More armed police - do you feel safer ?

Yes well said lam64 we hear about the dishonest police but the majority are prepared to protect the public. It's a thankless and dangerous task currently.

Its better to shoot 10 innocent people than to let 1 guilty person go free."

I'm sticking with my original post, the reason it stuck with me was the play on words and I thought it was unusual to have a thinking tyrant.

Mark Duggan mentioned because just one person shot for the wrong reason by police caused riots, not just in London but across the country. That was five years ago, before there were armed police on the streets.

Gononsuch, that would have the whole country rioting.

Awful attack, but I think we have to agree the police can't be everywhere.

Mark Duggan. Jean Charles de Menzez. The poor man who was shot dead because the police thought he was carrying a gun - it was a table leg, and more victims too.

We cannot and should not forget the killing of Ian Tomlinson, the police officer who killed him had known problems with controlling his moods, red rages was the explanation from the Met when they dismissed him first time around.

Before dismissing the mention of Mark Duggan, perhaps you should read the link, Iam, and look particularly at the people who have produced the film The Hard Stop.
It's worth thinking about what the thought of extra armed police will do to the disaffected young in places like Tottenham.

I'd rather not think about what use terrorists could make of such riots in London.

I agree durhamjen

It was said by Stalin or Hitler in the '30 so it would have been quite acceptable then.

Anniebach

Again you're right and if you've got a way to keep me and mine safe then don't keep it to yourself.

So you shoot the whole population and then you are bound to have killed the guilty ones. Is that what he, whoever he was, meant?
I do not think so.

The police in Northern Ireland have always been armed. To us it's no big deal.

Gononsuch, there is no way everyone can be kept safe. I await your answer to my question to you, are you content to have your loved ones or yourself among the innocent nine you support killing ?

I note that the perpetrator of last night's stabbings was captured by being tasered. Seems to me to be a perfectly adequate method of 'control', far less hazardous for innocent bystanders and unable to ccause death or serious injury if misused.

While it looks as though we could be protected no one knows where an attack will take place, they all appeared last night AFTER the woman had been killed so although they may look like a deterrent it's only show

I to think it's all for show, it will not deter , quite possible more innocent people will be shot and there must now be even more fear among ethnic communities

I feel the right decision has been made to have armed Police in London. A truncheon and taser is effective in some situations but if there is a incident where people are carrying guns and shooting innocent people as in France then to save life there people need to be stopped quickly in order to save life.

The new armed police, have reduced the ranks of the ordinary police, so we are not safer. You cannot treat the police rudely, as Teresa May did, reduce resources and then give a few hundred of them new uniforms and guns and expect the public to feel safer.

Far too many cost cutting measures, NHS, fire services etc, we cannot cut costs and be safer, no matter how many guns we hand out.

Decent public services cost money.

I think it's unlikely the man would have been shot if he was subdued by a taser.

I have more trust in the police than in gangsters. That's probably based on experience of working with both those groups.

durhamjen There have been armed police on the streets of London for a lot longer than five years

It is indeed a sad state of affairs when more and more of our police are carrying guns. But needs must, and I for one, feel safer because of it.

Anniebach stop asking silly questions you know what the answer is.

Maybe we should sort out or own protection, i.e change the gun laws.

1World has had a solution and it known as integration, no more ghettos.

Gononsuch, if I knew the answer I wouldn't have asked the Question . So you mean let nine innocent people be killed but not anyone you care for

Change the gun laws? Like America?

So killing nine innocent people is fine so long as none of them are related to to or cared about by you Gononsuch?!!! Whatever sort of weird logic is that? ab's question was perfectly valid, and deserved a civil answer. Why on earth would any civilised country want to emulate Hitler or Stalin? Why bring these two monsters, both of whom have been dead for over sixty years into a conversation about modern day terrorism? Change the gun laws to what? no more ghettos? How do you propose we do that overnight? wave a magic wand? FGS, you're the only one on here making completely idiotic statements which don't even warrant an answer.

www.pulsetoday.co.uk/home/finance-and-practice-life-news/gps-should-refuse-all-firearms-licence-requests-says-bma-in-u-turn/20032395.article

I'd rather see the extra resources being put into better detective work. We're told that they constantly stop incidents from happening here. Rather than the Robocops, we need more cops infiltrating violent terror cells - not Greenpeace ones.
.

Glad I live in Aberdeen and will probably be dead before policemen carry guns dressed in full riot gear here.