Extra Armed Officers to Tackle Terror

The Metropolitan police recently announced that the number of armed officers in London will be doubled. Before I carry on, it has to be said that we, as a country, should take pride in that the majority of police officers are not armed and are able to tackle crime without violence or harming any one. But, to tackle extremist threats, I whole heartedly believe that this is the right thing to do.

Scotland Yard revealed that there would be an extra 600 armed police in London, so that if an attack similar to Paris in November was to happen the force could effectively and quickly respond. After 130 innocent lives were taken away in the attacks on the French capital it seems an incredibly important measure to take to ensure the safety of citizens in London.

To introduce this, it will cost around £25 million, but will be made available through the existing Metropolitan police budget of £3.2 billion.

But, I feel that increasing armed offices should not be restricted to just in London. The threat of terrorism is being faced across many large cities in the UK and extra support and protection should be made available in those areas as well.

With the threat of violence at a high, it should be paramount that measures are taken to protect us citizens of the UK. And yes, through arming some of our police officers is one way to do this.

93% of the Met Police will still remain unarmed.

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Extra Armed Officers to Tackle Terror

  1. Forget arming more police.
    If you want to reduce the threat, look at who IS THE THREAT and deport them, their families, and their families family.

    Plus any idiot(s) who doesn’t like that idea.
    And yes that would also include the ambulance chasing human rights solicitors and the totally misguided (hug a terrorist as they are victims too) fools!

    Terrorists, jihardists, bad guys, or whatever you call them, cannot survive without at least tacit approval and covert funding from their ethnic or religious group. Remove those groups, and their family support structure and the numbers will shift in favour of the existing security forces..

    It may not be politically correct (and I’m not) but tactically it’s a viable (and cost effective) option.

    Like

    • Can’t say i agree with you, but understand your point of view.
      The problem is we don’t know who the ‘bad guys’ are in our society, and it would be wholly unfair to deport anyone without any reason apart from they might be a bad guy. Also, it would be almost impossible to implement- the logistics of uprooting people from our country would be extremely difficult and would cost a LOT.
      I also think by alienating the ethnic and religious groups would create even more tension and is likely to put the security of our cities at even greater risk…

      Liked by 1 person

      • In a nutshell you’ve stated the reason why we have a problem. Can’t do that as we’ll be “Alienating the ethnic and religious groups”.

        There are very few that cause harm, they are known about, their trouble rouser’s and followers identities are known, yet the political will flounders the whole time because “we the nation” have to be seen as “doing the right thing”.

        All to suit a political correctness and multicultural ideal the bad guys don’t give a toss about and see as weakness.

        Thus when the next 7/7 attack occurs, or a woman is raped by one of that ethnic group, the sad will come out saying the rest cannot carry the sins of the bad even though the perpetrators will cite their faith as the reason for doing whatever heinous event they carried out.

        As for cost? OK lets talk cost!
        Who will pay for the fallen?
        Who will pay the price for their loss?

        As always it won’t be the killers or the faith that urged them on. Let alone the government.

        Ergo, they win, we lose.
        “Doing the right thing”

        Like

      • If we had genuine evidence that suggested specific groups are a threat then, i agree there would be no reason to not deport them. But, there is a very fine line which could determine whether or not they posed a threat.

        Additionally, its not just people of minority ethnic that carry out these crimes. So, would it really be fair to punish ethnic groups and also not relatively punish white british nationals who are convicted rapists- for example.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s