ARMED POLICE STILL OUT ON ROUTINE JOBS
Only five months after police chief promised parliament that practice had been stopped...
ARMED police are attending routine incidents despite a promise to scrap the policy following a public outcry. Police Scotland had said officers with handguns would only be deployed to life-threatening situations or to those involving firearms.
But a senior officer generated anger from MSPs yesterday after admitting the new policy had been breached since its launch last October.
Armed officers ‘engaged’ with the public on an astonishing 1,644 occasions, during incidents as straightforward as pub brawls and drink-driving cases.
Yet top brass insisted they were not ‘deployed’ – officers simply encountered the situations while out on armed patrol.
Last night, the single force faced serious questions over whether the public had been misled, only days after police chiefs admitted another promise – to halt the
stopping and searching of children – had been broken.
Scottish Tory justice spokesman Margaret Mitchell said: ‘This will further serve to undermine confidence in Police Scotland and the Chief Constable.’
On October 1, 2014, Police Scotland Chief Constable Sir Stephen House directed that ‘armed response vehicles (ARVs) will now only be deployed to firearms incidents or where there is a threat to life’.
Since then, armed officers have ‘ pro- actively engaged’ with members of the public on 1,644 occasions.
But in just five instances, armed officers were deployed to incidents which were not deemed life-threatening, Assistant Chief Constable Bernard Higgins admitted at Holyrood’s justice sub-committee on policing.
He claimed this was a huge reduction on the more than 30,000 occasions in the first year of the force.
The five incidents police admit breached the new policy included three reports of domestic abuse, a pub i ncident and another reported disturbance.
Mr Higgins said officers and control room staff involved had been spoken to about the breaches and armed police were no longer deployed. But armed officers still have the discretion to attend routine incidents based on their ‘professional judgment’.
He added: ‘ Deployed on routine duties since October, there have been five occasions where ARVs were despatched to calls which didn’t fit the absolute criteria of a firearms incident.
‘In three of the five incidents that were identified, I personally believe they do reflect a threat to life because they refer to personal attack alarms activations by victims of domestic abuse.
‘The other two were a report of a disturbance and when police arrived there was nobody there; and a report of a disturbance within a public house where local officers required assistance with the ejection of people.
‘Since October 1, ARVs have involved themselves in 1,644 instances where they have proactively engaged with members of the public.
‘That will include charging people with offences which included dangerous driving, drink-driving and other suchlike offences.’
Police top brass argue that armed officers cannot sit around waiting for a life -threatening incident and when they are out on patrol and witness possible criminality – or someone who needs help – they are obliged to intervene.
In the 1,644 cases, officers encountered situations where the public needed help, or a possible crime had occurred, and they intervened. Police argue this is not a breach of the policy.
But at Holyrood yesterday, Scottish Lib Dem justice spokesman Alison McInnes said this was ‘quite a different story’ from previous information.
She added: ‘It is another example of us not being given the full facts. We have been given an assurance by Police Scotland that this is not happening – and it clearly is happening, whether it is on a reduced scale or not.’
But Mr Higgins said: ‘ 1,644 times they [armed officers] have come across instances where their professional judgment has determined that they should take action. I would say that we haven’t hidden that fact and that is what has been consistently said since October.’
Last night, a spokesman for the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) watchdog said: ‘In its public announcement last October, and in subsequent engagement with the SPA, Police Scotland has been clear that while ARV officers would not be attending routine incidents, there would still be occasions when they would be required to use their professional j udgment and duties where necessary.
‘Although trained specialists, they remain police officers. Understanding the public’s view on this was a key part of our recent inquiry. It is worth noting that over 70 per cent of respondents to our survey said their preference would be for the nearest
OCT 1, 2014
Armed response vehicles (ARVs) will now only be deployed to firearms incidents or where there is a threat to life.
Sir Stephen House
MAR 5, 2015
Since October 1, ARVs have involved themselves in 1,644 instances where they have proactively engaged with members of the public.
ACC Bernard Higgins ‘Not being given the full facts’
available officer to assist them, even if that officer was wearing a visible firearm.’
But many respondents also ‘considered the policy to have been introduced in a highhanded manner’.
The Scottish Government said: ‘Firearms officers continue to play an important role in keeping communities in Scotland safe.
‘Clearly, there are cases when police officers have to intervene if they suspect a crime is taking place or if they believe someone is going to get hurt. Police Scotland is currently considering the carriage and deployment of firearms and will present proposals to the SPA later this month.