More armed police on London streets

[Udayana]

As far as I recall the case, the police weren't initially after him for the visa irregularity. It was as a case of mistaken identity, but when he fled and headed into the underground, they believed that he was a suicide bomber about to cause a massacre.

Remember that it was only a few days after the 7/7 bombings.

You could just look up Roses's link. He did not flee and was unaware that he was being followed. We can be pretty sure that police will try and cover up these kinds of erroneous actions and deaths, preferably erasing them from memory and recorded history. There have been many examples over the years.

I read the other day how the first Nazi bombing of London was due to a military bombing raid that had mistakenly gone off course. Churchill responded by ordering the bombing of civilian targets in Berlin - to which Hitler responded by declaring "total war" - with all civilian targets seen as valid, and starting the Blitz.

[Brownie]

Well I never.   There was something very fishy about that shooting though.

[Udayana]

It wasn't "fishy" though, it was a series of mistakes by the police who shot dead an ordinary person on his way to work by train with no warning when they could have stopped and searched or arrested him earlier without any danger.

[Hope]

I take on board everything you said Rose and agree, I'd hate to see a Bobby on the beat carrying a gun, but we won't notice the armed police unless something very serious happens wherever we are, in which case we'd probably be glad of them.

Whilst I agree with both Rose and brownie, it's worth remembering that London especially can have specialist armed police highly visible quite often - and here I disagree with Brownie.  We WILL see them simply because that is what the powers that be feel is one of several ways to dissuade possible terrorists.  In fact, earlier this year I travelled from Cardiff to Ipswich and both Paddington and Liverpool Street stations had highly visible armed police patrolling the concourses.  Never did work quite why - perhaps it was one of the many occasions when intelligence indicates a possible threat to London.

[jeremyp]

We WILL see them simply because that is what the powers that be feel is one of several ways to dissuade possible terrorists.  In fact, earlier this year I travelled from Cardiff to Ipswich and both Paddington and Liverpool Street stations had highly visible armed police patrolling the concourses.  Never did work quite why - perhaps it was one of the many occasions when intelligence indicates a possible threat to London.

It's just a show of force. Terrorist attacks really aren't common enough to justify flooding the streets with armed police, but the politicians have to be seen to be doing something.

[Hope]

I fear it is the slippery slope to arming all police!

I very much doubt it; otherwise, we would already have reached that point as we have had specialist armed police for several decades now - the Metropolitan unit having been formed in 1966 - but divisional police stations wwere first issued with firearms as long ago as the late 19th century.

[Hope]

It's just a show of force. Terrorist attacks really aren't common enough to justify flooding the streets with armed police, but the politicians have to be seen to be doing something.

One police chief has suggested that some 50 potential terrorist attacks have been prevented since 7/7, whilst the Telegraph (16th Nov 2015) suggested that 7 such attacks had been foiled in the preceeding 12 months.  They may not be common - but to what extent is that the result of intelligence-led raids and proactive action?

[Brownie]

It wasn't "fishy" though, it was a series of mistakes by the police who shot dead an ordinary person on his way to work by train with no warning when they could have stopped and searched or arrested him earlier without any danger.

What was 'fishy' about it was the damage limitation afterwards.
Hope, I haven't been to big mainline stations in central London - when I did it was nearly always Charing X, sometimes Waterloo East or London Bridge or, very occasionally, Victoria - for years so haven't have seen the armed police presence.  I daresay they would be at Victoria which is a big station.

[jeremyp]

One police chief has suggested that some 50 potential terrorist attacks have been prevented since 7/7

And I bet not one of those 50 was prevented by armed police patrolling the streets.

whilst the Telegraph (16th Nov 2015) suggested that 7 such attacks had been foiled in the preceeding 12 months.  They may not be common - but to what extent is that the result of intelligence-led raids and proactive action?

I'd guess it's all the result of intelligence led raids and proactive action.

All these terrorist attacks have been stopped in spite of not having the increased armed police being proposed.

[Jack Knave]

The real point here is that we are less safe on the streets because of that full blown wanker Blair. Because of his insane hubris the person on the street is now under threat from terrorists and is having his life style and liberties curtailed. And who do our Western leaders blame...?

[jakswan]

I'd be concerned about arming all police and admit I have never seen an armed police officer, except on TV.  However we've always had them, a highly skilled specialist force.  I believe CID occasionally use firearms, they are trained to use them, in fact all police are trained but not to the degree of the specialist officers.

See them fairly regular travelling through London, the other week I saw two of them carrying what looked like SA80s assault rifles.

[L.A.]

You could just look up Roses's link. He did not flee and was unaware that he was being followed. We can be pretty sure that police will try and cover up these kinds of erroneous actions and deaths, preferably erasing them from memory and recorded history. There have been many examples over the years.

Quite a lot of the facts are still disputed, but the police believed that he was about to commit mass murder. They were mistaken and one man died, had they failed to identify and neutralise and actual terrorist a great many people would have died. I'm sure we all hope the police and other security services learn from their mistakes, but there are no totally safe options - in today's climate of terror it can be more dangerous not to kill a suspect than kill them.

I read the other day how the first Nazi bombing of London was due to a military bombing raid that had mistakenly gone off course. Churchill responded by ordering the bombing of civilian targets in Berlin - to which Hitler responded by declaring "total war" - with all civilian targets seen as valid, and starting the Blitz.

I believe that is true, and many believe that that 'mistake' allowed Britain to win the war. This was the Battle of Britain and the Nazis were on the verge of destroying our air defences but the shift to bombing cities took the pressure off the RAF and allow them to gain the upper hand.

[Jack Knave]

Quite a lot of the facts are still disputed, but the police believed that he was about to commit mass murder. They were mistaken and one man died, had they failed to identify and neutralise and actual terrorist a great many people would have died. I'm sure we all hope the police and other security services learn from their mistakes, but there are no totally safe options - in today's climate of terror it can be more dangerous not to kill a suspect than kill them.

One of the main issues in that and much of our security services is the lack of man power. Too much reliance is being made on hi-tech methods that just can't replace the human judgement and 'feel' on long term surveillance projects - computers don't join the dots the way a human team can.

[L.A.]

One of the main issues in that and much of our security services is the lack of man power. Too much reliance is being made on hi-tech methods that just can't replace the human judgement and 'feel' on long term surveillance projects - computers don't join the dots the way a human team can.

It's a fast moving situation Jack, no one has all the answers and mistakes will be made, but you can't vilify the people who are trying to protect us because they have made a mistake - there are a hell of a lot of mistakes that they haven't been made and people are alive today because of that.

[Brownie]

The real point here is that we are less safe on the streets because of that full blown wanker Blair. Because of his insane hubris the person on the street is now under threat from terrorists and is having his life style and liberties curtailed. And who do our Western leaders blame...?

So you think it is a consequence of the UK fighting in Iraq?

[Nearly Sane]

One of the main issues in that and much of our security services is the lack of man power. Too much reliance is being made on hi-tech methods that just can't replace the human judgement and 'feel' on long term surveillance projects - computers don't join the dots the way a human team can.

Evidence?

[L.A.]

Evidence?

Hi NS,

it seems obvious to me that with hindsight, you can always make these criticisms - but if you could accurately make those kind of judgements at the time, you would be winning the lottery every week.

[Hope]

And I bet not one of those 50 was prevented by armed police patrolling the streets. ...

All these terrorist attacks have been stopped in spite of not having the increased armed police being proposed.

Evidence?

[Nearly Sane]

Hi NS,

it seems obvious to me that with hindsight, you can always make these criticisms - but if you could accurately make those kind of judgements at the time, you would be winning the lottery every week.

Don't see the relevance to me asking a poster for evidence that there is unique about human judgement non replicable by computers

[Nearly Sane]

Evidence?

We didn't have these police and they were stopped.

[Hope]

The real point here is that we are less safe on the streets because of that full blown wanker Blair. Because of his insane hubris the person on the street is now under threat from terrorists and is having his life style and liberties curtailed. And who do our Western leaders blame...?

Sorry to disappoint you, JK, but there had been terrorist plots against London and other places, both inside and outside of the UK, long before Blair came on the scene.  Yes, his taking us into the 2nd Gulf War gave terrorists more of a reason to attack us, but he wasn't the cause.

[Hope]

We didn't have these police and they were stopped.

We've had armed units for decades, NS, and I can remember seeing them on the streets of London before I went to Nepal in 1992.

[Nearly Sane]

We've had armed units for decades, NS, and I can remember seeing them on the streets of London before I went to Nepal in 1992.

which wasn’t what was said. We didn't have this extra number and the 'attacks' were stopped.

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry to disappoint you, JK, but there had been terrorist plots against London and other places, both inside and outside of the UK, long before Blair came on the scene.  Yes, his taking us into the 2nd Gulf War gave terrorists more of a reason to attack us, but he wasn't the cause.

So there are a group of people called terrorists looking for reasons? They all live in a terrorist submarine?

[Hope]

which wasn’t what was said. We didn't have this extra number and the 'attacks' were stopped.

I think you will find that the numbers of such folk have been being cut over the last 5 to 10 years.  Remember that specialist armed police are ordinary police who have had the additional training that allows them to carry arms.  When they're not carrying arms, they are carrying out other police roles.  Whether ths latest 'mobilisation' will return us to the numbers we used to have, or - perhaps - more than we used to have, I'm not sure.