The next time someone is tempted to post critical comments about the police....

jdp1962

jdp1962

Grumpy Old Man
Joined
May 26, 2003
Messages
10,273
Reaction score
4,610
Points
113
Location
Northumberland
..I'd ask them to read this link before they do so, and then think again.

My dad was a traffic officer; he was also a trained marksman. This was in a time when forces did not have a separate firearms unit, but had trained officers from the ranks who would draw arms when required. He always played things down, so that we did not grow up in perpetual fear for his safety. Nonetheless, we had some awareness of the risk his work involved. For example, I do remember being aware that he was in a group of officers that came face to face with an armed murder suspect in the early 70s. The guy did go for his gun, but was overpowered before he could point it and shoot.

One thing he only told me years later, when I was an adult, was about an incident that occurred in the 1950s, long before I was born. He was on a night shift in Co. Durham, and he and his partner had just returned to the station with an arrested man. A call came through to attend a break in (at Lumley Castle, I think, but I may be wrong) and my dad and his partner agreed to take it, but when they got back in the car, it wouldn't start. Another officer sitting in the car next to them offered to go in their place. My dad's partner went with him, my dad stayed back to try and get the car going. Half an hour later, news came through that my dad's partner had been shot dead by armed robbers. But for a flooded carb, that could have been my dad and, bearing in mind this was before I was born, it would have meant no me.

One thing that does bug me about how these stories are reported, is when the officer is referred to as being "off-duty". It might be a cliche, but police officers really are never off duty. At most, they may be off-shift, but they are always on duty.
 
Last edited:
Terrible news and like you say Jeff never off duty.

The suspect has been found dead.
 
Sad times and a touching story from yourself too Jeff.
 
its something you dont expect in this country for officers to face such risks in their job, its considered such a safe place in terms of gun crimes, with laws being very strict.
its more obviously seen in america and other countries where firearms can be legally bought and owned.
despite how safe we think we are, we clearly arent.
sad story indeed.
 
SuperKarl, there has been a huge increase in the number of illegally held firearms being used in this country, mainly coming from east European countries, making them illegal does not stop them being obtained or used.
You cannot make a direct comparison with the USA, the police there always assume a firearm will be present at any incident and as such are ready for it. If it was an off duty officer in the USA in this situation he would still have been armed and drawn down on the guy as he exited the premises even if he wasn't carrying a gun, so would have been ready and prepared. Two different countries with two different police training. And that training is the vital difference, I know, I used to instruct for these instances. In a moment of high stress and panic you cannot think a rational thought and that's where the training kicks in as you will resort to what you know, and not what you have to think about.
An example, one guy who was quite a good target shooter tried to stop a guy who had just robbed a store, the robber pulled a gun and so did the target shooter, both fired at each other in a panic, the robber was shot in the shoulder. It was later found that a total of 18 shots were fired from a distance of 15 feet, and only one hit.
Someone else was once in a hostile panic situation somewhere foreign and took three shots, he hit his arm, shoulder and knee, he was side on to him at around 15 feet. That is the difference in training.
And if you are wondering what it is like to shoot someone, its not nice, he felt ill, he was shaking and couldn't sleep for a few days and he did need counselling.

I recently tested a stab vest that the UK police wear with a .357 Magnum rifle and it did indeed stop it, wearing it you would have been injured and not killed, no use in this instance when a head shot was used. The UK police do not automatically assume the bad guy is going to be armed with a gun or knife, but they should do, they should be trained for situation like this, not just a specialist unit, but all officers.
And if the government won't fund it then they should have the same on the beat officers to look after them instead of their highly trained protection squad, and then see what happens and how they react in an incident without training.

The sentences are there, its just the courts don't use them, whether they would act as a deterrent if enforced is an altogether separate debate. The courts need to back up the police more and get rid of this useless human rights for criminals crap, if a criminal is armed he should be taken out, end of, no abuse of their human rights, just take what action is needed there and then.

This officer did what he saw was right and he paid the price with his life, for that he should be honoured and respected.
 
With the ever increasing terror threat i think all officers should be fire arms trained and carry side arms, and the ART's should be geared up to handle the more lairy offenders. Nowadays 16 yr old kids have access to 9mm pistols from local dealers on the estates yet the government still protest that we don't have a fire arms problem. Not long back there was a house raid not far from me where a bundle of AK's were found with documents and IED ingredients. The guy was a teacher also so it goes to show anyone can be carrying at any time.

Such a shame that another officer has lost his life in an attempt to protect others due to not being able to protect himself or even to have the ability to stop the offender.
 
Damo,
While arming the police in theory sounds a good idea, not all people are confident around firearms regardless of training, and its these officers that would be the problem. The media would have a field day if one of them shot his mate in the station while playing around, remember this happening a few years ago? What about the child of John Shorthouse who was shot by an officer searching his house?
We live in a different society to America which has evolved over decades to be what it is now, and the law enforcement has evolved at the same time. England has also evolved over several decade but our law enforcement has gone backwards, and now they are making cutbacks.
Here, we will get arrested if we try and defend ourselves against a threat, so you are supposed to call on the police. If members of society do not respect the authority of the police then what chance do the rest of us stand? And with less police is it any wonder we are descending into a more lawless society?

I am not going to go on about the old saying of outlaw guns and only outlaws will have guns, and an armed society is a polite society. But California has strict gun control and also the highest gun crime figures, firearms were banned in Washington DC and gun crime and robbery went up 30%. Kennasaw county in Georgia has a law that says its illegal to not carry a handgun or own a firearm, and they have no gun crime. Would you try and mug someone who you knew was armed, or break into a house where you know the owner has a gun?
Or take on a police officer, on duty or off, who you knew had a gun and was trained to use it?
 
superkarl said:
its more obviously seen in america and other countries where firearms can be legally bought and owned.
despite how safe we think we are, we clearly arent.
sad story indeed.
Click to expand...

you can buy and own firearms here, a shotgun licence is relatively easy to get, only costs you £50, a gun safe and a police visit, i got mine a couple of years ago to prove how easy they are to get
 
Ste_Nova, its an old law in the UK that says its your right to own a shotgun with reason but to get a firearms license you have to prove why you want it.
You are correct about the shotgun license, but they do check up on your background and previous history. To get a firearms license you have to be a member of a home office approved club and serve a three month probationary period.
 
there are Police Officers and there Power hungry monsters dressed up as Police Officers, I've had the oppertunity to sit down to dinner with a few police officers and road traffic officers and talk about there outlooks on the job, 90% of the men I've speoken to are real decent men who just want to make our world a much safer and happier place for all, Them officers deserve meddles the size of frying pans, But there are the power trip hungry monsters who think they know it all and will use force when they feel they want to, regardless if its lawfully acceptable,

So where is the problem, our great police officers are educated by statue laws and not so on common law, and unless state your not giving consent to be governed and controlled by statue law then you are treated as a pieces of owned property that they can do what they wish with as you have just wavered all you rights. So unless your police officer in front of you is not educated in this position you could have an interesting time. I personally dont have any reason to be pulled to one side by the police as I'm a wiser and smarter human than when i was when i was young and wide, I do get some fantastic topics going at the dinner table with the top brass of Northamptonshire's Police Force.
 
I'm pretty familiar with statute law, but have never come across statue law. Is that what they mean when they say something is set in stone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnnythepie
Fair play to the bloke, a hero if ever there was one. I hope his widow gets looked after by the state, and they don't try and weasel out of compensation by saying he was off duty.

I have come face to face with guns in the hands of mentals, it isn't very nice. I have to say I have less courage than the off duty PC, in that I would not tackle them myself.

And in response to the opening thread, I will still give grief where it is due, as I know that there are a few loose cannons within the Police force. The PC who caused the death of the man walking home from the pub for one. Was it Tomlinson? The case is in court right now, I think the PC deserves some punishment for his aggressive behaviour.
 
StateOfPlay said:
And in response to the opening thread, I will still give grief where it is due, as I know that there are a few loose cannons within the Police force. The PC who caused the death of the man walking home from the pub for one. Was it Tomlinson? The case is in court right now, I think the PC deserves some punishment for his aggressive behaviour.
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right; Ian Tomlinson. Each time I see that video footage, it just looks worse. But, as you say, the officer is currently in court, being tried on all of the evidence, and if he is found guilty, then he will rightfully be punished.

As the thread has widened into a discussions about arms generally, I have been reflecting on a number of high-profile incidents down the years involving the police, the public and firearms. The most recent one that I suspect we all remember, is the shooting of Jean Charles De Menezez at Stockwell Tube Station. There can be little doubt that there was a catastrophic and tragic failure of intelligence, and I have always believed that those who briefed the firearm officers who followed him onto the train should have faced much greater scrutiny than they did. Equally, however, I maintain to this day that the officer(s) who fired the fatal shots should not. Those guys showed incredible bravery in following onto a crowded train a man who, as far as they were concerned, had a concealed bomb capable of killing himself, them, and a large number of passers-by. They had milliseconds to make a decision, and they chose in good faith, the option that they sincerely believed was in the best interests of the wider safety of the public at large.

There are parallels with another incident in London in 1983. Does anyone remember the name Stephen Waldorf? He was a young man driving through the West End one evening when armed officers shot him, in another case of mistaken identity. He was critically wounded, but somehow survived, and eventually recovered. The officers had mistaken him for David Martin, who was on the run having escaped from court whilst being charged with attempting to murder a police officer in a shootout during a burglary. The mixup occured because a woman believed to be Martin's girlfriend, and who had been under surveillance, was in the car with Waldorf. The case raised all sorts of questions about sloppy police procedures relating to firearms, and the officers were later charged with, but acquitted of, attempted murder. Meanwhile, Martin was re-captured a short time later, and hanged himself in prison.

I was able to discuss this case with my dad, and he explained that, whatever procedural failures and/or errors of judgement that may have occurred, those officer believed they were confronting a man already charged with shooting a police officer. They would have been sh!tting themselves at the same time as they were trying to maintain professionalism and do the job for which they were trained.

Which brings me to the third incident on my mind, much earlier still. Frederick Joseph Sewell was involved in a robbery in Blackpool, and in the chase that followed, shot and wounded an unarmed pc, then shot and killed an unarmed superintendent, Gerry Richardson. He escaped, and went on the run, eventually being found in London where he was arrested in a struggle during which he went for his gun, but didn't manage to fire it. Click on this link for more details.

The reason I can remember this case is that I had always thought this was the man my dad had helped apprehend back in the early 1970s, as mentioned in my first post. However, when I researched the facts of the case, I now realise I was mistaken, probably because it happened around the same time, and was massively reported on the news. I guess my nine-year-old brain attached his name to what my dad had been involved in, and preserved the memory forever wrongly. Whoever my dad was involved in arresting, it turns out it was not Sewell, but someone else.

To be honest, I'm not really what point I'm trying to make with these stories, but I guess it is that anything that involved the public, guns and the police is unlikely to end well, for all concerned. We have to remember always that the police are part of the general public, and they have the same human failings as the rest of us - as indicated by Turkster and StateOfPlay - but they sometimes show incredible bravery and place their lives at risk, to serve us, and often all they get in return is recrimination.
 
Last edited:
i think the bad press comes from the small amount of officers that are actual pr**ks.
i wanted to be a police officer when i was younger, still wouldnt mind it tbh.
i respect the law 90% of the time (i suspect its the same for the rest of us!) and think the job they do is extremely brave of them.

but i must say, on the poi t of armed police, i have seen a huge increase of them on the streets in the past few years
 
maybe i live in a bubble.
i've just not heard much regarding gun crimes and people out there shooting eachother.
i mean its not like there is stand-offs weekly like there is in other countries.
on that basis i think our country does well to enforce laws and protect people, thats what i was trying to say i guess. credit to police where its due.
totally agree about the 'big power hungry monsters though'.
 
Superkarl, they are not always made public, for instance, there are at least 8 overdose deaths a week in Birmingham but they go unreported.
Its not just power hungry cops, its the young ones with attitude too. I was recently walking down my road after coming back from my local range with a cased gun over my shoulder, a marked car pulls up and the young officer asks what I have, a gun I replied, I need to see it he said, no you don't I answered and carried on walking. He threatened to arrest me and search my property. I stood there and called my FEO who said to ignore him. I said to the officer in the car that my firearms officer said to ignore you, he asked in a voice filled with attitude, what does he know? I carried on walking.

There are good and bad in every walk of life, its just that the police have the power to make your life uncomfortable, and some of them thrive on it.
 
sidibear said:
I was recently walking down my road after coming back from my local range with a cased gun over my shoulder, a marked car pulls up and the young officer asks what I have, a gun I replied, I need to see it he said, no you don't I answered and carried on walking.
Click to expand...
You come across as being a bit ****ish there and you wonder why some police have attitude. Do you expect the police to just wave people on their way when they own up to carrying a gun?
 
Westy, He had no right to try and stop me, I was not committing a crime by walking down my street. He had no right to say he needed to see what I was carrying. A police officer cannot touch a firearm unless they are trained or it has been used and / or left at the scene of a crime. It was cased, its licensed and he didn't need to see it as he had no legitimate reason to.
If he had asked where I had been etc I would have answered politely and more than likely ended up having a friendly chat with him.
And if he was serious about it he should have got out of his car rather than wind the window down about 3" and shout to me through the gap past a parked car.
He started with the attitude and carried it on after I had spoken to my Firearms enforcement officer (FEO) who said to ignore him. He may have been having a bad evening, and if that's the case he should still treat everyone he comes across as an individual.
 
The police have the legal right to stop members of the public and search them for a variety of reasons and using a number of powers, including : Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, gives police the right to search people in a defined area at a specific time when they believe, with good reason, that: there is the possibility of serious violence; or that a person is carrying a dangerous object or offensive weapon; or that an incident involving serious violence has taken place and a dangerous instrument or offensive weapon used in the incident is being carried in the locality. This law has to be authorised by a senior officer and is used mainly to tackle football hooliganism and gang fights.
Click to expand...
Metropolitan Police Service - Stop and Search - FAQ Taking 2 minutes to explain yourself would have been a lot better then acting a bit stand offish. The police are there to make sure people are obeying the law. So after you told them you have a gun it's only right that they have to do the checks. It's also shocking that a FEO said to ignore them. Police deal with kn*bheads all day (i know i do) and that starts to grind on you. Countering attitude with attitude doesn't help anyone.
 
"When they believe with good reason". He didn't have any justifiable reason whatsoever. If a firearms offence had been committed in the near vicinity to where I live I would have already received a call from an AFO just to check where I was, or one would have come round the house, (for a coffee like they sometimes do).
The large percentage of any other officer who wanted to stop me would have had an opening line along the lines of Alright mate, Good evening or Excuse me sir / mate, not what have you got there?

Don't get me wrong, I know a lot of guys in the job and have respect for the police.
I have instructed a few of SO1 in firearms and know members of the blue team, who I currently shoot with. Also officers from other UK forces in various ranks.
I am a minority dickhead just like he was a minority attitude copper, but if he keeps it up he may use it in the wrong situation and that is no use to anyone, least of all the other officers he may be with at the time. One bad apple and all that.
 
I can see everyone's points here, as a Traffic Officer who is also armed on duty you deal with many incidents where a judgement call is needed... Many times I've had the hand on the sidearm with things going on in my head like what if.. So far i've been 100% everytime but its a fine line.

Where i work we carry routinely both sidearms and long arms and thats not in a Specialist Firearms unit.

I agree with the points raised in that many officers do have attitudes which 9/10 gets lost after a few weeks on the ground, many times they get reigned in by fellow officers, but on the other hand as also mentioned above attitude breeds attitude, if you meet someone thats out to try and make you look a dickhead then sometimes a change of attitude is required but at the end of the day if that member of public makes a complaint then you are the one that has to justify why you did what you did..

I like to think i'm level headed and can deal with near everything thats thrown at me, as a Traffic Officer you tend to be disliked by most but as a car enthusiast i tend to try and integrate with people through visiting shows, meets etc etc both on and off duty. If there's a meet on and i'm working i'll take something along that generates a bit of interest such as an Evo, Insignia VXR, 530D Msport etc etc, just this week we have taken a delivery of a fleet A6 Quattro Avants which pleases me immensely.

I hope i've come across as one of the "decent" ones lol
 
All very nice stories.

But the fact is, some police are genuinely nice people who go about their jobs and do a good job at that.

Others however, insist of intimidating and belittling you.

Unfortunately the majority i have met, through no particular fault of my own were A*****s

As for the Firearms police, these clowns would turn you into tomato soup if you were pointing a banana at them.

Trigger happy, wannabe rambos who i would not trust with a paint gun.

Just like the majority of the traffic police, they have fast, expensive toys and they want to play with them.

I used to have a lot of respect for the police, you assume that if you are law abiding, generous, kind, avoid trouble and just mind your own business you will be ok, until one day a rookie copper decides he is having a bad day and turns you into a criminal for defending yourself.

There's only one way out, if you cannot beat them then you join them!!:o.k:
 
We want law and order on our streets, and we need people to do that job. Some people do it because they always wanted to, others because they have short man syndrome and want to be in charge.

The PCCC is there to make sure we are treated fairly. So there are people there to check those who check us.

But if an officer asks a question, you have two ways to respond. And that will determine how the conversation continues from there. You choose.
 
StateOfPlay said:
But if an officer asks a question, you have two ways to respond. And that will determine how the conversation continues from there. You choose.
Click to expand...

The officer has two ways to ask the question, which will also determine how the conversation continues.
 
An officer spots a bloke walking down the road with a firearm in it's bag, rolls down the window and says "what have you got there".

He could have been far ruder than that.
 
State of Play, its obvious that you have it in for me despite the actions of the officer with attitude who was obviously in the wrong, but hey, all cops back each other up despite the evidence to the contrary, don't they?
He could have been far ruder? Why? What had I done wrong? What law had I broken by walking down the road? Would he have made something up to justify his illegal actions?
I could have been walking down the road with a chainsaw, I wouldn't be breaking any law and he still wouldn't have had a reason to stop me and ask what I had there.
Last time I checked it wasn't illegal in this country to walk down the street.

From where he was sat he could not see what I had, the gun was cased and over my opposite shoulder to where he was and about 4" was above my shoulder and more than likely hidden by my head from his view, but could probably see the small holdall over my shoulder. And if he did see what I was carrying under what law was I breaking?
He was an arrogant arsey young copper, end of.
Ask yourself this, you are in your marked car and see a white guy walking down the street at night, what reason do you have to ask him what he is doing? Never mind what you can or cannot see he is carrying, what is your reason for stopping your car in the middle of the road, winding your window down a couple of inches and calling to him asking what he has with him. And how would you open the statement? Evening mate? Alright fella? Excuse me sir?
Yes, the opening statement makes all the difference. If he had used any of the previous then it would have been a totally different response from me. As he opened up with attitude I also replied with attitude, yes, I am gobby tosser sometimes and I have the kahunas to back it up, but its not illegal to be me.
Now, you can see he is carrying a small holdall over his shoulder, still, what right do you have to question what he has with him?

I refer you back to this:
Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, gives police the right to search people in a defined area at a specific time when they believe, with good reason, that: there is the possibility of serious violence; or that a person is carrying a dangerous object or offensive weapon; or that an incident involving serious violence has taken place and a dangerous instrument or offensive weapon used in the incident is being carried in the locality. This law has to be authorised by a senior officer and is used mainly to tackle football hooliganism and gang fights.

What right do you have to stop me and ask me what I am carrying? What law have I broken? Wasn't the "Suss" law disbanded years ago after complaints from ethnic minorities that they were being targeted by the police?
So, now look at it this way. An Ethnic minority is walking down the street and you pull over in your car and ask what he has there, no introduction, just an attitude? All the good community relations that all the other officers had built up over the years has just been destroyed by the attitude of one.

No laws had been broken and the officer had no good reason to question me in the way he did, and you wonder why the public are loosing faith in the police?
 
I haven't got it in for you, I am just saying I think you should give the guy a break. He didn't say "you are surrounded by armed *******s, hit the floor".

Anyway, if he didn't know what you were carrying, why are you quoting Section 60? Maybe he thought you were carrying a stolen musical instrument? Maybe he had a report of a man wearing a cowboy hat that has just lifted a trombone from the music shop!

Chill, and don't let one misunderstanding colour your vision of our Police Force. And I ain't a rozzer!
 
i've personally NEVER experienced a bad copper, be it *****, on a power trip, rude, nasty, nothing. they've all been absolutely ace. which has always made me think 'why do they get such bad opinions made of them'.
il always be polite and respectful, to anyone i meet. and i totally agree with sidibear, if im spoken to in a particularly rude or harsh way, i will react exactly the same.
manners cost **** all. even if you've put a foot wrong somewhere, there is no need. we are all humans
 
+1 on that ^. I've never met the stereotype little hitler yet. But as sidibear says, if you're approached in an arrogant manner then you're more likely to react in the same way. We're nearly all men, and I'm sure we're all too proud to be spoken down to by anyone whatever the uniform. (unless it's a female wearing the uniform!) a while back I was pulled over and clocked at 104 mph, the very decent copper said to me that I wasn't driving stupid but I was driving too fast. He gave me a slap on the wrist and a ticket on the spot. He was well within his rights to put me In front of a judge where I could've got a ban, but his decent policing gave me respect for the police and still taught me a lesson. If only all police reacted in the same way I'm sure everyone would have more respect for them.
 
Another example.
I had just bought three shotguns, cased and in the boot of my old Mondeo, on top of a fuel tank that I was dropping off to someone later. I met him in McDonalds car park near the Walsall football ground. I lifted the three guns up for him to take out the fuel tank and put them back in the boot. We walked towards the main entrance as I was going to grab a bite to eat before I continued on my journey. A few minutes later two marked cars turned up.
Alright lads, the officer said, any guns with you? he asked, Yes I replied, and led him to my car, where I opened the boot and showed him. I got my license from the glove box and showed him where they were listed and offered to open the cases to show him the numbers, which he declined saying he couldn't touch them. He checked who the car was registered too and that I was who I said I was, And then went on to say that that branch had been held up two week earlier at gun point, hence their quick reaction.
Thanked me for my co operation and off they went.

The difference here was his opening statement.

And if he had shouted that I was surrounded by armed ******* hit the deck, I would have, and then pointed out its only valid saying that if he is in a Quattro :laugh:

If we ever get to meet, I will tell you the story about a prank traffic stop by the met armed division who had me plasticuffed in the middle of the road alongside Harrod's, before they realised that it was outside the Columbian Embassy and we all had to run off quickly. I had been instructing them for a couple of days and they wanted to get me back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

quattrojames
Next time the road is closed.....
Replies
13
Views
2K
Ash187
Ash187
J
next time the site goes down
Replies
1
Views
694
Sandra
Sandra
Crazyfool
I need to dig deeper the next time I'm gardening!
Replies
4
Views
727
Crazyfool
Crazyfool
Paul-RS6
the next James Bond is Blonde.
Replies
5
Views
688
TDI-line
TDI-line
silver75
Letter from the Police.. What next? Will I lose my license??
Replies
65
Views
4K
ManicMunky
ManicMunky
Top
Back