American police can you give a good case for uk police to carry guns routinely?

it seems that more and more guns are being used against police and public but i get the feeling policemen vote against carrying guns in britain as it would be seen as ';not the decent thing to do'; even though it seems illeagal guns are here to stay.American police can you give a good case for uk police to carry guns routinely?
Police in UK being unarmed has not prevented the criminal element from obtaining and using guns. It is my understanding that Armed Response Units are available in many parts of the country, but their response could be too late.





While the US may have higher gun related crime than the UK, this is an unfair comparison. The US is considerably larger and with a higher population. Population and size are only two factors that contribute to our crime trends.





If arming police in the UK is not the decent thing to do, consider other countries of Europe. Switzerland, for example, has armed police. That country still has a relatively low violent crime rate. Switzerland also has a significantly high rate of gun ownership nationwide, as marksmanship is considered a national past time. So, the presence of guns does not necessarily correlate with high crime.American police can you give a good case for uk police to carry guns routinely?
As a Police Officer I can give many examples of Officers who have been caught up in something when single crewed and their own asp baton has been used against them. They came away with bad bruises, maybe a broken bone at worst. Had those officers been carrying guns what would have happened?





Guns are not common place enough to warrant Police carrying them. Personally I think having such a fatal tool on your belt can only be a bad thing. Taser is just as effective at debilitating people and has far less chance of killing someone. The firearms units can provide sufficient cover.
The police here in the UK are correct in not wanting to be routinely armed and the public agrees with them. Arming our officers would merely reduce us to the lunatic level of the American mentality on guns and grossly increase the number of crims willing to go out 'tooled up'. American police are a law unto themselves and could not cope or even police effectively without their armoury.
CT makes a good point, If the bad guys have them, then the good guys need them. Luckily for us the bad guys don't have them. No one except a very small minority has them and they are more than matched by elite firearms teams.





Guns may stay in America, but I can send my kids to school safe in the knowledge its extremely unlikely that some fruit loop is going to storm in and shoot them. I can engage in friendly banter with a colleague knowing that if I go a bit too far the worst that can happen is a slap.








You can keep the right to bear arms, I'll keep my casual attitude to walking down the street without worrying about the mental health of my fellow citizens.
I am not an officer but I live and work at various times in both the UK and the US. And am a citizen of both as I grew up in both.





Now I understand the UK stance in regard to civility and decency. One just respects authority and there could be huge consequences. Society has changed and it is not say 1945 anymore. A baton and waiting for someone else to show up with a weapon is not going to cut it.





I like the US approach with all officers being armed. Every officer has the capability to protect others and themselves. There is also the implied threat.





They US police do not just go around shooting people. But what if a UK officer shows up for a domestic issue and the crazed husband has a gun or a knife to the wife's throat?





But major things come into play with the implied threat thing. Say there is a call that someone is robbing a bank or randomly shooting people. The closest unit that might be right around the corner can show and respond immediatly. Time is of the essence.





I actually saw a bank robbery (armed) in a village in England. The police that were around could do nothing expect watch them get on motorcycles and leave. They were long gone before someone showed with a weapon.
I don't follow your argument. There are a lot more shootings in gun crazy America than there are here. If the British police were routinely armed wouldn't that cause even more idiots to carry them in so called 'self-defence'? I'm a nurse and have tended to people with gun-shot wounds in Birmingham's 'wild-west'.
Isn't protecting and serving a decent act? Why should only the criminals have ammunition? How do your police protect you if they don't have the power to do so? Guns are definitely here to stay and if the bad guys have 'em the good guys need 'em.
I thought UK police did carry revolvers now in the larger cities. Maybe not. Anyway, the police are good for after the crime. But I keep a pistol at home for the hopefully-never-will-happen-to-me intrusion. I live way out in the sticks.
In Oakland, CA, an unarmed man was shot in the back by a police officer at a train station. He died and left behind a son. Police can be overzealous. I don't trust all of them.
I don't think police should carry guns here, they don't seem competent enough. Just think back to that innocent young man shot down repeatedly when boarding the tube.