Valued tradition? Armed policing in the UK

The traditional social “contract” in the UK mainland between the public and the police involves the ideal of an unarmed police service. In recent years while the public have accepted the more visible role of specialist armed officers on security duties in airports and strategic positions, the majority of officers remain unarmed. Following 7/7 in London and the Derrick Bird case in Cumbria there have been media calls for more police officers to be armed on a routine basis .This would fundamentally change the social contract and the relationship with the British public. The principle of policing by consent and the idea of the citizen in uniform are the fundamental tenets of British policing .Historically the only forces in the UK which are routinely armed are the Police Service of Northern Ireland in Northern Ireland, the Ministry of Defence Police and the Civil Nuclear Constabulary. In contrast all major police forces in Europe, as well as the US, Canada and Australia routinely carry firearms, the exceptions apart from Britain, are the Irish Republic, and New Zealand. In Norway officers carry arms in their cars but not on their person. Every time unarmed police officers are killed, as with the tragic case of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone killed in the line of duty in Manchester in 2013, the question of arming the British Police is raised.So does the current balance protect the public and safeguard officers or does it fail to satisfy either. Is the current balance between unarmed and armed police in the UK suitable for the 21st Century? There appears to be competing agendas for the Police to contend with. These have been illustrated by recent controversy in Scotland about a standing authority which allowed a small number of officers to carry guns while on routine patrol .Politicians and community leaders attacked the nationwide roll-out of officers with a standing authority to carry guns on routine patrols since the formation of Scotland’s single police force. The Forces armed police monitoring group recommended keeping the standing authority in place after it was given intelligence on serious organised crime groups in 2014.The Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS) in its review of the authority (2014) said the operational need for the authority is justified by national intelligence and threat levels.

Mining Police-Recorded Offence and Incident Data to Inform a Definition of Repeat Domestic Abuse Victimization for Statistical Reporting

Following inspections in 2013 of all police forces, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary found that one-third of forces could not provide data on repeat victims of domestic abuse (DA) and concluded that in general there were ambiguities around the term ‘repeat victim’ and that there was a need for consistent and comparable statistics on DA. Using an analysis of police-recorded DA data from two forces, an argument is made for including both offences and non-crime incidents when identifying repeat victims of DA. Furthermore, for statistical purposes the counting period for repeat victimizations should be taken as a rolling 12 months from first recorded victimization. Examples are given of summary statistics that can be derived from these data down to Community Safety Partnership level. To reinforce the need to include both offences and incidents in analyses, repeat victim chronologies from policerecorded data are also used to briefly examine cases of escalation to homicide as an example of how they can offer new insights and greater scope for evaluating risk and effectiveness of interventions.

The role of PCCs

Dr Mark Roycroft, Senior Lecturer in Criminology at the University of East London, provides the first of two articles containing insights from his forthcoming book on "The role of PCCs". This accepted manuscript was published as two articles for Policing Insight, "What do PCCs and chief constables REALLY think of each other?" (07.03.16) and "What do PCCs REALLY think about Panels, HMIC and the IPCC?" (10.03.6).