Doesn't surprise me one bit

Mark

Quoted: Doesn't surprise me one bit Mark

+1 on that.

The only accident we ever had at my old pistol club was a policeman (supposedly a firearms instructor) shoot himself in the leg when holstering a pistol...

What's all this "CO19" stuff? Have SO19 changed their designation?

I've been in a couple of police ranges. One relatively new indoor range had a very large amount of 'splash' marks in the ceiling and floor right by the firing point. Not an encouraging site.

On one MoD range complex we shoot on, the police were banned and could only come on as part of a civilian club's booking. Not sure if this is still true or whether they have been deemed fit now, but a few years ago they could only come on with us. On occation it looked like the situation you described, Vito.

In defence of the officers at the sharp end.
You all know I have friends and family who do this work.

It's all down to funding and time (and protocol )
The officers themselves would glady do more training but there is not enough facilities and range time to allow officers to even practice.

They do their re-qualification shoots every so often but are not allowed to go to the range to practice. How mad is that.

Gung-ho ...should be sifted but no system is infallible

SAS have seen active service and will NEVER hessitate when it comes to slotting a tango. The police dont get to fire enough rounds in training never mind worry about consequenses.

I shoot more rounds in one days shooting than an AFO would shoot in a year.
That's not the officers fault.


Taffy



ETA

There is a  physical fitnes requirement to be on a firearms unit. So that part of the article is incorrect.

I've got close family in the job too, and in two different forces. Basically, both these forces are after non-shooters to mold into armed officers. If you have a history of being a shooter you don't seem to get selected for training. One the initial training is over they don't sem to get enough practice time.

Now I know that being a shooter doesn't automatically make you a great candidate for the job but it certainly wouldn't hurt to have some experience.
One of my clubs is near a major UK airport, and many of the members work there. We had several new members from the airport police join who were so worried about not qualifying (having little or no practice) that they joined our club in order to stay 'current'. Only one didn't stay with the airport police, but he moved to a local constabulary and away from firearms (he still shoots though).
When the pistol ban happened most stayed as members and just enjoyed the shooting as a sport.

As Taffy says, it's a lack of practice and experience (I mean trigger time, not experience walking around looking hard with a gun).

But, they don't seem to help themselves in getting rid of this impression we all have for incompetance. Like most shooters I've heard stories of what they're like on the range, but I've also been on a range with them and taken over a range after they've left. Unfortunately, I'm not too convinced they know what they're doing all the time. Sometimes, what I've seen at best is just sloppy practice, at worse is damned incompetence. and dangerous.

Hello all,

It would seem that  finance and time is the problem.

Financial resourses to allow the Officers to train on a regular basis.
Time to train to do the job, because they are doing that job.

It is an unthakfull job (that I wouldn't want).

In the originall thread starter it described a senario whereby the Police went into a hostage situation, the SAS decided to lay down their weapons becoming a none threat, that just needed to be arrested. The assault team went in and started to rock and role without assesing the situation.... If I understand that rightly, the Officers were there to receive training, and it is okay to make mistakes during training as its part of the learning process.


Tony

I've a good friend just done an interview (sucessful) to become an AFO.
WE shoot together often.
It was commented that he knew more about firearms than the interviewing board.

That went in his favour ....Not against

He is knowledgable but he is not a gun-ho gun nut.
We have shot together for over 10 years

Taffy

It's not a job i would want thats for certain,
I do believe theses guys need more training, and lots more practice, at least 50 rds per week,

And having heard some of the things i've heard about there weapons discipline especially in the canteens, they need all the practice they can get,

like i said its not a job id want or even think about...... But i wouldnt say no to the job of testing there guns for them

James,

Two of Warwickshires finest managed to sweep me with their 2 bob Parker Hale "Sniper" rifles just last week while dropping them into a local shop for repair.

Unloaded from an unmarked car in the street uncased, bolts in and closed and carried horizontally.

No-one cleared them until the shop owner took posession.

Fortunate I wasnt carrying any bits of furniture so escaped unharmedhippie.gif

Richard

That sound's like a close call, hope you checked your surroundings for cover though just in case.

Tony

Quoted: Two of Warwickshires finest managed to sweep me with their 2 bob Parker Hale "Sniper" rifles just last week while dropping them into a local shop for repair. Unloaded from an unmarked car in the street uncased, bolts in and closed and carried horizontally. No-one cleared them until the shop owner took posession. Fortunate I wasnt carrying any bits of furniture so escaped unharmed Richard

hey where abouts in Warwickshire are you? I lived in Rugby for most of my life.

On the Warks/Northants border Watford village

Richard

Dis I hear on the News last night that it was suggested the police employ ex services members as firearms officers?  Or did I dream it.......................

Edit:  Found it:-

"Sir Ian Blair also suggested that former soldiers could be trained and deployed as firearms specialists as part of a radical restructuring of police responsibilities and duties.

After being criticised over the shooting of a man mistaken for a suicide bomber in July, he said he was not suggesting bringing in the Army to take over firearms duties but rather hiring ex-servicemen on short-term contracts. Asked if he would resign if he were condemned by the Independent Police Complaints Commission over the shooting, he said: "It depends on the level of condemnation."

It used to be that most Police Forces would not employ officers who have a FAC/SGC on Firearms duty. I don't know if this is still the case?

Reason? Probably fear of it being used against them in any court case by the defence council?

Now, how would that differ from the public perception of military 'mercenaries'...............?

Quoted: Now, how would that differ from the public perception of military 'mercenaries'...............?

I know that a lot of my old Army mate's joined their local Police force after leaving. So why military mercenaries? they have enough ex-force's personnel already. The problem is, that there are no answers to the London shooting incident. Each incident has its own particular set of changing circumstances that have to be taken into consideration as the situation develop's. Some of the decision's have to be made by the Officer on the spot, in a matter of second's rather than minutes often without any advice from his or her superior Officers. Sometimes they get it wrong, even ex-force's people make mistake's. The big decision of drop the tango or wait for backup or advice from senior's take's time that they may or may not have.

I have worked as an armed Security guard, and know only to well that when you go on duty and holster that gun. You have one foot in prison. It is very daunting.

I dont like the term military mercenary, brings back memories of those who went to the Congo, and wouldn't apply to trained Police Officer's who are also ex-forces. The fact that they are ex-forces shouldn't be held against them as they have already shown a large commitment to the security of their country in having chosen to join the armed forces in the first place, and proved further commitment by deciding to become Police Officer's after they leave.

This isnt a flame, and no offence was intended, just my 0,02pence.

Tony

Quoted: Quoted: Now, how would that differ from the public perception of military 'mercenaries'...............? I know that a lot of my old Army mate's joined their local Police force after leaving. So why military mercenaries? they have enough ex-force's personnel already. The problem is, that there are no answers to the London shooting incident. Each incident has its own particular set of changing circumstances that have to be taken into consideration as the situation develop's. Some of the decision's have to be made by the Officer on the spot, in a matter of second's rather than minutes often without any advice from his or her superior Officers. Sometimes they get it wrong, even ex-force's people make mistake's. The big decision of drop the tango or wait for backup or advice from senior's take's time that they may or may not have. I have worked as an armed Security guard, and know only to well that when you go on duty and holster that gun. You have one foot in prison. It is very daunting. I dont like the term military mercenary, brings back memories of those who went to the Congo, and wouldn't apply to trained Police Officer's who are also ex-forces. The fact that they are ex-forces shouldn't be held against them as they have already shown a large commitment to the security of their country in having chosen to join the armed forces in the first place, and proved further commitment by deciding to become Police Officer's after they leave. This isnt a flame, and no offence was intended, just my 0,02pence. Tony

Is that not what the contractors in Iraq are??

Mark

It doesn't matter who they put on firearms duty as long as they are properly selected and properly trained and turned into firearms experts.  That  just isn't happening at the moment. The average firearms officer gets to shoot at qualifying time and doesn't get enough ( any?) range time in between. When I was competing in practical pistol comps, back in the good old days, I would do 200 rounds a week nearly every week, and if I didn't  I'd feel rusty.
Thats the level of training  would like to see the police aim for , both live firing and their "expensive " shoot- don't shoot video games. Most police are lucky if  they do 200 rounds in six months or even a year.  Frankly soldiers don't fare any better on the firearms training front, unless they are special forces, so I dont see how hiring them will improve matters unless there is a commitment to more training. Or just allow them to practice  to hone their skills.  Even the guy who shot our Brazillian friend missed three shots at point blank range.
And while I'm ranting, it's criminal that police don't have more non lethal ( sorry "less lethal") alternatives available to them, like rubber or beanbag shotgun rounds in high capacity shotguns .
They say it's too expensive to give them more training, but how much is it costing to defend and settle all these "bad shooting" cases. That's got to be well into the millions by now. How much ammo would that buy?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Now, how would that differ from the public perception of military 'mercenaries'...............? I know that a lot of my old Army mate's joined their local Police force after leaving. So why military mercenaries? they have enough ex-force's personnel already. The problem is, that there are no answers to the London shooting incident. Each incident has its own particular set of changing circumstances that have to be taken into consideration as the situation develop's. Some of the decision's have to be made by the Officer on the spot, in a matter of second's rather than minutes often without any advice from his or her superior Officers. Sometimes they get it wrong, even ex-force's people make mistake's. The big decision of drop the tango or wait for backup or advice from senior's take's time that they may or may not have. I have worked as an armed Security guard, and know only to well that when you go on duty and holster that gun. You have one foot in prison. It is very daunting. I dont like the term military mercenary, brings back memories of those who went to the Congo, and wouldn't apply to trained Police Officer's who are also ex-forces. The fact that they are ex-forces shouldn't be held against them as they have already shown a large commitment to the security of their country in having chosen to join the armed forces in the first place, and proved further commitment by deciding to become Police Officer's after they leave. This isnt a flame, and no offence was intended, just my 0,02pence. Tony Is that not what the contractors in Iraq are?? Mark

Hiya Mark,

Sorry, but I was talking about the  UK. Police, the close protection people in Afganistan, Irak and other places are a different kettle of fish. I know what your getting at, but after 10years in a tank regiment, I hadn't learnt anything that a civilian employer was looking for or wanted. So I had to look for work in a branch that would pay the most money for the skills that I had. The majority of those who go into the security branch are in the same boat, come from a military background in a so called teeth arm. Which means that they didnt need to be trained to program a computer or become a finace inspector / broker or what ever. What we learned in all those years was the in's and out's of every tactical senario. Advance to contact, recce's, attack's and so on. They are just doing what they need to do, to put food on the table for their families.

Hello Bogtrotter,

I loved your rant and agree with you, We used to do APWT's (annual persnal weapons test's) and as the name say's ''annuall''. With no or few range days in between, spent so much time sweeping the Tank park that I felt that my personal weapon of choice should have been a bass broom..

Tony