141 replies to this topic

[SM17HY]

[centre][/centre]
Greater availability of the less-lethal weapon could mean the difference between life and death, says staff association.

More officers should be issued with Taser to bolster their safety as budget cuts bite and there are less boots on the ground, the Police Federation has said.
According to Paul Davies, the staff association’s Lead on Safety and Firearms, greater availability of the less-lethal weapons “could mean the difference between life and death” as officers continue put themselves in harm’s way.
He pointed out that more than 5,000 warranted officers had already disappeared from the ranks – and with thousands more vanishing in the months ahead, he said those at the sharp end needed to be better protected.
As previously reported on PoliceOracle.com, a new variant of the Taser – the X2 – is being tested by the Home Office although it is at least a year away from introduction.
But Mr Davies said that the current X26 model was already available in sufficient numbers for its availability to be extended to more front-line officers.
He added: “Police officers are asked to put themselves in harm’s way on a daily basis to protect the public, and of course officers are members of the public too.
“At a time when 5,200 officers have disappeared from our streets, and when 12,000 more are expected to face the axe, it seems ludicrous not to give those who remain the basic tools that could mean the difference between life and death.
Mr Davies emphasised: "Of course, no amount of equipment can ever replace fully warranted feet on the beat, but at the very least, we'd like to know that everything that can be done is being done to protect police officers.”
DCC Simon Chesterman, the ACPO Lead on Firearms, told PoliceOracle.com that he was aware that the Fed had been pushing for a greater roll-out of Taser.
The chief officer added: “Taser provides a less-lethal option and has been proven to reduce the numbers of assaults on officers – it is very effective tool.
“I would like to see forces considering the level of threat and risk facing their officers and ensuring that they have a reasonable level of Taser coverage.”

I'm all for more tasers in light of less officers - obviously I want to see more officers on the street - but thats not likely to happen any time soon!

Edited by Hades, 14 June 2012 - 05:16 PM.

[MacGregor]

Taser for all, the sooner the better. Hopefully one step closer to routine arming.

I don't know why we are so proud that police officers aren't routinely armed in Great Britain. Why would anybody be proud of the fact that we don't give police officers the tools that could save their life or that of somebody else?

[jackisback]

I'm all for more tasers in light of less officers - obviously I want to see more officers on the street - but thats not likely to happen any time soon![/size]

I agree.

Taser for all, the sooner the better. Hopefully one step closer to routine arming.

I don't know why we are so proud that police officers aren't routinely armed in Great Britain. Why would anybody be proud of the fact that we don't give police officers the tools that could save their life or that of somebody else?

I think that police officers, and the public, need more protection in the form of Taser, but I'm not sure that they need to be routinely armed with firearms.

[SM17HY]

Taser for all, the sooner the better. Hopefully one step closer to routine arming.

I don't know why we are so proud that police officers aren't routinely armed in Great Britain. Why would anybody be proud of the fact that we don't give police officers the tools that could save their life or that of somebody else?

^^ Too true, I think officers should be routinely armed with taser as appossed to glocks tho - the sad thing is, its going to take an officer to be seriously injured or even killed in the line of duty before anything is done

Also would a mod be kind enough to change the title to 'Cuts Must Be Met With Extra Tasers' Says Fed Lead
I stupidly copied the picture quote

[MacGregor]

I think that police officers, and the public, need more protection in the form of Taser, but I'm not sure that they need to be routinely armed with firearms.

Quite honestly, I'd rather carry a firearm and never have to use it than not carry one and need it.

[jackisback]

Quite honestly, I'd rather carry a firearm and never have to use it than not carry one and need it.

That's an excellent point, and I agree.
My original point was that if Tasers are just as effective as firearms, then firearms aren't needed.

[MacGregor]

That's an excellent point, and I agree.
My original point was that if Tasers are just as effective as firearms, then firearms aren't needed.

They aren't though. A Taser is a tool that compliments what we would traditionally think of as firearms but it doesn't replace the need for them.

[jackisback]

They aren't though. A Taser is a tool that compliments what we would traditionally think of as firearms but it doesn't replace the need for them.

In that case I concur with your statement.
Out of interest, has any studies of Taser usage in the UK taken place?

[MrKguy]

You may like this?

http://www.guardian....research-safety

quick google search, may be nothing though - just dribble about dangers etc..

[jackisback]

You may like this?

http://www.guardian....research-safety

quick google search, may be nothing though - just dribble about dangers etc..

Cheers.

[BigCopSmallTown]

Interestingly ACPO is yet to make a policy decision on whether they endorse specials being taser trained. The aspiration is for my unit to be trained and equipped due to the forcewide role we perform however we are tied up in ACPO red tape waiting for approval.

[SM17HY]

Quite honestly, I'd rather carry a firearm and never have to use it than not carry one and need it.

That is a very good statement! Thinking about it the PSNI are routinely armed, yes they have a greater risk of terrorism and violence from certain groups, but you don't exactly hear of them having to deploy there firearm on a regular basis - I can only assume that they stick by your statement and it seems to work, I think.

[Dave SYP]

Quite honestly, I'd rather carry a firearm and never have to use it than not carry one and need it.

I'm not, and never have been an advocate of routine arming. It's not a 'we pride ourselves' thing with me, it's just that some of the officers I have worked with in the past and some I see nowadays I wouldn''t trust to look after next doors' cat never mind a side-arm!

Firearms should be maintained as specialist.

[CmdKeen]

I'm not, and never have been an advocate of routine arming. It's not a 'we pride ourselves' thing with me, it's just that some of the officers I have worked with in the past and some I see nowadays I wouldn''t trust to look after next doors' cat never mind a side-arm!

I end up saying this in every thread firearms are mentioned. If you don't trust them to look after a cat they shouldn't be a cop. Police officers have, day in day out, to make decisions that could result in death, serious injury or a miscarriage of justice.

Screwups involving firearms, or less than lethal weapons, are far down the likelihood of occurring at the hands of an incompetent cop than other boneheaded things they could do that can cause serious repercussions. And as we've discovered it can only take one spark to set off nationwide riots - in the most recent case it involved a police firearm but see the American race riots where a police beating (right or wrong) sparked them. A bad cop has the potential to cause mayhem without gun.

[MacGregor]

I'm not, and never have been an advocate of routine arming. It's not a 'we pride ourselves' thing with me, it's just that some of the officers I have worked with in the past and some I see nowadays I wouldn''t trust to look after next doors' cat never mind a side-arm!

Firearms should be maintained as specialist.

Should they really be a police officer at all then? Most sensible adults are perfectly capable of handling a firearm in a safe manner.

[Dave SYP]

I end up saying this in every thread firearms are mentioned. If you don't trust them to look after a cat they shouldn't be a cop. Police officers have, day in day out, to make decisions that could result in death, serious injury or a miscarriage of justice.

Screwups involving firearms, or less than lethal weapons, are far down the likelihood of occurring at the hands of an incompetent cop than other boneheaded things they could do that can cause serious repercussions. And as we've discovered it can only take one spark to set off nationwide riots - in the most recent case it involved a police firearm but see the American race riots where a police beating (right or wrong) sparked them. A bad cop has the potential to cause mayhem without gun.

Agreed with wholeheartedly! However, we must all have worked with the likes of certain individuals that we would want 'screened out' from carrying anything more lethal than a teaspoon?

[CmdKeen]

Agreed with wholeheartedly! However, we must all have worked with the likes of certain individuals that we would want 'screened out' from carrying anything more lethal than a teaspoon?

Oh yes - and the one I'm picturing is banned from driving because they've crashed multiple times (more dangerous than a gun), and basically has been stuck on the beat in a rural location because it is where they can do the least harm. They shouldn't be a cop but it is too hard to get rid of them.

One of the reforms that definitely needs to happen is the ability to get rid of properly pish cops. Not in order to introduce firearms, though that would be a useful cover, but because they can do so much damage in any case.

[crunchybits]

Interestingly ACPO is yet to make a policy decision on whether they endorse specials being taser trained. The aspiration is for my unit to be trained and equipped due to the forcewide role we perform however we are tied up in ACPO red tape waiting for approval.

Interesting - can you link to the guidance on this as effectively taser is a part of your PPE which is role based. So if you are a full time|part time|special constable should make absolutely no difference in the decision process. Same role/same PPE requirement...

[Burnie]

Interesting - can you link to the guidance on this as effectively taser is a part of your PPE which is role based. So if you are a full time|part time|special constable should make absolutely no difference in the decision process. Same role/same PPE requirement...

In this instance though it reads to me that no-one on BCSTs team has TASER therefore it is a case of same role, same PPE at the moment

I think its down to the fact that TASER auth is seen as part of an AFO ticket (all be it that it has been decided that it can be issued to Specially Trained Officers [STOs])

Its the same in my force. Since there was a short trial (one weekend) a couple of years ago they have been looking at specials on TSG but they say the TASER issue and funding for Lvl2 PO kit is the main hold up (as Lvl2 PO is not something specials get in my force, we've only just got a few of us Lvl 3 trained)

Edited by Burnie, 14 June 2012 - 03:01 PM.

[TheLastBastion]

I'm gonna go down a different less than leathal option... The bean bag shotgun. Just imagine getting out of your vehicle and racking that bad boy... Crims would poo themselves.
Now seriously... It could be an option

[jackisback]

There's a petition here.
Whether it has an effect or not, I don't know, but it can't harm to try.

[Dave SYP]

There's a petition here.
Whether it has an effect or not, I don't know, but it can't harm to try.

Duly signed and sent.

[Hades]

The problem my force is finding with Taser roll out is the cost of training, due to the cost of the cartridges (around £25 each) where we're well and truly over a barrel!

I agree.

I think that police officers, and the public, need more protection in the form of Taser, but I'm not sure that they need to be routinely armed with firearms.

Are there any real arguments why officers shouldn't be armed? Lets not forget the recent conviction of offenders in Birmingham shooting what is thought to have been at least 4 different guns at unarmed police officers...

[Radman]

That's an excellent point, and I agree.
My original point was that if Tasers are just as effective as firearms, then firearms aren't needed.

Tasers arent though... By a long, long way...

[MacGregor]

The only real argument I can see for not routinely arming officers is that some officers feel they don't want to be armed. Other than that, I can't think of any other reason not to.