You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Britain
Gang Fatally Shoots British Policewoman
2005-11-20
A gang of men shot and killed an unarmed policewoman and wounded another, and police arrested six people in connection with the crime Saturday, officials said. The two women were shot when they tried to tackle three men who had robbed a travel agency in the northern city of Bradford, police said. Constable Sharon Beshenivsky, a 38-year-old mother of three, died from a gunshot wound to the chest, despite wearing body armor. Beshenivsky had been a full time officer for nine months, police said. She was killed on her youngest daughter's fourth birthday. Her colleague, Constable Teresa Milburn, 37, was being treated in a hospital for a shoulder wound. Milburn, who joined the force in April 2004, also wore body armor. London's Metropolitan Police said it had arrested five men and a woman in connection with the shooting, but provided no further details.

Before Friday, only two officers had been fatally shot in the last 10 years in England and Wales, one in 1995 and one in 2003, according to the Home Office. The shooting in the northern city of Bradford on Friday reignited a debate in Britain over whether front-line police officers — many of whom are unarmed — should be allowed to carry weapons. "The police service is being outgunned on the streets of Britain day and night," said police officer Norman Brennan, director of the group Protect the Protectors.

Jan Berry, chairwoman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said she doubted that arming police officers would make them safer. "Even if we armed every single police officer in this country that doesn't mean criminals aren't going to carry firearms," she told Sky News television.
They let people that stoopid onto the Brit police force? Arming them won't make them safer? I'd say that being able to shoot back would make them quite a bit safer. My son's a Maryland State Trooper. If you told him he had to patrol the streets unarmed he'd laugh at you.
Posted by:Fred

#16  even less so in switzerland where they have one of the highest levels of gun ownership in the world

Ordinary citizens can own guns? I thought this refered only to soldiers who have to keep their weapons with them at all times, even at home.
Posted by: Rafael   2005-11-20 23:46  

#15  with all do suspect, Mr. Turdnose Elmetch Crinerong1919, you must have researched your ass.
Posted by: Red Dog   2005-11-20 21:21  

#14  142 Police Killings In 2001 in the US.

Before Friday, only two officers had been fatally shot in the last 10 years in England and Wales, one in 1995 and one in 2003, according to the Home Office.

The population of the United Kindom is 60 million. The population of the United States is 300 million. We have 50 states - each with at least 2 very large cities and in those cities are gangs who run drugs. The gang members have no more license to carry guns than do your own citizens. So now we are down to the number of policemen who are murdered by citizens who legally possess their firearms. I don't actually have a figure of the number of police men killed by lawfully owned firearms. But once you divide that number by 5, your numbers wouldn't look so hot.
Posted by: 2b   2005-11-20 21:18  

#13  I know that gun crime isn't as rampant in the UK as it is in the rest of the world but I also know that its even less so in switzerland where they have one of the highest levels of gun ownership in the world. Maybe its a cultural thing. One thing I do know is that the British don't go in for knee jerk reactions to tradegy's like this one. There will be a period of sad relection, maybe even an enquiry which will recommend more armed police. The idea of an umarmed police these days is to avoid the type of testerone charged shoot outs which results in (FBI Reports) 142 Police Killings In 2001 in the US.

#6 I've done my research, turdnose.
comprehension, read the text from the article/
Before Friday, only two officers had been fatally shot in the last 10 years in England and Wales, one in 1995 and one in 2003, according to the Home Office.

Posted by: Elmetch Crinerong1919   2005-11-20 20:20  

#12  Give em flamethrowers, better protective vests, varmit rifles, Glock 45s and whatever else they require.
Posted by: John Q. Citizen   2005-11-20 18:58  

#11  Old German Russian anonymous5089.

I have it on good authority some PCs in the UK wouldn't be allowed to be cops most other places simply because they wouldn't be trusted with the judgment to carry firearms. That is a seperate issue. That said that PCs are not armed is criminal in this day and age the UK government is part and parcel to this brave womans death.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom   2005-11-20 18:17  

#10  it's crawling with South Asians and other folk whose culture determines manhood by caliber.

"South Asian" or "Asian" being Pakistani and East Pakistani (Bangladeshi).

You don't have Parsis, Sikhs and Hindus running riot in the UK. They tend to be better off, more educated etc than the average. The typical Paki on the other hand...
Posted by: john   2005-11-20 17:06  

#9  Chapter 11_20_2005
In which the guests are reminded not to play with the owner.
Posted by: Shipman   2005-11-20 11:42  

#8  "...then made the assumption that all those swarming masses of tough guys would perforce obey the law."

Since the problem is lawless criminals, the obvious solution is to pass a law requiring criminals to obey the laws! No, wait. Never mind.

I always liked the idea that British cops went unarmed. It implied a certain level of civilization. But as Fred said, in a most excellent rant, that time has passed by. 'Tis indeed a tragic situation, but that happens with a refusal to confront the realities of a changing world.
Posted by: SteveS   2005-11-20 10:53  

#7  So sad for that woman... in any case, theses two women were *really* courageous, trying to tackle three man they knew were or could be armed. Very brave of them, too bad it ended tragically.

The failure of the vest may be because some of the body armors given to Uk police officers are actually knives-proof vests, only rated to stop stabbing, not even handgun's bullets.

OT : Sock Puppet, I know of two fmj bullets that defeat class III vests (I know this from reading forums), are you thinking about the new belgian, or the old german/russian?
Posted by: anonymous5089   2005-11-20 10:27  

#6  I've done my research, turdnose. When civility and manners were a trait of Britishness the police could and should have gone unarmed. The nation is now socialized and it's crawling with South Asians and other folk whose culture determines manhood by caliber.

Working on the mistaken assumption that rules of logic don't apply to them, the warm milk set decreed firearms illegal in Britain, then made the assumption that all those swarming masses of tough guys would perforce obey the law. By leaving the police unarmed in the face of continued onslaughts by these latter-day Visigoths, these twits have managed to damage what was once probably the world's greatest police organization.

I would be happy as a clam to live in a world where police were unarmed, as long as all criminals were, too. Unlike the social engineers and their kindred police spokesmen, I would not be happy to live in a world where the police were unarmed and the criminals not. That sort of situation produces dead policemen.
Posted by: Fred   2005-11-20 09:45  

#5  "Even if we armed every single police officer in this country that doesn't mean criminals aren't going to carry firearms," she told Sky News television.

Which also means that your disarming of the law abiding citizens of your country didn't deter criminals from carrying firearms either. By arming your officers you stand a better chance of making sure the SOB is dead too and therefore not likely to commit further mayhem upon the world. Keep your head in the dirt and ignor reality as it continues to take a toll of your 'own'. Remember political belief, which is the modern version of religious belief, trumps reality or doing anything rational to solve it.
Posted by: Glock Thrang2756   2005-11-20 09:16  

#4  I want to know why this womans vest failed to protect her from frontal chest shot? As I understand it vests are manditory for PCs. If they are no damn good someone needs to be hung for this.

I have issues with unarmed officers but a failure of a vest is unacceptable. These women apperently didn't even have time to react. Being armed or unarmed may be a moot point. Their training should have included assuming all calls are to situations where arms are present and reactions are thereby tempered by such assumptions. Sounds like the bad guys got the drop on them.

I only know of one pistol round that my vest can't stop and gang banger types and common criminals don't have easy access to it.

My heart goes out to this poor woman 4 daughters. One daughter who just turned 4 will for the rest of her life remember her birthday as the date her mother was murdered.

Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom   2005-11-20 03:20  

#3  What in the world does arming the police have to do with criminals carrying guns?

Are she assuming that police only carry guns to deter criminals from doing so and not because you sometimes need to shoot them?
Posted by: 3dc   2005-11-20 03:10  

#2  If France is any indication, the British police had better start carrying Stens.

Spolump, you may wish to reconsider your statement in light of how the comments were most likely directed at spokesidiot Jan Berry and not brave constable Sharon Beshenivsky, may she rest in peace.
Posted by: Zenster   2005-11-20 02:53  

#1  They let people that stoopid onto the Brit police force? I think you should do some research first fuckface.
Posted by: Spolump Ebbomoth5433   2005-11-20 01:37  

00:00