Police deserve fighting chance

COMMENT

EVER since the November 2015 terrorist attacks in France, I have asked the following question of police and political leaders alike: In the face of a terrorist attack, what is it you expect an unarmed officer to do while awaiting the arrival of armed specialists?

If the attack in Westminster on March 22, or on London Bridge on Saturday night, is anything to go by, the answer appears to be – let them get killed or seriously injured. I, for one, think that is nothing short of an absolute disgrace.

I have no doubt Michelle Palmer would prefer if her husband Keith made it home to their daughter that night.

The bravery of officers who face sudden or extreme violence cannot be in question and political or organisational praise heaped upon them is well deserved. No one can doubt that the BTP officer stabbed in the face while responding to the incident on Saturday with his baton is brave.

But what is it about the psyche of this nation that seems to leave us incapable of realising just how perverse a situation this is?

Police officers deserve more than to be lavished with praise when they are injured or killed doing something courageous.

At the very least, they deserve more than a fighting chance of not finding themselves on the receiving end of a posthumous honour.

It is for these reasons that the question of whether you want an armed or unarmed police service is now the wrong one.

Indeed, it would be naïve to believe armed police officers will prevent all terror attacks – we need only look to the continent to see that is nonsense.

What we can do, however, is ask the right question and that can only be – what is it you expect an unarmed police officer to do?

I could equally ask: Is a police officer being stabbed in the face a price worth paying for having an unarmed police service? How many police officers have to be killed or seriously injured before the price becomes too much?

A wise man once said in respect of those who advocate the death penalty – the test is not whether you would be prepared to execute but whether you would be prepared to be executed. A similar train of logic must be applied to the question of an armed police service.

It’s not whether you are prepared to send an unarmed police officer to tackle an armed terrorist that matters but whether you would be prepared to be that unarmed police officer.