More armed police - do you feel safer ?

Someone mentioned truncheons. A friend I fish with was a beat cop and his finest hour was chasing a criminal and failing to catch up, threw his truncheon and scored a perfect hit, flooring the villan from 20 yards.

I've not been to London is years but I think I would feel safer with armed officer on the streets I lived in Germany for several year and all the police wore sidearms .Hopefully it will make trouble makers think twice

I noticed an odd wording to a statement earlier today. The police spokesman said that they would not be arming everyone only 10% of their workforce.

Workforce, not officers. I'm sure that was not a slip of the tongue.
Their workforce would include all the civilian staff, cleaners, mechanics, ete etc. So that could in fact be a significant percentage of the officers on the street.

Would like to point out the sad situation we watched on our screens 2years ago when Lee Rigby was so cruelly killed. The police were there fairly quick I believe and that is why we are in this situation. This could happen again we know a young military man was out jogging and nearly kidnapped. So unfortunately we are at war with Isis and we need the police on our streets, I for one am pleased to see them. I have a daughter who works in London. It can b very stressful for my husband and i we do worry but won't let her know that.

I've lived in 2 countries where the police are armed. Didn't think anything of it.
We were alarmed one day when we set the burglar alarm off and the next thing I knew they were in the house with automatics at the ready.

Who does the armed police officer shoot after a suicide bomber does their worst? I think, sadly, that guns are mostly only an illusion of safety.

I think it's very sad. Policing by consent and unarmed police made us a civilised society

if a terrorist attack were to be launched, in London or elsewhere, I would want the police to be able to bring down an attacker as speedily as possible.

But they could only do that if they happened to be where the terrorist was attacking. There's no guarantee that they would be. If they had had prior intelligence of a planned attack they would have time to deploy the specialist armed police thay already have. Don't see any reason why all police need to be armed 'just in case'.

It would be good to hear the opinions of Gnetters who live in countries where all police are armed, though.

Extra armed police will definitely make me feel safer in London. Bring it on!

@Nonnie Where has London suddenly got all these extra police from?

I don't think they've recruited extra police, just put more of them through firearms training.

IMO We should ALL be alert to terrorism wherever we live in today's world, and not rely on someone else to do it for us, whether they be police, armed forces or neighbourhood watch.

Please read, I wasn't referring to London over any other city in my paragraph about the IRA. I was talking about overall intelligence in response to Rosina's comment.

Warrington.

I wonder if the 'protection' for London has anything to do with tourism

Agree with you, Nonnie, about the IRA. Part of central Manchester was destroyed.

However, if a terrorist attack were to be launched, in London or elsewhere, I would want the police to be able to bring down an attacker as speedily as possible. And I'm afraid a truncheon wouldn't do it.

Lillie the IRA didn't just attack in London, what about the Birmingham pub bombings? If I were a terrorist I would only be looking for one target so I don't think the number in any city is particularly relevant. They will be just looking for one where they can do the amount of harm they want.

I too think it makes people both secure and frightened. When there is a security alert, and far more armed police around, then it is really frightening, the police/army are there for a reason, and doing a good job.

I live in London, and having armed police makes me feel less safe rather than more.

I'm not keen on the gradual Americanisation of Britain

You're right, Rosina, our intelligence is second to none, but I think it goes back even further than 7/7 to days of the IRA.

The reason London needs to be more heavily protected than other UK towns is not only because it has more potential locations for attacks, (tube, airports, theatres, restaurants etc.), but because the city has seen far more people from London than any other town being radicalised and heading for Syria. They usually return to the places they know to commit these atrocities.

So London is "safe" and the rest of us taxpayers......

It would also be fair to say that our excellent and cohesive anti terror organisations have saved us all from much evil over the past years. I heard last week that our success is due to the fact that MI5, MI6, GCHQ, the Government and Police work together; this has been policy since 7/7. Evidently in France (and PLEASE do not take this as a criticism - it isn't) the agencies are not quite so connected, although the opinion is that they will now have to be, as we have had to become. The chilling thought that I am sure we all have is that our protectors have to be lucky/informed constantly - a terrorist has to be lucky only once.

No. Doesn't make me feel safer at all. They're not going to discourage terrorists in search of martyrdom and why else would they be needed? Arguably they just might stop a potential terrorist before they do any harm but the the likelihood of them being in the right place at the right time is negligible. If they have a tip off they can already deploy specialist armed officers so what is the point of routinely armed patrols?

The American trigger happy police are an awful example of shoot first ask questions later but I suppose it would also be wise to look at countries closer to home, where police are routinely armed, for incidences of 'accidental' shootings before claiming that carrying arms would escalate such incidents.

Anniebach, no an armed terrorist is certainly not an innocent person. I haven't said that ...quite the reverse.

I agree with Angela, why only London. Anyone else remember the riots about 5 years ago? They started in London and then announced that police were being brought in from the rest of the country. No surprise then that riots happened in all the places those police were from.

Where has London suddenly got all these extra police from?

When making your home secure it is suggested you think like a burglar so surely we should now be thinking like a terrorist. If you want to stop tourism, damage London, if you want to frighten everyone you might think differently!

I'm uneasy about anyone needing arms - when I was young, I was told that most European policemen were armed (don't know if that was true or just propaganda), but I do feel that if you allow anyone to carry weapons, the "bad men" will get bigger and more powerful ones. When I started teaching in a South London Girls' Comprehensive in the early 70s, there was a staffroom concern that some 14-year-old girls were bringing in knives. Bravado or security?

I haven't been to London in years so if the queen is going to invite me to a garden party, she can come to the Midlands because I'm not going their