Terrorism

Jamba and gunboy, Do you do lottery numbers as well? Jim jam I find the arguments for arming the police in London similar

I am calling for armed police (the same as we already have in NI, Ireland, France, Germany, Italy etc.)

aye, because that has prevented terrorism in all those countries.

kilo

Jim jam I find the arguments for arming the police in London similar

Errrrr. Right.

Which one of us has spent the last 25 year on covert law enforcement ops against tier one OCGs in London? 😉

I don’t know what your acronyms mean but they sound fancy, and I still think NI disproves any argument against armed police you want to put forward.

Which one of us has spent the last 25 year on covert law enforcement ops against tier one OCGs in London?

Pff, we’ve had enough with experts remember.

I’ve spent 25 years working in and around IT and a further 10 years prior to that dealing with computers either academically or as a hobbyist and that didn’t stop someone calling me naive about the subject a couple of pages back.

High level Organise crime groups if that helps. Policing in London and the rest of GB is completely different to policing in NI back in the troubles and to a fair degree today, it does not require regular access to firearms and the police are not targeted the same way they are / were targeted by PIRA et al. Criminals in the U.K. do not have the same access to firearms, the supply of firearms is quite poor for criminals nor are GB police in constant pervasive threat from terrorists.

Soz Cougar, I forgot the new reality. 🙂

Oh, and whilst we’re credentials-dropping; I’m not a “security expert,” but I was asked yesterday if I was interested in moving into an InfoSec role at work.

How will ‘tooling up the coppers’ prevent terrorists who are actively seeking death?

Is this meant to deter them in some way?

Oh, and Coogs, do yourself a favour and get your CISSP and make loads of money- you’d be a shoo-in.

There are loads of graphical ways to communicate, over the internet, in games like minecraft & gtav.

So May is just on a power trip and knows it

Kilo > question for you. Say hypothetically the decision was made right now to arm all of the police. How long do you think it would take to train all the officers to the standard required to ensure the were safe and competent, and how many officers do you think we’d lose because they either lacked the skills or lacked the desire to carry firearms? (Ok, two questions.)

kilo

High level Organise crime groups if that helps. Policing in London and the rest of GB is completely different to policing in NI back in the troubles and to a fair degree today, it does not require regular access to firearms and the police are not targeted the same way they are / were targeted by PIRA et al. Criminals in the U.K. do not have the same access to firearms, the supply of firearms is quite poor for criminals nor are GB police in constant pervasive threat from terrorists.

We’ve essentially had 20 years of peace, to varying degrees and the police are still armed. Paramilitaries didn’t target psni/ruc officers in the way that Islamists are doing in the UK and France, they used car bombs and ambushes. A glock 17 is little use against a bomb or heavy machine gun 50 yards away. But the police have glock 17s.

NI is ten times the size of London, with a fifth of the population spread out mainly over small villages and rural areas. There is no terrorist threat here day to day, but constables still carry guns.

Whenever the police actively go looking for bad guys they bring in heavy weaponry. I don’t have a dog in this fight by the way, but I think most people who’ve never lived in Northern Ireland have a completely distorted view of it.

Oh, and Coogs, do yourself a favour and get your CISSP and make loads of money- you’d be a shoo-in.

I’m flattered, but (my understanding is that) CISSP is bastard hard. I could probably get my CEH, that’s the one they give away free with Tiger Tokens. I quite fancy that actually, reckon it’d be a giggle.

I’ve no idea how long it takes to train a firearms officer I’ve never been drawn to that side, but iirc for us it’s quite a long course and you have to have other skills before they’ll train you (advanced driving, surveillance trained). The course goes through a variety of weapons and scenarios which may not be considered necessary for a low level self defence arming but then what’s the point if the officers can’t use a weapon in all scenarios. I’ couldn’t say how many officers would bin or be binned. Also the idea of allowing off duty officers to carry is fairly mad. I remember an officer in the MPS firearms team, about twenty years ago telling me it was a lot better after they got rid of all the gun nuts 🙂

it was a lot better after they got rid of all the gun nuts

Did all the guns fall apart then or something?

Jimjam I don’t have any argument with regular arming in NI but to some degree your stating the weapons the police had were no use against the threat they faced. I would say the assassination threat to police in NI was vastly different in scale and methodology to that being faced inGB now and in NI the issue of firearms would / is still a valid deterrent to up close attacks. I still believe that NI policing does not extrapolate to GB

A boom tish for cougar:)

Poor choice of words there perhaps… (-:

kilo

Jimjam I don’t have any argument with regular arming in NI but to some degree your stating the weapons the police had were no use against the threat they faced.

Historically it might have been but as I’ve pointed out we’ve had 20ish years of relative peace wherein PSNI officers haven’t demonstrated any unusual tendencies to kill people either accidentally or in dubious circumstances, nor have they turned violent struggles into deadly struggles because of their ever present guns.

Obviously Northern Irish news is much more inclined to report on NI news and incidents and there have been times when police have been outnumbered or caught up in riots – even then, still no Dirty Harry behavior. And when they’ve lost their guns, guess what, they get turned in. Even in Republican areas.

I would say the assassination threat to police in NI was vastly different in scale and methodology to that being faced inGB now and in NI the issue of firearms would / is still a valid deterrent to up close attacks.

It’s pretty obvious that police in major English cities are in much more imminent threat of up close attacks than those in NI.

How are you defining “up close” here?

If the attackers don’t even make the top 20,000 never mind the 3,000 under some form of surveillance it makes you wonder how radicalised and dangerous the people on the active list are if the star of “the Jihadi next door” doesn’t make the cut

Cougar – Moderator

How are you defining “up close” here?

Not sure who you are asking but I am assuming Kilo meant stabbing, or perhaps shooting with handguns.

That was kind of my point. The range for stabbing someone and the range for shooting someone differ somewhat. If I was in a fight with someone a couple yards away I’d rather have a knife than a gun. I’m no expert but anywhere inside of, what, 10-20 yards maybe, someone with a knife in their hand is going to beat someone with a holstered gun most of the time I’d have thought.

Okay I see your point. But then why the hell were police in Northern Ireland ever armed? Or why didn’t Republicans surprise stab a lot more of them?

Edit: Perhaps we shouldn’t go down that rabbit hole, and that’s not my point. I wanted to point out that 20 years of peace in NI with armed police hasn’t revealed any of the negative consequences suggested when people discuss arming police in Britain, and while I know this thread is about terrorism more generally it has gone on this tangent and I think it has to be addressed in order to have an honest discussion about armed police.

Really I was just requesting clarification as I didn’t really understand. It’s a world apart from my sphere of knowledge. I know that a gun isn’t really a close-quarters weapon, I know that it takes an amount of time to unclip and unholster a gun and ready it for firing, and I know how quickly I can cover ten yards and I would expect that’s faster. Beyond that I’m flying blind, the only projectile weaponry I know squat about is a bow.

Can we talk about computers again? (-:

Cougar

Can we talk about computers again? (-:

Well I think the threat from computers and social media is actually scarier and potentially much more devastating than conventional terrorism but it’s probably for another thread, another day.

In other news,

I'm clear: if human rights laws get in the way of tackling extremism and terrorism, we will change those laws to keep British people safe. pic.twitter.com/8EfUJYUDMK

— Theresa May (@theresa_may) June 6, 2017

@theresa_may

I’m clear: if human rights laws get in the way of tackling extremism and terrorism, we will change those laws to keep British people safe.

Theresa May is officially against human rights.

Well I think the threat from computers and social media is actually scarier and potentially much more devastating than conventional terrorism but it’s probably for another thread, another day.

I think the power from computers and social media is actually one of our biggest assets, if we all learn to leverage it well. We all have voices and it makes it harder to sweep controversy under the carpet.

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=ThingsThatLeaveBritainReeling

The NI example shows clearly that things done out of fear or necessity are never rolled back. A stark warning to those asking for special powers to deal with the current threats – what is the condition for rolling them back?

Anything contained here is just my personal opinion…

I believe it is time for society to start asking the difficult questions of our governments, both past and present and our western security services. Difficult questions that we, the people, deserve frank and honest answers to.

We have been treated like fools for far too long with regards to the actions that have been carried out in our name. We have foreign policies that any sane person can see have done nothing but make the world a more dangerous place.

We have been taken into conflicts based on lies. Conflicts that have causes the deaths of millions of innocent people and destroyed nations. Conflicts that have taken the lives of sons, daughters, mothers and fathers. Conflicts that have bred resentment and hate, caused division and suffering and now radicalise young men and women to the point where they are willing to kill indiscriminately and kill themselves.

This isn’t something that just pops up overnight but festers over decades. Mistakes have been made and continue to be made but yet it is not the people making these mistakes who reap the consequences. It is innocent people of all creed, colour, nationality and faith.

We have armed groups to fight western proxy wars that it would be politically dangerous for us to fight ourselves. Wars that we, the people, would not want to accept if it were our soldiers going to fight.
When we have sent our brave young men and women to fight, we learn later that the reasons we have given them to lay down their lives were fabricated.

It didn’t matter that millions of citizens took to the streets across Britain and Europe to protest. It didn’t matter that they were warned of the consequences. It didn’t matter one bit, a few men and women decided it would be done. A few men and women who still represent us and continue to shape the world we live in today.

But yet have any of the people who created these lies, created the suffering, created the situations we find ourselves in today been brought to book for them? Well, we all know the answer to that.

We now find out that the men who have carried out the recent atrocities have been known to our security services long before they carried out their heinous actions. Why were they not stopped? Why?
Were they allowed to continue in the hope that they would lead to someone further up the chain? Were they managed by our security services in an attempt to gain further Intelligence?

About now some of you will be thinking this isn’t possible, our security services wouldn’t do that. Well, that is exactly what they do. In fact, they have been caught doing it many times whether it in Northern Ireland, Iraq, Afghanistan or even here at home. This is part and parcel of the M.O. of the security services.

We have eaten up the propaganda that has been thrown at us for decades and now many are willing to give up the last shred of privacy they have because they are being told it will make them safe. We are being told this by the very people who have created the problem in the first place. Problem, Reaction, Solution.

Yesterday our Prime Minister stood in front of the nation and told us all, “Enough is Enough”. Well I also believe “Enough is Enough” but not in the way our government want us to think. It’s time for our governments to be held accountable for their failings. It’s time for our security services to be held accountable for their failings.

We have enquires and recommendations time and time again but is anyone ever held to account? No, they get gold plated pensions, Knighthoods and slaps on the back as they put their expenses claim in whilst drinking champagne in a subsidised bar.

Meanwhile our Police officers put there lives on the line. Our doctors and nurses work themselves to the bone and then volunteer to go back to work to help those who are injured. All the time they do this for poor pay, in poor conditions and in some instances whilst at home they can’t even pay their bills.

I don’t have all the answers and I’m sure you don’t either but we should be asking the questions. We should be demanding the people we pay a vast amount of money to represent us are held accountable for their failings in the same way you and I would be.

Criminal and negligent acts have, are and will be continue to be committed in our name and “Enough is Enough”

This isn’t the type of country I wish to live in and I don’t believe you do either.

Theresa May is officially against human rights.

By that measure, the European Convention on Human Rights is officially against human rights

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Derogation_ENG.pdf

It cites times of war or threat to nation emergency, are we actually there yet? By any measurable statistic we are not. It also states the words temporary…. How many temporary measures are removed?

Oh, and whilst we’re credentials-dropping; I’m not a “security expert,” but I was asked yesterday if I was interested in moving into an InfoSec role at work.

Well if that’s the game…

I often manage and complete forensic infosec investigations and support organisations in developing and implementing enhanced controls. 😉

Sorry, it’s not often I have an excuse to large up my governance and assurance role!

are we actually there yet? By any measurable statistic we are not. It also states the words temporary…. How many temporary measures are removed?

I suggest you carry on reading down the page as it gives myriad worked case examples of exactly that, and shows very clearly that appropriate states of emergency have applied, repeatedly, within both the UK, Ireland and several other countries, justifying derogation from the ECHR

The Court accepted that there had been a public emergency threatening the life of the nation. Before the domestic courts, the Secretary of State had provided evidence to show the existence of a threat of serious terrorist attacks planned against the United Kingdom. Additional closed evidence had been provided before SIAC. All the national judges except one had accepted that danger to have been credible. Although no al- Qaeda attack had taken place in the United Kingdom at the time when the derogation had been made, the Court did not consider that the national authorities could be criticised for having feared such an attack to be imminent. A State could not be expected to wait for disaster to strike before taking measures to deal with it.

Afraid you’ve shot yourselves in the foot by relying on the human rights argument chaps 😆

By that measure, the European Convention on Human Rights is officially against human rights

Thanks for that. It looks like an interesting read and it’s 12:45 so I’ll go through it tomorrow.

Ah, Ninfan doesn’t understand the difference between derogation within the law, and changing the law

Afraid you’ve shot yourselves in the foot by relying on the human rights argument chaps

and your feet are full of holes, bashing on about encryption and detention with no idea how it will help or hinder – was there anything conclusive from Guantanamo?

I think a bit of perspective is required, ffs, aye there’s been a few attacks recently, but come on they are generally few and far between and you’re more likely to get killed crossing the road or riding your bike.

Actually now ye mention, we should ban bikes and roads. 😐

bashing on about encryption and detention with no idea how it will help or hinder

And all I’ve heard from you so far is that having more police to ‘monitor’ people (as long as you don’t read their emails though) who we already knew were a threat, will magically solve everything

Which one of us has spent the last 25 year on covert law enforcement ops against tier one OCGs in London?

Is that a Walter Mitty way of saying you are a store detective or CCTV operator?

French Police are armed (Nationals have rifles and automatic weapons, local police handguns). They seem to be able to manage training that volume. Spanish witness who’s friend was killed to the London attack said the police who where at the scene could have ended it in seconds had they been armed.