ordnance Posted March 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 A sensible comment afloat in a sea of holier than you spraffing. 'Ordnance' I sense you've got a little hang up here further than than commenting on the photo. If the photo was two marines serving in Helmand-would there be the same views aired on here? All aboard the police whingy whiney bus, fuddster I dont give a **** who it is you dont mess about with firearms. I am surprised some are trying to justify it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salop Matt Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I doesnt matter what there job is, the act that they are photographed doing is dangerous and am sure they dont like this being point out and am sure they did only see it as harmless fun but its no excuse and they shouldnt be allowed around firearms again. And if you think its harmless fun etc then just take a moment to think what your FLO and there colleagues would say if they saw it.... you would lose your lisence in a heart beat and any further grant would be decined and rightfully so. They wouldnt hesitate to take firearms away from us so they should be able to taken away from firearms to if they carnt be trusted to be safe with them. A steep a harsh learning curve for the officers but they did the crime and now they have to serve the punishement. they should be lucky to keep any job with the police after this stunt ! The act thats being carried out is also someone pointing a firarm at a police officer to add to charges that should be bought against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cockercas Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 i just feel if i did that to anyone here loaded or unloaded they would be more than justified in either never wanting to be near me again or reporting me after all nobody knows for sure weather it was loaded or not and they are the police they should know better. as for people having there licences revoked for not agreeing this was bad, no it doesn't mean they would do it themselves just because they don't think the copper should not be sacked. your right if we met and you pointed a gun at me i would wrap the thing around your head. but if we was good mates and we had planned to do it then aslong as it was unloaded i wouldnt give a ****. btw id not let anyone point a gun at me nor point one at someone else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cockercas Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I dont give a **** who it is you dont mess about with firearms. I am surprised some are trying to justify it. you are 100% correct that you dont mess with guns. if you read back no one has said otherwise. what we are tying to get across is theres no need to start with the OMG her **** could of been blown thru her head comment s because it wouldnt of happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuddster Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I doesnt matter what there job is, the act that they are photographed doing is dangerous and am sure they dont like this being point out and am sure they did only see it as harmless fun but its no excuse and they shouldnt be allowed around firearms again. And if you think its harmless fun etc then just take a moment to think what your FLO and there colleagues would say if they saw it.... you would lose your lisence in a heart beat and any further grant would be decined and rightfully so. They wouldnt hesitate to take firearms away from us so they should be able to taken away from firearms to if they carnt be trusted to be safe with them. A steep a harsh learning curve for the officers but they did the crime and now they have to serve the punishement. they should be lucky to keep any job with the police after this stunt ! The act thats being carried out is also someone pointing a firarm at a police officer to add to charges that should be bought against them. I recollect you're earlier comment on the 'dog bites cops' thread about the ability of firearms to shoot a rampant dog. You should really phone them up and offer your expert guidance-alternatively try the Samaritans-they might just give a flying ****. only rule broken here-dont get photo'd doing something you shouldn't be doing (that includes females). fudd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Whatever we think on here, there are other schools of thought. The family of the lad killed on a training exercise don't think it is funny. The Police don't think it is a harmless bit of fun. They have been very stupid and are paying the price. Better than, than another fatality. I have had a supposedly empty gun pointed at me many years ago. It turned out to have a live shell in it. I was less than happy - so was the absolute cretin who pointed it me. The Police deserve better people on the firearms unit than these idiots. I cannot comprehend why anyone would defend them. Just accept they were lucky not to have killed someone whilst playing around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salop Matt Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Fudd why do you defend the recognised failings that are being talked about here. And am no expert on anything really but i just cant see why a "trained police marksman" would need 4 shots to kill a dog, the calibre was big enough and I would like to think that at 15-20 yards say the police officer should be able to hit a dog sized target first time certainatly second so why were 4 shots used is what am asking! Although bringing that up is going off topic and definately taking a personal line at me. And sorry fudd there is a few failings here not just one. Quite simpley this wouldnt of been debated right now if they hadnt been messing about with firearms let alone taking pictures and then letting them get out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
storme37 Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 how did the pics get out dont tell me they were on facebook lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) It was just a bit of fun but it was stupid and they paid the price. The police have a very dodgy sense of humour, I suppose its a safty valve. Years ago someone had a picture of a Met police car next to the sign saying Southend welcomes careful drivers. This led to a spate of copycats with destinations ever more distant, Birmingham, Leeds etc. They were getting photocopied and put on notice boards till the **** hit the fan. Edited March 30, 2012 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death from below Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 It was just a bit of fun but it was stupid and they paid the price. The police have a very dodgy sense of humour, I suppose its a safty valve. Years ago someone had a picture of a Met police car next to the sign saying Southend welcomes careful drivers. This led to a spate of copycats with destinations ever more distant, Birmingham, Leeds etc. They were getting photocopied and put on notice boards till the **** hit the fan. Oh yes, i remember seeing a TSG carrier (Met police riot bus) pictured next to the Eiffel tour - and it was done in one tour of duty - impressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) Don't you just love forums, the full H&S view through to the it's just a laugh. This could run and run, but I see no point as no consensus will ever be reached! Edited March 31, 2012 by Dekers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salop Matt Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Think your right there Dekers, maybe the best thing to do is lock the thread in the forums interest ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Fudd why do you defend the recognised failings that are being talked about here. And am no expert on anything really but i just cant see why a "trained police marksman" would need 4 shots to kill a dog, the calibre was big enough and I would like to think that at 15-20 yards say the police officer should be able to hit a dog sized target first time certainatly second so why were 4 shots used is what am asking! Although bringing that up is going off topic and definately taking a personal line at me. And sorry fudd there is a few failings here not just one. Quite simpley this wouldnt of been debated right now if they hadnt been messing about with firearms let alone taking pictures and then letting them get out. Just as a matter of interest any idea what weapon/round was used on the dog ? Julian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 And am no expert on anything really but i just cant see why a "trained police marksman" would need 4 shots to kill a dog, the calibre was big enough and I would like to think that at 15-20 yards say the police officer should be able to hit a dog sized target first time certainatly second so why were 4 shots used is what am asking! It was shot 3 times, not 4, and at point blank range, not 15-20 yards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) its almost as stupid as saying someone who drives over the speed limit shouldn't have a car. - "50 in a 30mph area". or mabey we should revoke all sgc/fac for people who drink, - "while handling firearms". My added quotes. Yep, could quite happily debate those points. As in all things it's a matter of degree - but the line is fine. If you want to take the risk and step over it, OK, but be prepared to live with the consequences. It's just unfortunate that in so doing whoever you just killed is unable to do so. Edited March 31, 2012 by wymberley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted March 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) Think your right there Dekers, maybe the best thing to do is lock the thread in the forums interest ! You are probably right` as long as their are people that think its OK to play with firearms whats the point. I must say i am very surprised that some on this forum think its OK. I don't think that saying that you shouldn't point a firearm at anyone is going overboard with H&S. There is safety advice on your FAC. Quote Always treat a firearm as if it where loaded. (Never point a firearm at anyone, even if it is unloaded) ect. Some on this forum think its OK to ignore the advice. If that's an example of highly trained officers. Edited March 31, 2012 by ordnance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Marty Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Think a severe kick up the *** and maybe suspension for a month or two but to take 2 highly trained officers off all together bit much,and at the end of the day it's only so there seen to be taking strong action... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salop Matt Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Zulu I dont think its been released what cal was used but the likely 2 cals are going to be 9mm or 5.56 ! So 3 shots of either of the above at near enough PBR ? :o but still this area of convo isnt in keeping with the thread ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Zulu I dont think its been released what cal was used but the likely 2 cals are going to be 9mm or 5.56 ! So 3 shots of either of the above at near enough PBR ? :o but still this area of convo isnt in keeping with the thread ! Ok thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vole Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 This should have been dealt with behind closed doors but the publicity put paid to that . This pic does not make him a bad officer who needs sacking , unless there are other issues with him . I vote to give the fellow a break . There might have been a criminal hiding up there . It was big enough . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
storme37 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) i can hear it now " its not how it seems chief super intendant i was about to insert the barrel in to the constables jacksy as i firmly believe there was an armed criminal hiding there posing a serious threat to the public sir" Edited March 31, 2012 by storme37 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Essex Hunter Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 Is it professional?...........No Was anyone hurt?..........No Does it really matter?.....No Get over yourselves people!!! Two officers fired a total of eleven shots according to the number of empty shell casings found on the floor of the train afterwards. Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at close range, and died at the scene. An eyewitness later said that the eleven shots were fired over a thirty second period, at three second intervals. A separate witness reported hearing five shots, followed at an interval by several more shots. They never gave him a chance, so why give them a chance....kick them out they are ment to set an example and cost us £1000's to train and **** around like that. TEH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewj Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) i have two opinions personally i wouldnt loose any sleep over it . but a little bit of me says incompetent tw*tz they should know better and should at least try to set a good example Edited March 31, 2012 by lewj Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPARKIE Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 if its true what someone said on here that they had a serious incident in the same unit where someone died from a training excersize before the picture was taken they would of been briefed to not **** about with them....if they have done this after the indecent they have obviously not taken the warnings in and the force has done the right thing....I just cant believe some people would be so stupid as to mess about with guns and the stupidity of people on here trying to justify it. also the comments about it making you holier than holy for shooting stuff with a "POP GUN" you guys obviously dont have a firearm or you would respect them and realise they can turn something living inside out in an instant..... Please please please if you take this mentallity DON'T put your name down for my rifle shoot in may. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcf1 Posted March 31, 2012 Report Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) Got to wonder how the photo came to light, during an "unrelated raid on one of the officers homes". Sounds like someone was being naughty in other ways too.... I know 3 people from my younger years who have gone into police firearms - 2 in the MET. Two I would trust with guns, one I wouldn't give scissors and had a reputation as a raging nutjob at uni with a penchant for naughty activities and really hasn't changed a great deal. From my albeit limited experience and anecdotal info, police firearms training doesn't do enough to instill discipline, weed out the weirdos or actually develop proficiency under pressure. These guys were dicking around with firearms in a position of significant responsibility, and they got caught and rightly sacked. Doesn't surprise me, but its the nature of the training and screening that needs to be looked at IMO. Examples of poor practice are all over the place and it looks awful. 2006 - 2008: 46 public negligent discharges, 18 rounds fired in real threats. Says it all really. Edited March 31, 2012 by jcf1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.