Are Armed Police Licenced?

[unapalomablanca]

Problem with a tranq dart is firstly your usual vet does not have access-There is only one for my county who's equipped but only as he's the vet cover for a attraction park that has some large african game.

 

Then its £400 a dart and who's going to pay that-excluding the vets call out. Farmers and cattle markets all deny liability. I've known farmers tell little white lies just to get a 'rampaging beast' shot rather than call out a vet or slaughterman.

 

Then you have to get within 30m of the beast to deliver.If they miss, the ground has to be excavated and disposed of as toxic waste for 1m around where the dart lands.

 

The vets last advice was that it could take twenty minutes for a dart to take effect-in the mean time the animal can react in differnt ways and remains out of control.

 

RSPCA are unable to assist.

Likewise local authority.

 

So it falls to a licenced slaughterman with a rifle or armed Police with a rifle.

 

hope that clarifies the use fo darts.

 

ps I'm not a slaughterman.

 

F.

£400 a dart. What are you saying? Why not stick a no. 4 in a 12 guage and just despatch the beast with a head shot at close range. Surely you could get within 30feet of it.

[Bleeh]

Please, everyone.

STOP READING A TABLOID NEWS PAPER AND USING IT AS A RELIABLE SOURCE OF ACCURATELY PRESENTED FACTS.

[HDAV]

I am more surprised that they are allowed to stand on ladder resting against the side of a van and sit on the roof rack with no guard rails or harnesses.......

 

As for missing the cow...............

 

 

I recon on THL at least 50 people will have claimed to have shot them between the eyes with gat guns from 150 yards and had them drop on the spot. At least 10 would have just walked up to it with a bowie knife and got up close and personal......

[Vipa]

I am more surprised that they are allowed to stand on ladder resting against the side of a van and sit on the roof rack with no guard rails or harnesses.......

 

As for missing the cow...............

 

 

I recon on THL at least 50 people will have claimed to have shot them between the eyes with gat guns from 150 yards and had them drop on the spot. At least 10 would have just walked up to it with a bowie knife and got up close and personal......

What a load of rubbish... took one at 300 yards with my slingshot last year!

[Dirty Harry]

I dealt with a loose cow some years back. Big beef animal running down an unlit road in the dark and next thing you know a member of the public smashed into it at 40mph. Cows head went through the windscreen and then the whole thing went up into the air and landed in the verge. Old couple went off to hospital in an ambulance coverd in glass and white cow hair! They were lucky not to be seriously injured. The cow was knocked out but got up and limped off to the farm with a bloody nose.

 

Harry

[Muddy Funker]

Next time am doing the pest controll down by the outdoor 25 meter range we have here I will take some pics of it for you......

You should see some of the holes in it 10ft + above where the targets are from misses...... and there isnt just a few theres loads ! and would suggest some have gone sailing over the top also ! its quite shocking really. My lamping partner Shropshire lad off here came with me to see it once and was also shocked at how much the misses were by. LOL

 

Please bear in mind that it is not only standing still and taking aimed shots that police practice.

 

Shooting with the weak hand, shooting in the dark, shooting while moving, shooting while moving with the weak hand, and a whole host of other practices.

 

Any of you here that have any experience with pistol shooting will know that fairly large misses are very easy when you're pushing out to 15 - 20 yards.

 

I would comment on the story itself but it's all complete drivel.

 

 

 

 

[Dirty Harry]

It would be benifical to shooters and police alike and hopefully improve relationships between both partys.

Next time am doing the pest controll down by the outdoor 25 meter range we have here I will take some pics of it for you......

You should see some of the holes in it 10ft + above where the targets are from misses...... and there isnt just a few theres loads ! and would suggest some have gone sailing over the top also ! its quite shocking really. My lamping partner Shropshire lad off here came with me to see it once and was also shocked at how much the misses were by. LOL

There are holes like that at my force range. Most were caused by people on assessments and usually failed. When I did mine there was a woman who for 3/25. This was at an outdoor range and from 7 meters some of the shots were at least 10ft off target. She failed.

[JonathanL]

there was a woman who for 3/25. This was at an outdoor range and from 7 meters some of the shots were at least 10ft off target. She failed.

I don't believe you.

 

J.

[Kes]

To add to the debate about police training, a number of years ago our local gunshop owner ran a deer culling course (practical) for the police as they were getting a huge drop -out rate from their firearms people who were actually required to fire their weapon at live targets.

It seemed that unless involved in shooting externally from the police force, ARO's had never shot at live targets and seen the effect of HV bullets on any living animal. Their reaction to the effects on living tissue caused them to drop out. Maybe some of these targets were cows - maybe some were not?

Edited March 29, 2013 by Kes

[Alycidon]

Some cattle especially the continental breeds can be a real handful at times. Belgian Blues are by and large pretty quiet though. The problem would be getting her into an area where she can be loaded into a trailer, cattle do not like treading on a tailgate.

 

As for the shooting, I expect the standard issue 9mm was used, maybe with rapid expanding bullets used by forces to stop pass throughs. Obviously nowhere near enough power unless a close range head shot and the bullet would have been totally unsuited. But a senior officer would have had to give the order to shoot. When push comes to shove you have to use whatever is to hand, most of us have been there at some point.

 

A

[Dirty Harry]

I don't believe you.

 

J.

Outdoor range with a massive sand bank and behind that a massive concrete curved wall with a concrete overhang to catch any strays. She hit the concrete wall above the level of the sand bank. This was with a glock.

Don't believe me....don't care. I saw it with my own eyes and found it hard to believe that someone could be so far out. I think the problem was reacting to the bang before the bang came.

And to clarify it was 7-10-15 and back to 7 meters. I could give date time location and about 15 witnesses but I'm sure you wouldent believe that either.

[scimitar]

I don't believe you.

 

J.

Dirty harry I believe you, seen similar in the forces. New recruits firing handguns for the first time, shooting high and wide from less than 10 mtrs.

[Zulu]

To add to the debate about police training, a number of years ago our local gunshop owner ran a deer culling course (practical) for the police as they were getting a huge drop -out rate from their firearms people who were actually required to fire their weapon at live targets.

It seemed that unless involved in shooting externally from the police force, ARO's had never shot at live targets and seen the effect of HV bullets on any living animal. Their reaction to the effects on living tissue caused them to drop out. Maybe some of these targets were cows - maybe some were not?

 

Just to clarify what do you mean by drop out , are you saying the firearms officers were handing their authorities in after experiencing shooting live animals and where did this information come from ?

[JonathanL]

Outdoor range with a massive sand bank and behind that a massive concrete curved wall with a concrete overhang to catch any strays. She hit the concrete wall above the level of the sand bank. This was with a glock.

Don't believe me....don't care. I saw it with my own eyes and found it hard to believe that someone could be so far out. I think the problem was reacting to the bang before the bang came.

And to clarify it was 7-10-15 and back to 7 meters. I could give date time location and about 15 witnesses but I'm sure you wouldent believe that either.

 

The reason I said I didn't believe it was that I find it utterly staggering, not to mention rather worrying, that any organisation could allow someone who is clearly a gross danger to others to play with firearms. Do they just hand out firearms to anyone who asks without any training or instruction what-so-ever? What is even more shocking, quite frankly, is that from your description this was a person doing an assessement. How does someone get to the point of an assessment whilst clearly being very dangerous?

 

Disbelief is not unreasonable with such fantastic stories, surely? I did think it was something you either made up or was information you obtained as rumour but if you saw it fair enough. I doubt your force would want the fact broadcasting though.

 

I have never seen any civilian at a club or any other organisation behave quite so dangerously. Me thinks your training needs looking at - urgently!

 

J.

Edited March 29, 2013 by JonathanL

[Dirty Harry]

Jonathan there is nothing for my force to hide or be ashamed of.

This was on a selection course to become a firearms officer. The person had never fired a gun of any type before and had an instructor standing next to them at all times. There was no pass or fail score but the shooting part is used more as a gauge to see how someone is with a gun. Some people shoot, close their eyes and jump out of their skin the first time and they are the ones you probably don't want!

This person failed the selection process and never got to use a police firearm again.

I passed and just so you know I shot 23/25 on my first time shooting a handgun and had no flyers.

[Greymaster]

23/25 Hence your handle, Dirty Harry?

Jonathan there is nothing for my force to hide or be ashamed of.
This was on a selection course to become a firearms officer. The person had never fired a gun of any type before and had an instructor standing next to them at all times. There was no pass or fail score but the shooting part is used more as a gauge to see how someone is with a gun. Some people shoot, close their eyes and jump out of their skin the first time and they are the ones you probably don't want!
This person failed the selection process and never got to use a police firearm again.
I passed and just so you know I shot 23/25 on my first time shooting a handgun and had no flyers.

[bobt]

A few mates in the police have told me, if you shoot game and deer they dont actually want them in the armed responce, as they are more likely to pull the trigger,

they want someone who only shoots at the final/last push.

 

I used to shoot with the police on a range, one week there was a few new holes in the shed roof, one had taken the safety off with his finger on the trigger,

[Dekers]

A few mates in the police have told me, if you shoot game and deer they dont actually want them in the armed responce, as they are more likely to pull the trigger,

they want someone who only shoots at the final/last push.

 

I used to shoot with the police on a range, one week there was a few new holes in the shed roof, one had taken the safety off with his finger on the trigger,

 

The Police Training College at Sulhampstead has a State of the Art indoor shooting range, they also have some very large grounds and lots of Deer and other wildlife, they look after their own "Pest" Control. At least 2 Firearms Instructors I have spoken to there personally are also Deer stalkers. In addition one site I control has two Armed Response officers who shoot it regularly.

 

As an aside, I know a Police dog handler and a regular PC who also shoot, not Armed response, I've never really thought about it but it seems I do know a few police shooters!

 

I don't know their "Policy", but I would suspect, as with so many things, this will change from Force to Force!

 

Anyway...as usual we are wondering from the topic!

[JonathanL]

A few mates in the police have told me, if you shoot game and deer they dont actually want them in the armed responce, as they are more likely to pull the trigger,

they want someone who only shoots at the final/last push.

 

I'm not sure that that is the reason. The people I know who are ex-police firearms officers, including instructors, are people who have been very critical indeed of recent police shootings which, in their view, were totally unjustified. These people are people have have been shooting for decades and long before they joined the police. The main example is that of the drunken solicitor who was shot in his flat in London a few years ago. Another where a guy was shot who had a cross-bow and the police who shot him knew he did.

 

J.

 

 

[Zulu]

A few mates in the police have told me, if you shoot game and deer they dont actually want them in the armed responce, as they are more likely to pull the trigger,

they want someone who only shoots at the final/last push.

 

I used to shoot with the police on a range, one week there was a few new holes in the shed roof, one had taken the safety off with his finger on the trigger,

What about all the ex forces ones who end up in armed response units then ? , if that is the that forces concern they wont have any ex military as AFO's as they may be more likely to pull the trigger ?

 

Must admit I have been to many ranges ( police/military/civilian ) over the years and if I looked could find holes outside of the target area .

Edited March 29, 2013 by Zulu

[Dekers]

I'm not sure that that is the reason. The people I know who are ex-police firearms officers, including instructors, are people who have been very critical indeed of recent police shootings which, in their view, were totally unjustified. These people are people have have been shooting for decades and long before they joined the police. The main example is that of the drunken solicitor who was shot in his flat in London a few years ago. Another where a guy was shot who had a cross-bow and the police who shot him knew he did.

 

J.

 

 

 

It's very easy to be critical in hindsight, and not having any information except a press article, I struggle to see any serving/ex/Instructor/Armed response is going to spout off criticism about the force not knowing ALL the facts, and if they did I would have no time for their opinion.

 

The police make mistakes, of course they do, but they have to pull the trigger just before the suspect kills someone rather than just after, or they are going to be shafted by the press and public alike.

 

Lets us be very clear here, I am not supporting this particular action, because I don't know what happened, but the police do have a more than tricky tightrope to walk when they bring out guns!

[JonathanL]

It's very easy to be critical in hindsight, and not having any information except a press article, I struggle to see any serving/ex/Instructor/Armed response is going to spout off criticism about the force not knowing ALL the facts, and if they did I would have no time for their opinion.

 

This is true but it wasn't simply based on a press article. These people followed the case quite closely, including the subsequent inquest. No one could work out why the guy was shot. The guy was holed up in his flat, drunk off his face. He had a shotgun with birdshot. I think he had taken a few shots out the window. He was contained and wasn't going anywhere. There were no public about as they had been evacuated. The police were behind ballistic shields which he couldn't penetrate with his shotgun. When he attempted to take a shot no ones life apeared to be in immediate danger as the police were adequately protected. They shot him.

 

Why not just wait until he sobered up or came to his senses? The guys I have spoken to have all said that their training was simply to wait out situations like this, even if it took days.

 

The police make mistakes, of course they do, but they have to pull the trigger just before the suspect kills someone rather than just after, or they are going to be shafted by the press and public alike.

 

He couldn't have killed anyone. I'll accept that some vital fact may have been missed but none of the evidence I've seen reported would suggest that he could have actually killed anyone.

 

Lets us be very clear here, I am not supporting this particular action, because I don't know what happened, but the police do have a more than tricky tightrope to walk when they bring out guns!

 

Very true. The point relevant to the discussion though is that people who are long time shooters and also ex-police firearms officers are saying that he shouldn't have been shot. Perhaps, if the police had a policy of encouraging shooters into their firearms squads then he may still be alive?

 

J.

[Dekers]

This is true but it wasn't simply based on a press article. These people followed the case quite closely, including the subsequent inquest. No one could work out why the guy was shot. The guy was holed up in his flat, drunk off his face. He had a shotgun with birdshot. I think he had taken a few shots out the window. He was contained and wasn't going anywhere. There were no public about as they had been evacuated. The police were behind ballistic shields which he couldn't penetrate with his shotgun. When he attempted to take a shot no ones life apeared to be in immediate danger as the police were adequately protected. They shot him.

 

Why not just wait until he sobered up or came to his senses? The guys I have spoken to have all said that their training was simply to wait out situations like this, even if it took days.

 

 

He couldn't have killed anyone. I'll accept that some vital fact may have been missed but none of the evidence I've seen reported would suggest that he could have actually killed anyone.

 

 

Very true. The point relevant to the discussion though is that people who are long time shooters and also ex-police firearms officers are saying that he shouldn't have been shot. Perhaps, if the police had a policy of encouraging shooters into their firearms squads then he may still be alive?

 

J.

 

I wasn't trying to take this even further off track, I was talking about this thread, and generally, not what your mates think or were told or read about another incident, which they call hearsay, and is inadmissible anyway!!

Edited March 29, 2013 by Dekers

[ordnance]

10 week initial course with 50% fail rate.

4 week advanced driving course.

1 week advanced first aid.

1 week tpac course.

4 week rifle course if selected.

You would wonder how they manage here with 2 weeks firearms training before being allowed to carry a firearm in public. And be trusted take it home with them. Even after all that training in the MET for example, the government and senior officers make them leave their firearms at the station at the end of the shift.

Edited March 29, 2013 by ordnance

[Fuddster]

probably because they're unlikely to be murdered off duty or face having their police station mortared?