Armed Police at Euston

[londiscape]

Just got back to EUS and popped up to the Britannia for a pint. Standing at the bottom of the stairs there's a policeman holding what appeared to be an automatic weapon (didn't look too closely as I didn't want to stare at him!) Anything going on, or is this something regular? I've never noticed CO19 at stations before, unless there was an alert.

 

[Vicpaul]

Always have them floating around at Victoria

 

[Bald Rick]

Regular. Often seen at all the major stations in London.

 

[W-on-Sea]

Seem similar (or the same) immediately outside Fenchurch Street on several occasions, over the last two to three years. Unfortunately in London, while not quite commonplace, this is no longer unusual.

 

[londiscape]

Excellent, thanks guys. Now I can enjoy my pint without wondering if something's gonna kick off. Wonder why I haven't seen them before at London terminals

On side note - regular announcement at EUS is 'please note that thieves and pickpockets operate in this station' - wonder if they should add 'and we have a couple of gentlemen from CO19 to provide a projectile-based deterrent should any be spotted'

 

[Nym]

If you want to know the armed police I've seen in London now carry either;

HK416 or MP5, both with scout ACOG style sighting scopes, usually with torch/laser also attached onto the rails.

Glock 17 or Glock 19, sometimes a Sig Sauer P227.

They're also armed with a taser and some form of chemical restraint.

I beleive the HK416 has replaced the role of the previous G36c, but I am seeing a lot wider spread use of the HK416 than I ever saw with the G36.

 

[the sniper]

BTP have their own firearms team who largely work in London, it may well have been them rather than CO19.

 

[IKBrunel]

I think this started in late 2011/early 2012 in the build up to the olympics.

Like the pointless silver stumps, this is all about presenting an image of London as a 'safe place' & nothing to do with finding a sensible solution to a known problem.

Unless anyone can explain how stumps and automatic weapons would achieve anything in the face of a suicide bomber carrying a rucsac.

Met police don't exactly have a very good record when it comes to use of firearms against suspected terrorists..
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If you want to know the armed police I've seen in London now carry either;

HK416 or MP5, both with scout ACOG style sighting scopes, usually with torch/laser also attached onto the rails.

Glock 17 or Glock 19, sometimes a Sig Sauer P227.

They're also armed with a taser and some form of chemical restraint.

I beleive the HK416 has replaced the role of the previous G36c, but I am seeing a lot wider spread use of the HK416 than I ever saw with the G36.

regardless if they're HK416,MP5,Glock 17,Glock 19,Sig Sauer P227,G36c
the end result is still a tragedy.

 

[bnm]

BTP Firearms Officers use the Glock 17 pistol and the LMT AR-15 CQB semi-automatic gas piston carbine.

 

[Nym]

regardless if they're HK416,MP5,Glock 17,Glock 19,Sig Sauer P227,G36c
the end result is still a tragedy.

Didn't make any comment on how appropriate armed police are in the capital or at rail stations, meerly catalouged what they carry...

 

[the sniper]

Unless anyone can explain how stumps and automatic weapons would achieve anything in the face of a suicide bomber carrying a rucsac.

Neither of them are there to do anything about that really, though that's fairly obvious. The stumps are there for car bomb attacks like Glasgow Airport had, the armed capability for a Mumbai style attack. The latter was widely regarded as the biggest threat a few years ago, maybe still is.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

...some form of chemical restraint.

They most definitely aren't. The last thing anyone needs is a load of coppers stabbing everyone with anaesthetics or sedatives.

 

[Rich McLean]

Most criminals will know that firearms teams can only open fire if life is threatened. It's a deterrent more than anything

 

[Nym]

They most definitely aren't. The last thing anyone needs is a load of coppers stabbing everyone with anaesthetics or sedatives.

"Pepper Spray" or "CS Spray" Luv... </YorkshireAccent>

 

[ralphchadkirk]

"Pepper Spray" or "CS Spray" Luv... </YorkshireAccent>

That's not chemical restraint. They are lachrymatory agents. Chemical restraint has a very particular and very precise definition, and is only carried out as an absolute last resort in restraining someone, in discussion between police officers and health professionals. It can only be carried out by a doctor. It is usually done with benzodiazepines, dissociative anaesthetics or antipsychotics.

 

[VauxhallandI]

They have been at Liverpool St in the last week

 

[Nym]

That's not chemical restraint. They are lachrymatory agents. Chemical restraint has a very particular and very precise definition, and is only carried out as an absolute last resort in restraining someone, in discussion between police officers and health professionals. It can only be carried out by a doctor. It is usually done with benzodiazepines, dissociative anaesthetics or antipsychotics.

Christ and I thought I was pedantic...

Fine; shal I rephrase that to be; "chemical agents used to reduce the threat posed"?

 

[CallySleeper]

Meanwhile, in Belfast...

 

[orpine]

Most criminals will know that firearms teams can only open fire if life is threatened. It's a deterrent more than anything

This guy wasn't threatening yet they still killed him in cold blood. I'd feel much safer if there weren't armed police around tbh.

Wikipedia has a nice page of people killed by the police - 8 in the last decade, at least two of whom were no threat at all (the other being Ian Tomlinson). The other 6 I don't know anything about, but may also not have been a threat. So a minimum of a 25% failure rate at killing people; that's far too high for my liking given I don't see what benefit they offer.

 

[221129]

This guy wasn't threatening yet they still killed him in cold blood. I'd feel much safer if there weren't armed police around tbh.

Wikipedia has a nice page of people killed by the police - 8 in the last decade, at least two of whom were no threat at all (the other being Ian Tomlinson). The other 6 I don't know anything about, but may also not have been a threat. So a minimum of a 25% failure rate at killing people; that's far too high for my liking given I don't see what benefit they offer.

May I politely suggest you don't know what you are talking about?

 

[Muzer]

May I politely suggest you don't know what you are talking about?

And would you care to explain what's wrong with his arguments?

 

[orpine]

May I politely suggest you don't know what you are talking about?

May I politely request that you expand on that? I've provided references, even if only to wikipedia which itself links to primary sources. You've provided a vague assertion that I'm somehow wrong without actually providing any facts or reasoning.

 

[Monty]

8 in ten years to me seems like relatively low number to me, Ian Tomlinson was not killed by a Armed Policeman so for the purpose of this argument his death is irrelevant. Jean Charles de Menezes's death was a tragic accident caused by exceptional circumstances, had religious fundamentalists decided not to blow up three tube stations and a bus only a few days previously coupled with the fact the officers were feed woefully incorrect intelligence there is a strong possibility that man would still be alive today.

Armed response units are a necessary component of modern policing, the only alternitive is an 18 year old squaddie who is taught to elminate combatants with extreme predudice. So who would you prefer to respond to an armed bank robbery? Or a hostage situation?

 

[1e10]

Do any other stations outside of London have firearms officers present on a regular basis?

 

[jon0844]

Changing back to the original post.. I remember back in 2003 as Tony Blair was trying to scare us all into accepting the Iraq invasion, and travelling to New York only to see armed police and tanks on the approach to Heathrow Airport - plus two armed police officers at Hatfield station a few days before that, a station definitely high up on the list of any terrorist target*.

Of course, I remember seeing armed police on occasion at airports and train stations before and after, but get the feeling that it's not a lot more random and routine than a deliberate attempt to put members of the public on edge more than any would-be terrorist or criminal.

* I presume they were hopping from station to station to make sure they had maximum effect.

 

[bb21]

So a minimum of a 25% failure rate at killing people; that's far too high for my liking given I don't see what benefit they offer.

Statistics used in this manner is meaningless. It's far too small a sample and the results can too easily be influenced by random factors. Had only one of those two people not been killed, you would see your percentage measure drop by 12 points straight away.

Two too many I agree however.

 

[ex-railwayman]

Of course, I remember seeing armed police on occasion at airports and train stations before and after, but get the feeling that it's not a lot more random and routine than a deliberate attempt to put members of the public on edge more than any would-be terrorist or criminal.

They've had armed police at British airports since the 1940's, in fact, after the Policing of Airports Act 1974, it was quite commonplace to see armed officers walking about at the London termini of Heathrow and Gatwick, as well as the other major BAA-run airports, it's a deterent really, but, nice to know they are available at a moment's notice, I just totally ignore 'em, standing around posing with their weapons as if they own the place.....LOL

 

[jon0844]

I certainly remember seeing them at Gatwick when I was young, so obviously they've always existed at airports.

But, I think we all know that Mr Blair decided to use the police and army strategically to put us in fear to justify going in to Iraq.

Fortunately, while we still have armed police doing the odd patrol and know there are many more in vehicles ready to respond in a heartbeat, we no longer have them standing over the runway underpass at Heathrow, or standing at suburban railway platforms trying to intimidate.

Of course, if they were to stand at Hatfield and do some revenue protection work then I'd be all for it. Might just stop some of the people jumping over the wall..!

 

[Monty]

But, I think we all know that Mr Blair decided to use the police and army strategically to put us in fear to justify going in to Iraq.

The deployment of FV107s CVR(T)s (Scimitar light tanks to the Sun and Daily Mirror readers) had nothing to do with intimidating the public in to an invasion of Iraq. It was done by a government that needed to be seen to be doing something in the wake of the Septemeber 11th attacks, nearly 2 years before we set foot on Iraqi soil.

The irony is the Scimitar would have been next to useless in the event of an actual attack as it's 30mm cannon would rip through walls and cars like paper making the risk of collateral damage unacceptably high. That's if they even had ammunition for the weapons in the first place. I've see. Armed Police at airports for as long as I can remember and that was before 9/11.

 

[SETCommuter]

Do any other stations outside of London have firearms officers present on a regular basis?

Don't know about regularly but I have seen them on the Eurostar platform at Ashford International before now.