49

Arming the Police

by Whaleoil on December 13, 2010

Senior Constable Bruce Mellor

After the vicious cowardly attack on Senior Constable Bruce Mellor, people are rightly thinking that our cops should carry guns as a matter or course not as an exception. The criminals, as we can see daily, are already armed, it is only the feeble of mind that can’t see that. It is actually now a health and safety issue that our police are properly armed.

There aren’t many good arguments for having an unarmed police force. One argument is that you end up losing officers who have to shoot scumbags who seek other career opportunites, and that is bad, losing the good officers. Or suicidal people who want to go out by “death by police” which is bad also, for the police officers that have to deal with it. Other than those two, there is no good reason for stopping police from carrying whatever weapon they need to ensure they go home safe at the end of their shift.

The problem is a small number of do-gooders whinge like crazy any time the police do anything, blaming society, the Treaty of Waitangi, a bad up bringing or some other reason for some moron needing to be filled with lead or given 50,000 volts.

The sensible approach is to challenge these whinging do-gooders, like Brian Rudman, to run for office in a nice seat like Papakura where they can put their views up against those of the current police minister, and see whether the population agrees with them. That should demonstrate how out of touch they are.

We need to arm our police and scale back the scrutiny of shooting incidents. The mandatory enquiry that occurs after a police shooting should stop wasting time and ask the single most important question “Why did you have rounds left in your magazine?”

Tagged: • • • •

Related posts

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Arming the Police — -- Topsy.com

  • grizz

    “The prob­lem is a small num­ber of do-gooders whinge like crazy any time the police do any­thing, blam­ing soci­ety, the Treaty of Wai­t­angi, a bad up bring­ing or some other rea­son for some moron need­ing to be filled with lead or given 50,000 volts.”

    Such people think of everyone but the victims or potential victims of crime. Police are there to protect law abiding citizens. Sadly prominant members of our community seem to forget that. If the Rudmans of this world were to stand in Papakura, he effectively will campaign on a basis that a vote for him is a vote for the criminals. Yes, that will make people sleep well at night.

  • grizz

    Whale, is your second argument against police taking up arms really worth worrying about? There are people around who will find this statement abhorrent, but in many such intances we should be thanking the police.

    • http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz Whaleoil

      Of course I’m not worrying about it, just saying what a liberal hand-wringer would say.

  • nasska

    Let’s see how this stacks up……… violent criminals armed – check…………police need to be able to protect themselves – check. There a few people missing. Could be the other four million or so of us who are prevented from protecting our families & ourselves because of draconian enforcement of laws of self defense.

    The police offer little protection to urban citizens & almost none to rural dwellers. If anyone values his/her own life sufficiently to defend it they can look forward to lifetime of penury after paying their legal bills.

    The system doesn’t need tinkered with……. it needs to be destroyed & rebuilt.

    • http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz Whaleoil

      Complete with general citizens having the right to keep and bear arms

  • http://pollywannacracka.blogspot.com/ pollywog

    If constable Bruce had a gun it still wouldn’t have stopped him getting bashed.

    and dude…you’re a criminal are you armed ?

    the answer isn’t arming everyone or putting more guns on the street legal or otherwise

    • grizz

      Pollywog, can I ask you this: If you wanted to hit Constable Bruce over the head with a Machete, would you have tried it if you knew he was armed with a firearm? Or even a taser for that matter.

      I want the police to feel they are adequately protected in order to protect me. Two things may have helped constable Bruce. The first is that they work in pairs. The second is that they are armed. Tasers at the very least.

      • http://pollywannacracka.blogspot.com/ pollywog

        for starters i wouldn’t do such a dumbass thing and if i was the kind to, it wouldn’t make much difference if constable Bruce was armed or not

        sounds like he turned his back on the scrotes and they sneaked up on him so he woulda had a hard enough time reaching for any sort of weapon before being pounced on, in which case, if he had a gun they prolly woulda stolen that as well.

        For me the worrying thing is that these kids thought it was the right thing to do in that circumstance and that they could get away with it ???

        jeez…there’s some dumbfuck kids out there not to mention some even dumber fuck parents !!!

    • http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz Whaleoil

      I suppose you think the answer is hugs and kisses for the crims.

  • jamegumb

    Roll on April so we can see the last of that useless Broad Howard, inflicted on us for 5 years by the commo Clarke gummint. The quika he gets home to mum and gets his fill of roadrunner videos the better. Bring on the Pete & Judy show and lets get some real policing underway – with a strategy similar to the Solomans approach being a real good start…

  • poliesarefilthlyscum

    the problem i have with arming the police is how useless they are with guns.i remember a couple of years ago the scene where a man was hold up in a house in auckland and a dog ran out.The cops including armed offenders shoot at it at least a dozen times and not won bullit got anywhere near the bloody dog and of course lets not forget the auckland motorway debacle.
    i just do not think our police are up to snuff to be trusted with guns.
    thru personal experience i just don’t trust them any more than our polies

    • Blondie

      Dude, you don’t even know the difference between the words “one” and “won”. I know they sound similiar, but they have quite distinct meanings. There’s no such word as “bullit”, and you should capitalise the letter “I” when referring to yourself.

      Once you’ve mastered Year 4 grammar, spelling and punctuation, you may be more able to convince us of your arguments against arming police. Until then…..

      • http://pollywannacracka.blogspot.com/ pollywog

        Stop, drop, roll, duck, run for cover !!!…it’s the grammar police and they’re gunning for us all

        PFFFFFFFTTTTT…

        • Blondie

          When some idiot doesn’t know the difference between the words “one” and “won”, thus demonstrably proving they’re thick as pig-shit – then how the hell can they expect anyone to respect their opinions?

          Bloody hell, I know primary school kids with a better grasp of written English.

  • Blondie

    God…. I feel so sorry for that poor guy. I can’t even bear to look at that photo.

    Yes, we should totally be arming the police. After all a fair proportion of the crims are armed, how fair is it asking an unarmed cop to go up against an armed P-freak?

    Maybe if the police were armed as a matter of course, they’d be more likely to turn up promptly when we need them. Maybe their families would sleep a little better at night. Maybe we’d be less likely to lose the good ones, and maybe we’d be more able to attract decent police without having to lower recruitment standards if good men weren’t afraid that joining the police force is a quick way to shorten one’s life expectancy?

    And hell, if a couple of crims get shot, is it really any loss to society? I’m sure some idiot will say their kids will miss them, but quite frankly, some kids would be better off with ANYONE besides their criminal parents. Just ask the Kahui twins.

  • mikeman

    I support arming the Police with one caveat.

    They need to qualify every 3 months and that qualification is in two parts, marksmanship at a range (10 rounds each at 5m, 10m, 25m with a 100%, 90%, 70% hat ratio inside the lines on a human target silhouette) and an assault course run through with no non-combatants shot.

    If they fail then they have 14 days to re-sit or be de-certified for weapons ratings, off the streets and 75% pay until re-certified.

    That will make sure that there is enough training to make them competent to handle and USE their weapons.

    • mikeman

      Also they need a real weapon and I am NOT talking a Glock in 9mm.

      Glock 22/23 (Full size and Compact models in .40″ S&W) would be the obvious choice.

    • http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz Whaleoil

      Comprehensive training and qualification should be mandatory.

  • http://zerorocketlaunchers.blogspot.com/ Mr. Infinity

    Arm them. Enough of this hippie shit. The crims are armed, the cops need to be too. Train them to shoot at legs, and use killing shots as a last resort, grit your teeth while the training wheels come off and we have a couple of accidents early on, and I don’t see a problem.

    And for the love of God would someone please gag Keith Locke.

    • hagues

      “Train them to shoot at legs, and use killing shots as a last resort”

      What? So we can have fuckheads like Graeme Burton running riot in prision committing more crimes with his taxpayer funded titanium leg? One one chest, one in the head.

  • spiker

    I’ve no idea about the sequence of events in this case but the practise of NZ cops to allow occupants of a car to get out seems like a dangerous thing to do. Occupants need to be instructed to stay in the vehicle with their hands in plain sight until they are allowed to go on their way or removed from the vehicle in a controlled manner & restrained.
    Officers need to be armed & along with arming as above a serious amount of training needs to be invested. Firearms handling by police that I have seen in person has left me less than impressed.

    • gaskranken

      That is exactly what I’ve been thinking since reading this story.

      Standard operating procedures with regard to approaching vehicles needs to be looked at and like most of you I’d be a whole lot happier if the occupants of the stopped vehicle show any signs of trouble the guy who is on our side can draw his weapon and deal with it. Be nice if his or her partner was keeping an eye on things as well.

      I expect to make it home in one piece every day because of the health and safety policy at my work place why shouldn’t our patrollers get the same right?

  • bobbydelorot

    I don’t think general arming ie guns on hips 24/7 is the answer. Unless of course you increase the training hugely, not only in firearms but general physical fitness, strength and defensive tactics, otherwise there is far too great a risk of cops particulary female or small or fat and weak males simply being overpowered and having said weapons taken off them. But then you train them up to that extent physically and your losing out in other areas, not to mention lacking the resources to do so.

    Tasers on hips 24/7 with cameras, guns in lockboxes in cars and armed response vehicles with highly trained officers being the first port of call.

  • symgardiner

    I guess the question is… In other police duristictions, in which the police are armed, do events like this not happen? And the answer is NO!
    I personally feel uncomfortable with people, weather they are police or anyone else, wandering around with guns. It might be different if I had been bought up around firearms but I wasn’t. I imagine this is not an uncommon feeling.
    I would prefer that police carried guns in their cars all the time and that if you saw a police officer with a gun, you knew something serious was about to go down and it would be better to get away from the scene ASAP. Tazers should be carried as standard.

    • mikeman

      If it is locked up in the boot then how does it help?

      The simple fact is that the criminals are currently armed with deadly weapons (Machete anyone?) and this is not a one off happenstance. How many police officers have to be hospitalised and/or murdered before the bleeding heart liberals wake up to the fact that hugs and kisses are not going to get the job done, there is no 100% fix for this but arming the Police will reduce the number of incidents and therefore make the job safer.

      Stop screwing around with this and give the Police the tools they need to stay as safe as possible.

      • symgardiner

        Most criminals aren’t armed. I think we are a bit prone to exaggeration. The issue remains… What will make police more effective and safer? I have yet to see any figures that show that arming police achieves this.
        Have the Tazers on the hip and decent guns (rifles) stored in cars for when they are needed (which is very rarely).

        • titanuranus

          Most violent offenders are armed and tazers are basically useless .
          Unfortunately times have changed and the NZ police force need to catch up.They can no longer afford to be complacent,you would never have a Australian or US cop turn their back on any person they have pulled over, the US police even cuff witnesses at times.
          Scumbags know they have the full weight of the legal system behind them,these two maggots will get their hand slapped with a wet bus ticket,the 18 yr old will be free to continue his rampage on the citizenry of NZ in a couple of years if he is unlucky enough to do jail time.

          BTW, wtf is a “duris­tic­tions”?
          English anyone? Spellchecker?

          • symgardiner

            Should have been jurisdictions. Typing on an iPad can be a bit messy and the spell checker doesn’t seem to function in WordPress.
            I agree violent criminals tend to be more likely to be armed. Not sure that the majority are. I suspect not but are happy to be shown otherwise.
            However I am confident that the majority of police work does NOT require a gun.
            I think you might have a different view of Tazers if you have been hit by one. They are remarkably effective.
            I agree that the justice system does not seem to be dealing to these guys very well. I would be quite happy with a 25% penalty increase for attacking a cop. Just as I would be quite happy with a 50% penalty increase for a cop who abuses their powers.

        • mikeman

          OK so how do the officers know when they need their guns?

          Do they call ahead and ask the nice crims if they have their weapons today?

          Get your head out of your ass!

          If they need the guns (and I think they do) then they need to be available in a split second not having to run back to a car after being confronted by armed offenders and spending 30-60 seconds opening a boot, then a lock box and only then having the tools to do their job.

          • symgardiner

            @Mikeman… It might be nice if you would debate rather than resorting to needless insults. It doesn’t real help the debate and really makes more of a comment about you.

            Answers to your questions…

            Police exercise professional judgement. For instance it would be inappropriate to visit a parent whose kid had just been shot while wearing a gun.

            No. Ringing ahead would not help.

            If they need guns they really need REAL guns, not toy guns like their current pistols. Let then take their assault rifles but only when they feel they need them.

          • mikeman

            @symgardiner

            First of all the “Needless Insult” was more in the nature of advice not insult :)

            You are advocating that the police do not carry handguns but have an assault rifle in the car is that what I am hearing?

            90% (Made up stat but it will be close) of the occasions that require firearms would be sudden events and at 15m or less range, neither is conductive to an Assault Rifle in the car being useful.

            With *good* handguns and proper training you have a rapid response system that can put 2-3 shots traveling at ~285M/S (Not a lot of over penetration) delivering ~400 ft lb of muzzle energy (Using JHP Ammo).

            Lets say they issue the standard Bushmaster M4A3 (XM15) Carbine commercial 5.56mm Ammo you get a ~895M/S shot delivering 1200 ft/lbs of muzzle energy, that will kill innocent people all over town as a center mass shot on most people will over penetrate and come directly out of the other side of someone and guess what happens then?

            There is a case for sector NCO’s to have carbines, even for designated marksmen to have one in the car but a .40 S&W handgun with a 4 1/2 inch barrel (Glock 22/23, S&W 1076 etc) firing JHP or Frangible ammo is the best first response to an armed suspect as long the the officer is well trained and has clear policy about what is and is not a shooting situation.

  • jakejakejake

    So many crooks in the police force, I don’t think they can be trusted to carried firearms. No wonder they get attacked so frequently when they behave like gang members themselves (don’t think it was the case in this incident though).

  • kevin

    Well, I guess he just assumed the 2 little thugs would respect his uniform/role and accept there was a problem. Wrong. The cop must have been a bit relaxed for them to take him down. End of his shift maybe, 6.20am.. Plenty more little tossers like them unfortunately. The mold is cast for these 2 young shits.
    I imagine we will get a hardening up of police style especially with road stops.

  • pita

    Discipline and consequences…not taught any more by parents or at schools with some transitory and trifling corporal punishment…better to shoot them as adults when they really fall off the rails!

  • ipfreely

    what do you think,will happen a group conferance, a lesson on maori tangi, the meaning of a beating as it relates to the treaty and honi key cuddling the perps with hone h saying the white??? motherfuckers oppress the poor hori and the plod deserved what he got,what DO you think

    • gaskranken

      That’s very cynical iP, but also very true, well said:)…

  • overthehill

    There’s certainly a problem here, and one that won’t go away.

    The challenge as I see it is not the arming per se – I think that’s going to happen regardless of what the public feel (we are talking about Nazional, after all). The bigger problem is that, with the 3 strikes legislation in play as well, violent crims now have no reason to back down – if the cop has a gun, it’ll just be a case of ‘go down in a blaze of glory’, as the crims now have nothing to lose.

    For non-violent crims, this may well be the catalyst for them to become violent, as they will need to be prepared for a potential gunfight (talking about bank jobs etc here) that wasn’t a consideration before.

    Of course, they’ll try to take some innocent bystanders out too.

    So we can expect to see a lot more innocent folks get shot, and some might even be shot by the crims. Cops have enough trouble keeping cars on the road, I don’t want to be in the area when they start blasting off rounds – like they did on the motorway at almost point-blank range and still missed the perp but hit a bystander.

  • titanuranus

    Pandoras box has already been opened,the crims believe they have the right to do whatever they like whenever they like,whilst some of you may like to bend over and take it up the arse from the scum because you are afraid to upset them,some of us would prefer the scum to go down in a screaming heap,fuck their rights what about the rights of the law-abiding public that get fucked over on a daily basis?

    Some of you bleeding heart morons need to take a page out of a book of a little old spanish lady( whilst I hesitate to quote a commie) the sentiment is apt,

    Better to die on one’s feet than to live on one’s knees.
    Make no mistake we are being held hostage by the criminals and their gutless enablers ,who seem to think they are just misguided,were`nt breast fed or mummy tied their shoelaces too tight.

  • bigkev

    the other thing that needs changing is the drama for the officer after they done the deed, rem the cop who shot the guy with the golf club the family were still fuking with him a couple of years later

  • cadwallader

    A fully trained/fully armed police force is not a matter for debate: It is a necessity!

  • symgardiner

    @Mikeman… My advocacy of rifles over handguns is based on what some cop friends have said. Essentially they say the Glock (hope that is spelt right) are a waste of time and they would prefer to use their rifles. The rifles are more accurate and therefore safer than handguns (although as we have seen, there are still risks for others around the situation).
    In most situations where firearms are needed, there will be some heads up.

    • http://www.cadlow.co.nz spanishbride

      I prefer rifles because I personally am more accurate with a rifle PLUS they have the benefit of a handy BUTT to hit the Crim on the head with if he gets too close.

      My Dad told me that when he had a bayonet on the end of his rifle the enemy was so busy watching the pointy end they never saw the butt coming!

  • mikeman

    @Sym

    If they are talking about the 9mm Glock and their current training levels then I have no argument. I have read of cases where someone was shot 10+ times with a 9mm Para handgun (Like the Glock) and still kept walking/shooting.

    Something like the .40 S&W firing 300-350MPS Jacketed Hollow Points can generate over twice the muzzle energy (Knockdown Power) of the 9mm Para and generate a effect called Hydrostatic Shock which will take anyone off of their feet.

    The police need that sort of weapon and training so that when they shoot at someone/thing 10-15M away they do not miss.

  • symgardiner

    @Mikeman… undoubtedly you are right. You seem to know your guns. Their comments were given what guns they have available, they would prefer to go with rifles.

    I agree with the training. Very important they don’t miss. Part of this should be to be able to assess when weapons will be useful and when they are not appropriate.

    As it happens, it seems the government has decided to do the guns in cars idea. I guess we wait and see how it pans out.

  • spiker

    Problem with relying solely on rifles is they are not appropriate for all situations. Over penetration of soft cover can be dangerous for bystanders or even people in the next street/block. Though if you are a black dog named Chopper you could be relatively safe. ;-)

  • nasska

    What’s wrong with a shotgun? Great stopping power at close/medium range & a reduced risk of serious collateral damage.

  • gaskranken

    How bout a grunty 12 volt battery in a back pack with a solar panel and a miniature version of today’s weapon of choice. Imagine if the cops were able to shoot a projectile at 8 times the speed of sound it would only take a couple of a couple of crims lifted off their feet for word to get around.

  • gaskranken

    Surely even Lockey and the greens would have to dig this solution, it’s soooo green after all:)