TBH, I don’t know what their marksmanship is like, I don’t know what their training is like or when they last had any, I don’t know if they’ve ever had to use a weapon ‘in anger’ before…All of which has a bearing on any incident that they may be involved in.
An ARV AFO has their “marksmanship” tested at least twice per year in that they will have to pass a multi discipline & reactive qualification shoot on moving targets. This is the most basic of standards they have to reach, but don’t be fooled by my wording – it is NOT a basic standard, and is supplemented throughout the year by development shoots. From memory, for the qualification they have no warm up shoot, and have to pass 80% overall with no less than 60% on any one element of the shoot. If they fail, depending on the type of fail, they can either re-take the element (for when they’ve scored over 80% but dropped below 60% on any particular individual element), or register an overall fail and then get a period of remedial training. During this period they are not allowed to carry a firearm operationally.
Each AFO, whether they’re a basic AFO, ARV AFO, SFO, or CT SFO has to complete a minimum hours of contact time of training. This incorporates both development shoots, tactics & enhanced/advanced 1st aid. If you have a specialism such as Close Protection, Rifle Officer etc. you will do a similar amount of training again, over and above your AFO training for this specialism.
I was an ARV AFO (with a few specialisms over the years) for almost 20 years. I would do at least 2 x 12 hr training shifts every 5 weeks. I would do a similar amount for my specialisms.
Every single minute of every day you are scrutinised; from the moment you drew your weapons you were under CCTV. Every drill, whether drawing the weapon from the armoury, function testing or download procedures was done using a Buddy Buddy system where your colleague would watch you like a hawk to ensure you didn’t **** up.
All tactical training contained an element of “judgemental” training, where your decision making was constantly monitored. You had to be able to cite the powers under which you were acting at any time, as training could be stopped mid flow for you to explain your actions. If your decision making wasn’t rock solid then you could have your “ticket” pulled pending a panel, which usually consisted of the head of firearms training, head of department & you. You would have to go through your decision making in great detail under interrogation adhering the National Decision Making (NDM) model. All of this could ultimately lose your authority to carry a firearm, and even disciplinary action.
As statistics show above, it’s highly unlikely that an AFO would’ve used their firearm “in anger”. That said, an AFO is fairly unlikely to use one “in anger” because of training, it the training is generally designed to put AFOs under so much pressure that they cope well operationally.
Contrary to popular stereotypes your ARV AFO is not a knuckle dragger; prior to becoming an AFO they’re usually some of the higher performing PCs at their respective stations. On my shift of 16, 12 of us had decent degrees. Now that was unusual – not that they had degrees, but more the proportion of us; it’s usually about 50%.
Now the Met are somewhat different. They have different threats and a much higher volume of threat to deal with than the rest of us. I cannot comment on how they do things, but most I’ve met have been very professional.
A charge of Murder is a very big deal indeed for a Police officer to be charged with; it suggests malice aforethought… premeditation. I am struggling to see that this officer drew weapons that day & thought “you know what, I’m gonna kill someone today”. My personal thoughts when I heard this were what is the CPS doing? What is their interpretation of this crime and how are they applying/testing this against this incident? And very importantly – How strongly are the IOPC pushing this (I can guarantee very strongly indeed as the political lackeys they are).
Being an AFO is totally voluntary. At the drawing of weapons I was required to make a declaration that I was physically & mentally fit, and not under the influence of any substance. I believe that due to the uncertainty this incident has created, it is not beyond the realms of probability that a few folk are upset & therefore not able to honestly answer that they are emotionally/mentally fit to carry. Some may simply be very militant. I don’t know, but I can hardly blame them.
It I s absolutely right & proper that this incident should be investigated fully. No Police officer is above the law and I do not believe the Police are seriously asking for that. They do however need assurances that the unique pressure & circumstances are held into account & that volunteering to carry a firearm to protect people from armed criminals & terrorists is NOT the same as saying I want to kill someone. It is not part of the premeditation of murder. If I was still in that job I would also decline to carry.
