|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 27, 2023 10:23:28 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 27, 2023 10:32:47 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago. Are you confident that the findings of the various hearings into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes have resulted in better policing and use of firearms by the police today?
If you recall, the Macpherson report was a quarter of a century ago, and the faults it highlighted then are still being found by official inquiries today...
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Mar 27, 2023 10:38:44 GMT
Who are they then? Can you name some? And do you realise that firearms is already a separate branch? There were 6,192 police officers licensed to carry firearms in England and Wales as of 2022. Firearms officers are in several units, not just one branch.
Where firearms support is needed, it is carried out by specially trained and accredited firearms officers known as authorised firearms officers (AFOs).
In the Met, firearms support is primarily provided by MO19 Specialist Firearms Command. There are also firearms officers in a number of other units, such as Aviation Policing, Royalty and Specialist Protection Command, and the Parliamentary and Diplomatic Protection Command.
There are multiple levels of armed officers. Officers undergo rigorous selection and training to become a firearms officer. Their initial, and continued training, is dependent on the role they’re operationally required to perform. All training is governed by the College of Policing’s ‘National Police Firearms Training Curriculum’ (NPFTC). The curriculum, in tandem with the Met’s chief firearms instructor, ensures that the relevant training modules are completed by all officers within their specific role profile.
All this is stated by the Met:
Knowledge that there are different roles that Authorised Firearms Police Officers are attached to, even some Officers who do not wear uniforms carry Firearms , but the one thing they all have in common is they are all Authorised Firearms trained Police Officers. different horses for different courses that is all |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Mar 27, 2023 10:40:03 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago. That was my initial thought as well. Characterising that victim as an 'innocent Brazilian electrician' seems rather partisan as well. The available evidence indicates he was a visa overstayer working illegally. Not that that provides any justification for his killing.
It does seem strange though that it is necessary to go back so far in search of evidence to support the proposition that Metropolitan Police firearms officers are 'Dirty Harry' types.
|
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Mar 27, 2023 10:40:21 GMT
I say the Met police are racist. What, all of them? Yep all of them even the non white ones  |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 27, 2023 11:03:40 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago. Are you confident that the findings of the various hearings into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes have resulted in better policing and use of firearms by the police today?
If you recall, the Macpherson report was a quarter of a century ago, and the faults it highlighted then are still being found by official inquiries today...
I have zero confidence. I see it as politics - ie expensive and useless for a reason. I have noted that, since that one unfortunate data point, the number of Brazilians shot on the underground by the police has reduced significantly. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 27, 2023 14:42:16 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago. Are you confident that the findings of the various hearings into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes have resulted in better policing and use of firearms by the police today?
If you recall, the Macpherson report was a quarter of a century ago, and the faults it highlighted then are still being found by official inquiries today...
The faults the Mcpherson report highlighted were political findings and not the conclusion reached by a dispassionate report. Much that the Mcpherson report highlighted were assumptions especially as regards 'Institutional' problems as there is little evidence to that finding contained in the body of the report. I have no idea on what basis this current report concludes several more repeat and new 'Institutional' findings but if it is like Macpherson then it is pure assumption and possibly a conclusion directed to be found by the political class of whom, in the main with some noble exceptions, I find untrustworthy and self serving. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 27, 2023 15:10:24 GMT
Are you confident that the findings of the various hearings into the killing of Jean Charles de Menezes have resulted in better policing and use of firearms by the police today?
If you recall, the Macpherson report was a quarter of a century ago, and the faults it highlighted then are still being found by official inquiries today...
The faults the Mcpherson report highlighted were political findings and not the conclusion reached by a dispassionate report. Much that the Mcpherson report highlighted were assumptions especially as regards 'Institutional' problems as there is little evidence to that finding contained in the body of the report. I have no idea on what basis this current report concludes several more repeat and new 'Institutional' findings but if it is like Macpherson then it is pure assumption and possibly a conclusion directed to be found by the political class of whom, in the main with some noble exceptions, I find untrustworthy and self serving. It must be annoying that Casey only builds on the findings of Macpherson, and so many allegations against officers are being acknowledged by the police themselves. I guess the narrative will be that certain senior officers are endeavouring to ingratiate themselves with the political leaders of the anti police bandwagon in the hopes of securing senior roles from any coming reorganisation… |
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Mar 27, 2023 16:43:38 GMT
The faults the Mcpherson report highlighted were political findings and not the conclusion reached by a dispassionate report. Much that the Mcpherson report highlighted were assumptions especially as regards 'Institutional' problems as there is little evidence to that finding contained in the body of the report. I have no idea on what basis this current report concludes several more repeat and new 'Institutional' findings but if it is like Macpherson then it is pure assumption and possibly a conclusion directed to be found by the political class of whom, in the main with some noble exceptions, I find untrustworthy and self serving. It must be annoying that Casey only builds on the findings of Macpherson, and so many allegations against officers are being acknowledged by the police themselves. I guess the narrative will be that certain senior officers are endeavouring to ingratiate themselves with the political leaders of the anti police bandwagon in the hopes of securing senior roles from any coming reorganisation… Because they'd never do that now, would they? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 27, 2023 18:44:09 GMT
To give some idea of the now mind-blowing levels of corruption and nonsense currently imbedded in government departments and their related processes, an audit of the Prevent anti-terrorism program recently revealed that it had identified 'Yes Minister' as a red flag for right wing extremism
|
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 27, 2023 19:30:00 GMT
Yeah, yeah - I know all that.
Now can you tell us who the gung-ho, Dirty Harry types are, please?I don't think you did know all that (or you may have forgotten) — otherwise why did you post:
Who are they then? Can you name some? And do you realise that firearms is already a separate branch?
The gung-ho Dirty Harry types are like those who were so hyped up they slaughtered Jean Charles de Menezes by shooting him seven times in the head.
Their actions were so bad that an Old Bailey jury ruled that London’s Metropolitan Police had broken health and safety laws and unnecessarily put the public at risk in the hours before shooting Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent Brazilian electrician, who was mistaken for a suicide bomber and shot dead at Stockwell Tube station the day after the failed 21 July bombings in 2005.
Not only that, the Met closeted the firearms officers together after the shooting to agree their statements before being questioned. The met also made false allegations about the clothing and the way De Menezes made his way to Stockwell and on to the tube. The Met also produced a doctored composite photo of De Menezes and terrorist Hussain Osman to excuse the killing...
Jeez |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Mar 27, 2023 19:31:30 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago. Ah, well so long as it was 17 years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 27, 2023 19:55:30 GMT
It seem the peculiar and unexpected diversion into the details surrounding fire-arms officers was intended to segue into recalling an event that happened 17 years ago. Ah, well so long as it was 17 years ago. All i can say is, if were trying to make Patman's point, I'd try to come up with something a bit more persuasive than a singular event 17 years ago that happened during a terrorist scare |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2023 20:02:17 GMT
Ah, well so long as it was 17 years ago. All i can say is, if were trying to make Patman's point, I'd try to come up with something a bit more persuasive than a singular event 17 years ago that happened during a terrorist scare PP has a thing about the police. He always thinks he could and can do better than them. He's always been scathing of everything they do. The shooting of JCM was indicative of the very high state of alert at the time coupled with a nervous reaction in an attempt to keep the public safe, which obviously went sadly wrong. Cressida Dick, who was in charge at the time, was promoted to Met Commissioner. Perhaps the people who promoted her had more understanding of the circumstances, than a keyboard warrior named PP. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Mar 27, 2023 21:56:58 GMT
The faults the Mcpherson report highlighted were political findings and not the conclusion reached by a dispassionate report. Much that the Mcpherson report highlighted were assumptions especially as regards 'Institutional' problems as there is little evidence to that finding contained in the body of the report. I have no idea on what basis this current report concludes several more repeat and new 'Institutional' findings but if it is like Macpherson then it is pure assumption and possibly a conclusion directed to be found by the political class of whom, in the main with some noble exceptions, I find untrustworthy and self serving. It must be annoying that Casey only builds on the findings of Macpherson, and so many allegations against officers are being acknowledged by the police themselves. I guess the narrative will be that certain senior officers are endeavouring to ingratiate themselves with the political leaders of the anti police bandwagon in the hopes of securing senior roles from any coming reorganisation… Therein lies the problem Macpherson did not find much other than some pretty sloppy investigative work and police work. He then 'concluded' that the police were 'Institutionally racist' using as evidence his own assumptions as regards why police officers were sloppy in their work. No evidence worth anything as evidence was ever presented as to how that conclusion was reached. If you 'build' on a shoogly table you will always get a shoogly table with stuff on it. No doubt the met has problems, unaddressed problems certainly as regards discipline but it should not be all things to all people it should be to seek out criminals and forestall crime but 'crime' is a rather nebulous thing that sees insult and hurt feelings being far more of a crime than petty theft, burglary and GBH. |
|
