Xerxes is right, the PF is basically the Police union, and has been seen to be more than a little unfit for purpose of late, shall we say. Lots of allegations of bullying and intimidation, and several top officials have done the old Police trick of resigning before disciplinary action can be taken against them. The PF is in need of a complete reorganisation, it seems.
As for the issue of arming the Police, it seems to me that they get themselves into a bit of bother regularly enough without routine bobbies being armed - having them armed would mean the risk of incidents would increase hugely. I have family (sister sergeant, brother DI) in the Met and neither are in favour of arming en masse.
I do have a mate in the Notts constabulary who served for several years in Armed Response Units, and we had the discussion of shooting to disable a target on more than a few occasions. This is his take on the matter, from the horse's mouth if you like, from a bike forum we are both on:
"If we have to draw arms, then the situation is already critical. We do not shoot to disable, we shoot to kill. There is a incident, you've drawn arms, you're on adrenaline, as is the suspect. He may be firing at you, and you may have a few seconds maximum to aim and fire. Have you ever seen how small a human thigh or arm is down a gun sight at as little as 30 feet? It's nothing. You aim for the biggest target, the centre of the torso. You double tap, in case you miss, or the weapon jams. If that doesn't take the suspect down, then you aim for the head. That's what we are taught to do. You draw a gun and you've crossed the line. I don't have time to ask myself is it a replica gun, and I don't care anyway. I have a wife and kid at home, and I'm not going to take risks with my own life, sorry."
I understand that attitude.
