our branch is here to provide armed support to allow the vast majority of policing activities throughout London to be conducted in the traditional manner by unarmed officers.
Surely we need some police officers who can handle guns, for those occasions when they’re dealing with some nutter(s) who might kill other people?
I would have thought it wise that all coppers were trained to at least handle and make safe a loaded firearm without accidental discharge. It would be a shame if they shot themselves in the foot with a confiscated gun. Somehow I doubt most poses these skills however.
Just because guns are illegal in UK doesn’t mean that criminals won’t have them (that’s why they are criminals–they break the law :smack: )
As such, the police need to be trained in firearm use to protect themselves and the public (which has been disarmed) from these criminals…
That is really what I was thinking. Guns exist. They even exist in GB. It is at least a possibility that you could come in contact with a firearm during your career. I’m sure Bobbies go through months of training before they are put on the street. Wouldn’t it make sense to take them to the range for one day during that time so they can become familiar with the safe operation of the weapons?
There are a lot of different weapons which operate in alot of different ways out there.
In the UK as all handguns are illegal the criminals have to make do with what they can get there hands on. Which means alot of esoteric or re-activated weapons also get used.
As it is trained officers occasionally have accidents with their service issue weapons whilst unloading. What are the chances of a beat bobby making a MAC 10 safe he’s just pulled from a Mancunian wideboy’s waistband.
Better off handing it over the ARV as their “supposed” to know how to handle it.
No it is not. It is better to make it safe immediately.
Sorry hit submit too soon and couldn’t edit.
It’s not rocket science. It doesn’t take a long training period to became familiar with firearms. You don’t have to hold every gun ever made to figure out how to handle them. I recently had to help confiscate over 50 weapons from someone. Most were antiques. I was never trained on how to handle double barrel black powder muskets. I am familiar enough with weapons to be able to figure it out. This attitude with actual police officers who treat weapons like they are radioactive is ridiculous. One day at the range would be all that is needed to familiarize them with the operation of firearms. “This is a pistol. The bullets go in here and come out there.” Maybe they would never need to use the training. Like every other aspect of the job I would rather be trained in something and never use it than not have the training when I do need it.
Hit, son. 
Ongar.
Sorry, I meant most British police. As per my cite, there are specialist firearms units.
Just because a member of the public has a gun licence doesn’t mean it won’t be used to kill illegally. That’s why they have guns - to shoot them. :smack:
As such, a country will be far safer if guns are banned. (The UK has far fewer gun deaths than the US.)
I suppose (as Ticker already said) it might be useful for a policeman to learn how to make a gun safe.
In case they ever confiscate one.
You could also argue for police learning how to deal with hand grenades, biological and chemical weapons.
However you should realise just how few guns there are in the UK. We had two gun massacres in 1987 and 1996. So we banned handguns completely then (they were already pretty rare).
Did you read that right? The quote mentioned criminals with guns because they are criminals. It then said police should be trained in the use of firearms to protect the public. No mention of giving the public licenses or removing the gun ban in England.
Pro/anti gun is a discussion for another thread as I don’t wish to hijack this one. I’m not sure what you mean by a “gun licence”. I own several guns, but have no license, as one is not required to own a gun, or even carry a gun in your car’s glove box in the state of Florida.
If I want to conceal the pistol on my person, in public, then I need to get a concealed weapons permit, which costs about $100, a background check, and is must-issue if I am not a criminal. Is this the “gun licence” you mean?
Anyways, just because the UK bans citizens from owning firearms, you understand that the criminal element disregards such laws? I’m sure the UK has laws against bank robbery, but need a police force to stop/investigate those crimes.
Since a criminal in possession of an illegal firearm could be a serious threat to the officer or the public in general, why shouldn’t the police be trained in the use of firearms should that unfortunate event happen?