Ferguson- the elephant in the room

Yes, I did. You are making, it seems to me, a distinction between sergeants and officers (and by inference some sort of lower rank that doesn’t get guns) that doesn’t really exist. It’s not a military structure. Firearms officers of all ranks in the UK are trained and screened constantly. They don’t hand out weapons to Billy-Bob “Fatarse” Racist just because he’s got a badge.

Policing by consent

1.To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2.To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3.To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4.To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5.To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6.To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7.To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8.To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9.To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

So, what you are saying is that you do, in fact, have ranks (from here it looks like Police Constable, sergeant, inspector-chief superintendent, Assistant Chief Constable up to Deputy Chief Constable, and finally Assistant Commissioner up to Commissioner), , but that they aren’t a separate ‘class’, whatever that means (to you). Which is exactly what I said. Officers of sergeant rank or higher are often issued arms if they can justify the need.

BTW, all our police are also called ‘officers’ (you know, as in ‘police officers’) as well, in case you didn’t know that. We have similar ranks, though called different things (and, of course, we have a lot more police departments and it varies from state to state a lot more, and you have local police, tribal police, city/town police, state police and a few federal agencies tossed in as well).

No response to this, Pjen?

Or this:

That’s nice. What happens when a cop who believes in all of that is pinned inside his vehicle and is being punched in the face by a stoned heavyweight?

Are you saying that a Police Constable is the same exact rank as a Sergeant and both are the same rank as, oh, say a Assistant Commissioner? :dubious:

As for you guys not handing out weapons to racists, well, I guess that’s just one of the many ways you are better than us, right?

Is that what you think happened in Ferguson?

What happened immediately before the confrontation?

NO. Trained firearm officers may be constables or sergeants. Some may be Inspectors or Superintendents as managers.

They use skill and experience to avoid such situations and ensure that they have appropriate resources to contain the situation.

No what? No, you don’t have ranks (which I already showed you do), or no, it’s not just sergeants and above that are generally armed? Or, no, it’s only trained firearms officers of whatever rank that are armed?

That is what I know happened in Ferguson based on the preponderance of evidence that has been released.

The officer observed the young men jaywalking, yelled at them to get on the sidewalk, and simultaneously noted that one of them fit the description of a suspect in a strongarm robbery and subsequently moved his vehicle to block the road, whereupon the thief responded aggressively.

Do you begin to understand how a routine encounter can quickly escalate into an act of violent aggression in ways that an officer cannot possibly predict or plan for? Or is it your continued assertion that law enforcement should always run away with their tail tucked between their legs and call for mommy to help them upon noticing a bad person who might not politely consent to be arrested like a decent criminal would?

There are ranks.

Any rank may train to carry firearms. They always operate under superior command. Unless fired upon they may not fire without Bronze command agreement.

Describe the way in which one “uses skill and experience” while being pinned inside a vehicle and punched in the face by a stoned heavyweight.

Ok, gotcha. Yes, I agree. Sorry for the confusion, but I couldn’t tell what you were actually saying there.

Even in the UK with its low preponderance of firearms in the civilian or criminal population, no police officer would intervene alone in such a situation if they suspected that violence might occur.

Additionally your language gives away attitude. In the UK they would not ‘yell’ at people, they would try to make a relationship with the people without acting in a manner that might make someone strike back verbally or physically.

Avoiding getting into the situation in the first place.

Eh? They are all officers. Of course there are ranks. WTF. You extruded:

If you can remember what your original point with that statement was, I’d like to hear it!

So the best way to enforce the law is to not enforce the law at all and let criminals do whatever they want because someone might get hurt if you tell them “No, you can’t do that”.

I guess the only way to win really is not to play.

That’s rather painting a rosy picture, Pjen.

Where do you suppose these British policemen went wrong? Looks to me like a failure to build a relationship … I think I even saw some guns too. :stuck_out_tongue: