http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16265551

the potential here is staggering. I want to protect whats mine as much as the next person, but I can't say I'm keen to have the boys in blue spraying rounds in built up areas. Goldie looking Chain or what.

They can already use baton rounds or tear gas (i.e. it's within their powers to do so). What this is about is having clearly defined circumstances where such things would be deployed. It's not about doing or not doing, it's about creating an S.O.P. for response to rioting. The problem in the summer was partly because you had different forces all saying to each other 'can we break this stuff out? Should we break this stuff out? Is it considered legally acceptable to use it yet?' and nobody actually knew. Part of the reason things got so out of control was that the police command structure couldn't make it's mind up exactly how to respond. If you define an S.O.P. everyone knows what to do when x, y or z occur, so the response is much quicker.

Of course the downside is the other side will probably know the S.O.P. too, so they'll know exactly how far they can go before they get a riot stick in the mush. But at least it'll stop the farce of the police standing around watching people set fire to things because their bosses can't decide what an 'appropriate response' is.

In summary : This won't change what the police can do, but it might change when the can do it.

Jon

The thing is the riots could have been quashed early on if the Police hadn't stood by, several factors resulted in that farce, and there wouldn't need to be this talk of turning to Syrian tactics of crowd control.

Yeah, because our police are just like the Syrians

Perhaps I was being a drama queen but talk of live ammunition to control rioters in a democratic population is never an idea I'm comfortable with.

Just shoot the [LIFTED].
problem solved all round

Until they miss and a stray round goes through your window and kills you or one of your family

Whilst the rioters burn your property whilst your in it burning you and your family to death.

Whilst there's a mistake made and your family is shot by accident...

FFS, anybody with any sense knows that we already have the capabilities of quelling riots through preventative and tactical measures - they just have to be employed at the right time in the right fashion.

That is the recommendation by the way. Can anyone name any instance where, in the long term, plastic or live ammunition has actually worked?

Don't be rash when you condemn people to death, even the wisest cannot see every eventuality.

To be fair, you'd have to say you were just really, really unlucky that day.

Jon

I don't have a problem with this. Most rioters were the usual criminal scum anyway, the "usual suspects" as it were.

clicky

clicky

So yes, a majority had previous convictions. I think that highlights that changes need to be made to the Justice System rather than Policing. Reforming people who have been convicted of crimes is not working.

Yeah, just what we need, giving the Police carte blanche to shoot people; that worked out really well for Jean Charles de Menezes.

I don't trust the plebs in the Metrpolitan Police with guns, they will shoot innocent people.

i predict that within 10 years (or less) you will have a form of marshal law in this country ...

reason
they, the authorities, lost control of the public areas at the last riots, properly more riots to follow
also outside this country events that are happening will cause long lasting after affects

and the biggest 'maybe' is food imports ? ...
rest assured things are going to get much worse with strikes (for whatsoever reason), protests and more riots leading to emergency law enforcement ...

Well that's kind of my point. We're not talking here about letting the police do anything 'new'. They can already use aggressive measures like baton rounds and water cannons if they want to. They can even shoot people and justify it later, or at least try to. What this report is doing is simply putting down hard rules about what they should do or what it is acceptable for them to do, given a particular set of circumstances. Personally, I think the whole 'shooting arsonists' thing is very shaky and it'd be a foolhardy copper who even considered it but running round claiming it's one step from a police state is bunk. It hasn't changed the powers the police have over us one jot. If the report's suggestions will make us into a police state, then we already are one.

Jon