This week's riots in Britain, which have spread from the north London neighborhood of Tottenham to the cities of Birmingham, Liverpool, and Manchester, were sparked by the Aug. 4 shooting by police of a 29-year old London man. The victim, Mark Duggan, was carrying a weapon, though tests show he did not fire it. But Britain has long been well known for having an unarmed police force. Is that still the case?

Yes, but there are an increasing number of exceptions. The unarmed bobby on the beat is an image as quintessentially British as Big Ben or the Beatles and -- with the exception of Northern Ireland, where police have been routinely armed for years -- the vast majority of officers, including Scotland Yard, still make do with nonlethal weapons like batons, pepper spray, and gruff admonishments.

This hasn't always been the case. London police were issued revolvers in 1884 following the murder of two officers, though it wasn't mandatory: They could choose whether or not to carry them. The weapons were formally retired in 1936. During World War II, police were issued firearms in case of German invasion, but these were never to be used on patrol.

The police department has gone back and forth on the issue over the decades. Following a number of shootings of police during the 1950s and 1960s, about 17 percent of London police officers became authorized to carry firearms, but many licenses were revoked during the 1980s following a series of shootings by police. An increasing number of specially trained officers are now also armed with Tasers, though their use has been criticized by human rights groups.

As of 2009, there were 6,868 officers authorized to carry weapons in England and Wales. Within London's Metropolitan Police, out of a force of 33,000, around 2,700 officers were authorized to carry guns, though, unlike American cops, the vast majority of those aren't armed on a regular basis. Over 80 percent of British police officers say that despite increasing levels of violent crime, they don't want to see all officers armed. The issue often re-emerges as a topic of public debate, especially after the killing of a police officer, such as the 2005 killing of 38-year old West Yorkshire constable Sharon Beshenivsky during an armed robbery. Thankfully, this is pretty rare. Between 1900 and 2006, only 67 British police officers were killed by firearms, excluding Northern Ireland.

The London police's specialized firearms unit, today known as CO19, dates back to 1966. The purpose of the unit is to provide firearms training to the rest of the force and tactical support when necessary. In 1991, the unit introduced armed response vehicles, specially modified police cars that are able to rapidly respond to gun crimes or provide backup on dangerous assignments such as drug raids.

While armed operations have become more common, they are still pretty rare. According to official statistics, firearms were authorized for 19,951 operations in England and Wales between April 1, 2008, and March 31, 2009, but weapons were fired in four instances.

The unit came under heavy criticism in 2005 following the shooting death of Jean Charles de Menezes, an unarmed Brazilian man who was mistaken for a suicide bomber in the wake of the London Underground terrorist attacks. The Metropolitan Police was fined, but no charges were ever filed against any of the officers.

In 2009, the CO19 began the unprecedented practice of conducting armed patrols in the Brixton, Haringey, and Tottenham neighborhoods, in response to an increase in violent crime in those areas. The officers were charged with carrying out weapons sweeps to deter gang members from carrying firearms. Previously, the unit had only been called in to respond to reported crimes. The program was controversial ever since it was announced -- including within the police department. And, with Duggan have been shot during one of these patrols, the act that triggered the ongoing riots, it's likely to become even more so.

Christopher Furlong/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS:
 

Joshua E. Keating is an associate editor at Foreign Policy.

F1FAN

8:05 AM ET

August 11, 2011

Society gives police the right to use lethal force

And in return police MUST be held to a higher standard. Anytime a police office shoots someone that turns out to be unarmed, they should automatically no longer be a police officer. Defenders of the police will say 'it's a split second life or death decision and sometimes mistakes happen with the best intentions of protecting the public' and I generally agree with that. However a police officer that shoots and kills an unarmed civilian has made the wrong decision in that split second, and people that make poor decisions in that circumstance are precisely the people that should not have a firearm.

The increase of police brutality and the shootings and taserings of unarmed civilians in the US and UK are anathema to the police motto 'To protect and serve' and increased unaccountability for police (over 300 lethal police shootings or unarmed civilians in Chicago this year with 0 convictions or reprimands on part of the police) only stoke the perceived lack of justice in society, which of course means that given a chance societies more unfortunate elements will take advantage of the public's growing mistrust of police and do unfortunate things like riot and loot......................

 

XTIANGODLOKI

8:36 AM ET

August 11, 2011

Yeap

Police should be empowered to carry out their duties in the face of armed criminals, this means heavier weapons. At the same time, if they make stupid mistakes or abuse their powers they should be on the hook for punishment and not the tax payers.

 

ROBERT M WILSON

10:20 AM ET

August 11, 2011

heavier weapons?

You're not serious, heavier weapons? Isn't it enough that they had even ordinary guns. Look what has happened. BTW, i didn't know that British police carry guns. Or is this only a 'fairytale' from the movies? I think that bobbies aren't allowed to carry guns.

 

WIDGET

10:45 AM ET

August 11, 2011

From the UK

Outside of airports you'll very rarely see a copper with a gun. Most brits support it, as do most Policemen.

To the commentator arguing police should be given heavier arms, most crimes in Britain don't involve the same level of weaponry as the states and I'm sure ubiquitous police firearms would simply escalate the weaponry of criminal. A recipe for more fatalities.

 

D-B

10:11 AM ET

August 12, 2011

There have NOT been 300 lethal police shootings in Chicago

News reports indicate that as of August, 2011, there have been 43 police shootings in Chicago this year. 16 of those have been fatal.

 

FSILBER

2:32 PM ET

August 11, 2011

When Sir Robert Peel created

When Sir Robert Peel created the first London municipal police force in the middle of the 19th century, he made them patrol unarmed, believing that a free people view an armed police force as an occupying standing army, an adoption of French-style despotism. Instead, they were given whistles so that, when necessary, they could summon armed citizens to their aide. The private citizens' right to arms, in turn, was degraded due to adoption of the Marxist view that criminals were victims of society and there really was no right to private property -- and therefore no right to defend it.

The push for the absolute ban on legal handgun ownership was based on the hope that this would disarm criminals, making gentler measures of dealing with them feasible. The August 4th shooting of an armed professional gun smuggler, however, demonstrates that keeping criminals unarmed requires just as much harshness as dealing with armed criminals. The attempt to prevent violent criminals from using even knives requires intrusive harsh treatment (e.g. frequent ad-hoc friskings) of the general public in troubled neighborhoods to deter criminals from breaking the law.

There would be much less street crime and much less resentment of the police if well-behaved private citizens were allowed to carry deadly weapons and to use them in self-defense as needed. Then, poor black youths who don't do robberies and such could be left in peace.

 

JULIEHOWARD1

3:17 AM ET

September 1, 2011

No Guns, Thanks!

I don't think the whole police force should wear guns, I actually think Britain have got things about right. I know, it's a shocker. But it is right that police should be allowed to fight gun crime with guns, but not be allowed to carry them as a daily right.

I also think that police who carry guns should be held very accountable for their actions - one fatal mistake should mean immediate retirement. No matter how old they are. And there should be thorough investigation as well.

We don't want Britian to turn into the US, where guns are commonplace and children die from playing with their parents guns. Lets take the best from the US, like their prison systems which are mostly self-funding. We can just leave the bits that haven't worked so well.

JH

 

MATHALIE

5:54 AM ET

September 4, 2011

The private citizens' right

The private citizens' right to arms, in turn, was degraded due to adoption of the Marxist view that criminals were victims of society and there really was no right to private property -- and therefore no right to defend it.The push for the absolute ban on legal handgun ownership was based on the hope that this would disarm sázkové tipy criminals, making gentler measures of dealing with them feasible. The August 4th shooting of an armed professional gun smuggler, however, demonstrates that keeping criminals unarmed requires just as much harshness as dealing with armed criminals. The attempt to prevent violent criminals from using even knives requires intrusive harsh treatment (e.g. frequent ad-hoc friskings) of the general public in troubled neighborhoods to deter criminals from breaking the law.

 

EGISTUBAGUS

8:07 AM ET

September 7, 2011

police of a 29-year old London man kill british people

This week's riots in Britain, which have spread from the north London neighborhood of Tottenham to the cities of Birmingham, Liverpool, and Manchester, were sparked by the Aug. 4 shooting by police of a 29-year old London man. how come it will be riots?
(gliderforbaby, glidersfornursery, littlecastlegliders, beststeamiron, electricteapot, biometricsafe , nurserychairs, glidersfornurserygedehumidifier, lgdehumidifier, mielecoffeemaker, vikingcoffeemaker)

 

ANAN

6:14 PM ET

September 8, 2011

Discreet use of weapons can’t kill!

British cops patrolling the streets in an unarmed fashion is of course a commendable feat; a feat that deals with crime in a natural anti inflammatory manner. But, what justification can you offer to explain the deaths of all those cops who died in the hands of hooligans just because they don’t have a gun to shoot the thug? Discretionary use of weapons should be encouraged by the CO19 so as not to belittle the police force and give the organized crime an upper hand. Police personnel should be held responsible for each clueless death that takes place at their hands.

 

CANDIE SODEMAN

2:09 PM ET

September 9, 2011

When Are British Cops Allowed to Carry Guns?

Very rarely. You're not serious, heavier weapons? Isn't it enough that they had even ordinary guns. Look what has happened. BTW, i didn't know that British police carry guns. Or is this only a 'fairytale' from the movies? I think that bobbies aren't allowed to carry guns. he said The August 4th shooting of an armed professional gun smuggler, however, demonstrates that keeping criminals unarmed requires just as much harshness as dealing with armed criminals. The attempt to prevent violent criminals stavkove kancelarie from using even knives requires intrusive harsh treatment (e.g. frequent ad-hoc friskings) of the general public in troubled neighborhoods to deter criminals