Scotland Yard’s C-Men Armed With SIG MCX And a Whole Lot Of Wolf Grey

36D54CF000000578-3721270-The_heavily_armed_officers_carry_semi_automatic_rifles_hand_guns-a-98_1470228207269

Scotland Yard publicly showcased its latest Counter Terrorism Unit dubbed C-Men in an article by the Dailymail.

This new unit is equipped with SIG’s MCX Carbine. One of the officers is shown with a SIG 516 Patrol Rifle. A close up is shown below.

36D54F5D00000578-3721270-Met_Commissioner_Sir_Bernard_Hogan_Howe_said_the_deployment_of_a-a-89_1470228207058

One thing I noticed on the MCXs, is that they do not run the front sight at the very end of the handguard. You can see that on all three MCX rifles in the photo below.

36D5588700000578-3721270-Police_forces_across_the_country_are_working_to_recruit_and_trai-a-91_1470228207119

Metropolitan Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe that more armed patrols would take to the streets of London. According to the Dailymail, there are 600 officers all armed with firearms.

In the article, Sir Bernard made this statement:

Speaking in Hyde Park, Sir Bernard said: ‘People aren’t fools – they know that in the event that there is a firearms attack, we are going to have to respond with firearms.

‘They pass through airports where we have armed officers, they pass through railway stations where they see firearms.

‘In some of our big iconic locations, we’ve already got armed patrols – if you look at Parliament, Downing Street – so it’s not entirely new.

‘I think people understand that where you are going to have people as enemies who’ve got guns, we’ve got to have guns.

‘It’s unusual, but it’s an entirely rational and reasonable response to make sure that people are aware that we’ve got the guns, and if we have to use them we’ve got people well-equipped to do that.’

I have issue with that statement. They understand that firearms are necessary to stop someone armed with a firearm. However only these guys can do it. Majority of the UK citizens do not have firearms or access to firearms. Especially not for self defense purposes. Sir Bernard is trying to assuage people’s concern for armed officers on the streets. Just last year, almost to the day, we saw Scotland have a kneejerk reaction to an armed officer talking into a market to buy lunch and take it to go. Click here to see that article.

The other part I have issue with is the mentioning of Downing Street and Parliament. Below is what you typically see at these locations. I wrote an article about British police armed with SMGs last year while I was touring the UK. I noticed these armed officers at places of money and power. They do not seem to be there to save the lives of ordinary citizens. If they were then why are they only at these locations? Perhaps a London local can shed more light on armed officers out in the public that perhaps I did not see? Are they more common that I witnessed? According to the Dailymail the Met has increased armed officer patrols in public parks. Which is where the photo below comes from.

36D5CFF100000578-3721270-Scotland_Yard_stepped_up_its_number_of_armed_police_officers_on_-a-29_1470236766426

This new CT group have BMW F800GS motorcycles.

36D555AE00000578-3721270-image-a-97_1470228207257

36D557E500000578-3721270-The_police_officers_have_access_to_motorbikes_and_other_vehicles-a-126_1470232446168 36D559F900000578-3721270-Sir_Bernard_said_the_use_of_armed_patrols_at_landmarks_and_touri-a-94_1470228207155 36D5572100000578-3721270-image-a-95_1470228207219 36D5571900000578-3721270-Sir_Bernard_today_said_when_Britain_has_people_as_enemies_who_ve-m-125_1470232439917  36D5E92400000578-3721270-image-a-114_1470231792099

This new Counter Terrorism group seems like a show of force more as a deterrent. Hopefully they will not be needed. While London is a target, who knows if terrorists will change focus. Look at the attack at Nice, France. Who could have predicted they would attack there?



Nicholas C

Co-Founder of KRISSTALK forums, an owner’s support group and all things KRISS Vector related. Nick found his passion through competitive shooting while living in NY. He participates in USPSA and 3Gun. He loves all things that shoots and flashlights. Really really bright flashlights.

Any questions please email him at nicholas.c@staff.thefirearmblog.com


Advertisement

  • Spencerhut

    “One thing I noticed on the MCXs, is that they do not run the front sight
    at the very end of the handguard.”
    From the way they are holding the MCXs, it looks like they train to deploy the FS without breaking the grip on the fore end. Fat lot of good that will do them with the 3x magnifier in the way of the rear iron.

    But why bother with irons on a gun with an Aimpoint T2 is my questions. Unless you are a tard and leave it on 12 for a couple weeks straight those batteries last forever. And good luck breaking an Aimpoint, I mean unless you are just purposely trying to smash it.

    • AK

      Well, if the lens gets dirty or broken, then you will have a nearly useless rifle unless you’ve got irons. My issue is with the decreased sight radius. Like it is going to matter how fast you deploy the sights. If the fight is that close and furious, there is no aiming, just pointing.
      Second, I concur with the “show of force” aspect of the article – these guys are not real smooth operators due to the way the pistols hang like sacks of doodoo way too low (OK, one guy has a clue), and the fact that they’ve got extra crap on their kit that has little or no use in actual combat, like the black shotgun shell holders all over the place. Just look like the (younger) uniformed cops put on some new, expensive grey threads.

      • kyphe

        They have just been given a bunch of new tacticool kit and been told to dress for a photo shoot. This is not deployment ready, they have not even had time to work out what bits of it they think they like or fits in with their protocol. the pistols are perfect height btw proven for many years service both civil and military to be at the natural extension of the relaxed arm length. Just because it is not your way does not mean it is wrong.

        • AK

          Well, that’s pretty much my point – from the looks of them, just a bunch of normal cops playing dress up with PR bullshit glued on top.
          And I disagree on the pistol height, it’s too low. I don’t think the dropleg holster is a good setup at all, much better to have the pistol with a rigid drop rig off the belt. Less to dangle around if you need to move, doesn’t bang into things as much, works equally well with a vest, and the draw is easier from unconventional positions, opposite hand, etc. Off the chest, if operating off vehicles.
          I would personally use subloads only for special munitions (shotgun ammo, grenades) and medical supplies for the actual medic, otherwise they are too much of a mobility killer.

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            The event is total PR but the unit and equipment isn’t. These guys have existed and been equipped like this for a few years now. I personally see nothing wrong with their equipment (where you want your holster is a matter of taste for you IMO, and i wear mine at this sort of height and it works for me). As for the shotgun shell holders, it has always been a thing with the British police (along with special forces) to always have them as any member of the team may be required to carry a shotgun at short notice.

            The only exception is the guy who is carrying his rifle right handed but has his pistol on his left thigh, I have not idea what is going on there. It has always been a thing with the British army using the bullpup SA80 that you are taught to fire righty even if you are lefty, but the MCX is fine shooting left handed and I would have though that it would be better to use the pistol right handed as well.

          • ostiariusalpha

            Could be a lefty with right eye dominance.

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            But surely if you have trained to fire a rifle right handed (by far the primary weapon, pistols are rarely used by British police), you would be better off also using the pistol right handed wouldn’t you? Changing hand dominance during a transition seems like a needless complication to me. Maybe if you practiced you would get used to it, and being a right who is right eye dominant I have no experience with this sort of thing, but it just seems weird.

          • ostiariusalpha

            It’s an odd thing, having your hand and eye dominance be mismatched. I don’t know any lefthanded shooters that deal with this issue, but I do know a couple righthanders that shoot as I describe: right hand for pistol, and left hand for rifle.

          • Billy Jack

            I always think they’re doing weak hand drills until I remember how cross-eyed dominant hold. They probably have the fastest pistol transition times. Seems like it would stuck to start out that way.

      • Bill

        These guys are indeed smooth operators, Brit training being well ahead of US training in some areas. By the time they get to be gun cops they’ve had a lot of line experience and butt loads more training than we do.

    • The sight is where it is because the front portion of the removable rail is not attached to the gas block.

      • AK

        Ah, just noticed that. Makes sense then, but very bad weapons design in that case!

        • Dracon1201

          There is no shift from my personal experience.

  • insertjjs

    That’s Racist! how come the Sikh cop can’t have a Optic? That’s white privilege for you.

    And for any SJWs that troll here, I’m not serious.

    • AK

      That Sikh cop is just smart. Less neck-ache at the end of the day, equal results.

    • tt_ttf

      hehehe

      Given the warrior rep Sikh’s have, I would put it the other way – the guy on the left needs an optic to keep up!!!!!

      • Bill

        He must have a kirpan somewhere in his kit.

    • John

      Serious answer: probably because he doesn’t want one.

      His index finger is placed above the trigger where it won’t slip, unlike his partner. His sling is angled in a way to make raising and sighting the MP5 easier, unlike his partner. His shooting shoulder is free of any obstructing crap, unlike his partner.

      He just… looks ready. Simple and ready, unlike some of the other cops.

      • Mike

        Is that a “Tactical Turban”

        • Kurt Akemann

          No, just a standard ‘Patrol Turban’. 🙂

        • Billy Jack

          US forces are finally allowing Sikhs to have the beard and turbans too. We should be seeing more sign up now.

      • jay

        Actually if you look closer, you’ll notice the Sikh is a right hander, and the other officer is a left hander. They both are similar unobstructed for firing access. Just a fyi.

    • iksnilol

      Considering it is an Eotech I’d too go with the irons.

    • Core

      You don’t need an optic on a MP5, just aim it and hold on target..

  • Budogunner

    “C-men?” Really? That doesn’t seem very well thought out. Read this hypothetical news title aloud:

    “British C-men flood the streets of London after a gay pride rally went wrong. “

    • AK

      I prefer: “Terrorists quickly subdued by C-Men, surprised from the rear.”

      • Tassiebush

        All the same c-men is hard to swallow

        • Tassiebush

          They’re involved in some sticky situations too

          • Tassiebush

            I first saw a picture of the C men on the BBC website…

          • Tassiebush

            Cmen jokes just keep on coming

          • Tassiebush

            I hope they don’t have too many negligent discharges

          • ostiariusalpha

            Okay, this one was good.

          • Tassiebush

            Thank goodness, I’m spent from pumping these out

          • iksnilol

            Gotta wait 15 minutes so it’ll be ready again 😉

          • Tassiebush

            Oh I wish! If I was a bull you’d shoot me!

        • Tassiebush

          My wife said that was in bad taste

          • ostiariusalpha

            Did she think it was too salty?

          • Tassiebush

            Hehe well actually…

        • GaryOlson

          I’m sorry, but if you have grey c-men, antibiotics many be required.

          • Tassiebush

            Haha too right!

    • thedonn007

      At least they are not using STD rifles.

    • Core

      ROFL. The BBC should censor all that C-men..

      • Billy Jack

        C-men and the BBC… England is scary.

  • Graham2

    C-men! Oh dear!

    • Spencerhut

      My brain did not even go there. That is some seriously bad judgement in picking a name on their part.

    • iksnilol

      Didn’t think of it until you mentioned it.

      *giggles*

  • Uncle Dan

    I’ve got my own guns, but sure wish my department would issue me a BMW Bike like that! I’m assuming this is to thread their way thru panic-stricken streets where the I killing is already over so everything looks pip-pip on the Telly?

    • Pod

      I’ve seen these photos being paraded around of these cops getting ready to operate operationally. I’m actually genuinely curious how they manage a rifle and all that gear, and effectively ride a motorcycle? I’m guessing they can, just wondering how…

      • DC

        2 point sling with rifle on their back? Seems doable.

        • Pod

          Could be. I don’t ride so I’m not familiar with the procedures.

          • DC

            There is a picture on the interwebs somewhere of 2 women riding bicycles with some sort of long gun on their backs. I imagine just like that.

      • FarmerB

        I’ve carried a rifle on a motorbike for years (2 point sling) but not sure how you do it with almost groin length armor they seem to have (and helmet would be another complication – I didn’t wear one). I’ve seen guys at rifle matches here in Switzerland ride off on a motorbike with the SIG slung (have a photo somewhere) over their back. I would expect a grey Ninja on a bike to cause mass panic in the UK.

        • FarmerB

          ROTFL – from the article “The new generation officers won’t need training for the grey BMW F800GS motorbikes as they will ride passenger, with colleagues from the British Transport Police driving the vehicle.”

          • JumpIf NotZero

            You want to bet the ride English on it ?

          • FarmerB

            Not sure what you mean by the term “riding English” – you mean side-saddle? Be interesting to see how they work this.

          • Matt Wilder

            Sometimes, riding b**ch has its merits. Haha.

          • Vanns40

            You mean they’re going to get Angelina Jolie to teach them how to ride? Now that would be worth the price of admission.

        • jay

          I didn’t see one picture where you couldn’t see the “Police” patch, from front or back. And since they generally are not the first response, there will be Bobby’s every where.

    • Stuart Smith

      No bullet proof glass on a motorcycle either, throw a wire across the road and some caltrops on the road they you got the motorcycle cops guns also, they did not think of that one.

  • QuadGMoto

    Just last year, almost to the day, we saw Scotland have a kneejerk reaction to an armed officer talking into a market to buy lunch and take it to go.

    This sentence needs a bit of editing.

    • Harry’s Holsters

      When I was in london a couple years ago there were cops everywhere with MP5s around the touristy areas. This isn’t new. The guys with the MCXs looks more like photo ops.

      • Sunshine_Shooter

        I think he meant the “talking into a market” part which should probably read “walking into a market”.

  • Joseph Goins

    I still find it funny that the average policeman in the United Kingdom doesn’t carry a firearm.

    • kyphe

      Think about it this way. when a cop carries a gun every single incident they attend becomes potentially lethal. They themselves bring the legality to the situation and are always at risk of being shot by their own firearm. Now in a nation full of people with guns this may be an acceptable risk but in a nation where 99.999% of all incidents are non firearm related then it is bloody stupid to turn up with a gun.

      • Harry’s Holsters

        Every incident a cop attend is potentially deadly with or without a gun.

        • kyphe

          The point is when the officer bring a gun to an incident he or she
          raises the risk of lethal engagement many many times compared to
          without, which is totally unacceptable if it can be avoided

          • Harry’s Holsters

            I get that and in the US I’ve heard the stats that 40% of officers who are shot are shot with their own duty weapon. What does the officer have though to give them superiority against a subject? Do they carry Tasers?

          • kyphe

            UK police have a range of tools to protect themselves, sprays and extendable batons. Tasers are in use but are highly frowned upon. It is a very different style of policing they call policing by consent as citizens do not by law have to comply with their orders most of the time. I think the number one tool of superiority for a UK police officer is a rapid response van with 20 fellow officers in it who will just jump on you and flatten you if you get a bit feisty.

          • Harry’s Holsters

            Based off the fact our society in the US is more spread out that wouldn’t work. The officer per square kilometer is an advantage you all have. Batons put you maybe a even level with the suspect if they are armed with a blunt force object. The none use of tasers is naive as they pose much less physical risk to the assailant than a physical confrontation using bodies or batons. Departments in the US are using tasers first for that very reason and it also helps their liability insurance rates. Why don’t they have to comply? What is the point of enforcement if the suspect doesn’t have to comply. I remember talking with locals about this and they said often the suspect would just run off and disappear.

          • kyphe

            Well we are a very compact nation lol. Imagine a 5th of your population all crammed into Florida. In regards to enforcement if clearly you have committed a crime then you will be pulled in and charged with resisting arrest if you fail to comply. But more often than not police make request of the general public that sound like orders, they are not orders as the police have no right to simply order you about without clear evidence of wrong doing. When we see US police shouting commands at people with a hand on their holster it kinda freaks us out a little.

          • Harry’s Holsters

            Yeah most of the time they don’t start shouting and putting their hands on their sidearms till it has escalated. The exceptions might be they pull over a car run the plates and it’s registered to a wanted person. Then they call for backup before going up to the car. Backup is usually 3-5 minutes out in the populated areas. Where I like response time is 45 minutes and they always send two officers. He in the US I honestly don’t know what rules are as far as complying but besides road blocks where they are looking for criminals for drunk drivers you really don’t interact with them unless you’re doing something wrong. I’m always super polite, smile tell them to have a nice day and they treat me great. The only people I’ve ever heard of getting their rights abused by officers are people that act suspicious and push them to begin with. I’ve had interactions with local officers when I had a lot of guns and ammo in the back of the truck after some neighbors called and complained about us shooting on land we owned in the county where it’s allowed. The Officer knew if was allowed and thought it was stupid he was even called out and we joked about that and everything way good.

      • DC

        Every confrontation where there is psychical violence is potentially lethal. A single punch to the head can kill.

        • ostiariusalpha

          Psychical violence…

          • DC

            lol oops

          • Tassiebush

            It’s when two psychics join in a gladiatorial mind meld. Nasty stuff!

      • Every incident is potentially lethal regardless of what defensive weapons the police officer is carrying. I’ve seen folks strangled with bare hands, hit in the head with rocks and bats, stabbed and run over with vehicles.

        Also, if you are referring to the United States as a “nation full of people with guns,” the incidents that police officers respond to here are also about 99.999% unrelated to firearms.

        • Brian Ballard

          I think the point is that in the UK 99.99% of police incidents, a traffic stop, a domestic, bar fight, burglary etc the police can assume that no fire arm will be present and in particular no hand gun will be present. So the rationale is a gun is not needed. It works too, last year police officers fired a gun (not in training) 7 times. The number of people killed by police firearms is usually in single digits. In 2011 zero people were killed by police bullets.

          in the us this is not the case. Every routine traffic stop or domestic or burglary may well have a handgun or long gun involved. This means the police have to be more ready to use deadly force. The larger number of armed officers results in lower training standards which leads to more “grey area” incidents.
          Where specific intelligence says a gun is involved (known gang member with history of firearms, or witness) then the police go in “mob handed”. With the prevalence of firearms so low, pistol calibre SMGs and semi auto or bolt action snipers are usually more than enough.
          Our officers are responsible for every bullet (possibly to too great a degree). For example that incident where a carer of an autistic man was shot in the whilst lying on the ground would have resulted in the officer losing their job at least and probably on trial for GBH or worse.

          • xds

            UKs muerder rate is higer per year, STABING people is the national sport.

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            Higher than what? America? In 2013 The UK has 0.9 murders per 100,000. The US has 3.9 per 100,000. The murder rate in the UK is a quarter that of the US.

          • It is in point of fact 77% higher if you define “homicide” the same way for both countries. If the UK standard were being applied to the US, the published US numbers wouldn’t be anywhere near as high as they are.

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            No it isn’t. Going by the article you linked to elsewhere in the comments, you can come up with a figure that the UK ends up with the rate increasing from 1.15 to 2.08 compared to the US’s 4.8. Even this is questionable as it includes a large number of potential accidents and suicides that the US figures wouldn’t.

            The assertion that ends up with the UK rate being 77% HIGHER than the US is absolute bollocks, as it assumes that every narrative coroner verdict is a homicide, due to the fact that he doesn’t really know what they are. The vast majority of these are suicides, accidents, and unexplained incidents rather than homicides, it is just used where the situation and causes are more complicated than is the norm.

          • Brian Ballard

            This is a common myth. Our total murders is around the 5-600 mark per year for a population 1/5th the size of the USA. That would equate to around 3000 murders across the USA per year. I believe your murders from firearms alone are in the 9000 a year range.
            The UK has a lot less murders than the USA and before anyone pops up with the “more violent crime” trope, the UK records “crimes against the person” which include things like common assault, shoving someone, peeping tom, flashing and other crimes that the US doesn’t record as violent.
            Finally, yes it takes time for armed officers to respond, although they are working on that. In addition, in a serious “machine guns” Charlie Hebdo (worth noting French police are armed) style attack the army in the form of special forces (SAS) would be deployed via helicopter. The point is that the lack of easy access to guns makes gun attacks of any type extremely rare, hence knife attacks are more common (as in the tragic events of the last few days) however a knife is a considerably less efficient weapon than a gun and unless you are in direct proximity of the attacker you have a much higher survival chance. If the attacker is armed with a semi automatic long gun the “danger zone” extends a considerable distance from them.

          • No, as a matter of fact the UK numbers are a flat out lie when laid next to the US numbers, because the Home Office deliberately defines “homicide” so narrowly– by basing it on a conviction obtained at trial rather than, say, a bullet-riddled body found in the street– that it excludes rather quite a lot of intentional killing. If you apply the same definition of “homicide” to the UK as is being applied to the US, the UK in fact has a much higher homicide rate per capita. And the reports showing that the UK has more violent crime than the US weren’t just plucked from thin air, they come from published studies issued by the European Commission and the United Nations, which also apply the same set of standards to every nation studied.

        • kyphe

          Well I did not want to fill the screen with 9s basically a tiny fraction of what happens in the US. The point is when the officer bring a gun to an incident he or she raises the risk of lethal engagement many many times compared to without, which is totally unacceptable if it can be avoided. This is why UK armed police avoid regular police duty which requires physical interaction with the public so as to maintain a safe distance at all times or put their guns in a gun box in the car when not required.

          • If your point is that unarmed police officers are less likely to shoot people, your point is, well, self-evident.

            Keeping guns locked up until they are needed is a nice thought, but one that rarely works out in the real world when life threatening violence is underway. Consider the case of Lee Rigby. After he was hacked to death, unarmed officers showed up some 9-10 minutes later.

            The unarmed officers then set up a perimeter and waited…and waited…until armed officers showed up. It wasn’t until after the armed officers showed up – roughly a quarter hour after the first emergency call came in that a man was being hacked to death in the street – that the situation was resolved.

            Fortunately, the murderers didn’t start hacking the many bystanders also. How many could they have killed in those 15 minutes it took the local constabulary to rustle up some armed cops?

            I’m not about to suggest that the UK – a completely different country with its own culture – arm all of its police officers. It should do what it thinks best. But, your thinking is a little off axis with the reality of police work in the US.

          • kyphe

            This discussion was not about the reality of policing in the US but in the UK, which is technically still the real world lol and our system works really well as it does in most of Europe. For example In the UK Homicide from all causes is at about 0.8 per 100000 people, in 2013 it was higher at 0.9 but that is still less than 1 in a million where the figures I see for the US in 2013 is 3.9 per 100000 and that is by far the lowest level of the prior 13 years. That is 39 out of a million, basically just under 40 times more likely to be unlawfully killed in the US than the UK so I think our policing is based around a wider national culture of not killing people. This thread was started by a guy who found it funny UK police are not all armed and I can understand how living in the US could make that sound incredible so I explained one reason why that is so. Why the vast majority of British police refuse to carry a firearm even though they are entitled to take the qualification. Having armed police arrive just 4 or 5 min after regular police in the Lee Rigby case is a good response time and nothing much meaningful could have been done differently. The greater risk to life overall that comes with having a fully armed police force simply does not justify a 5 min faster time to have a gun on scene once every few years. Orlando swat took 3h to move into that nightclub for example because all it takes is a couple of hostages to render the first responders impotent armed or not.

          • FarmerB

            I think you don’t mean one in a million. You mean less than ten in a million.

          • kyphe

            yes sorry that 1 should have had a 0 after it then I messed myself up. should not post so late at night.

          • The UK homicide rate is in fact dramatically higher than it is in the US; the only reason it gets reported as being that low is because the Home Office is just plain lying to the world about its own crime numbers, by defining “homicide” based on whether or not a conviction was obtained for a charge of Murder, rather than the US definition, which is based on the non-negligent killing of one person by another person. If you re-ran the US numbers using the UK definition, they would be much, much lower.

          • kyphe

            You have it totally backwards, UK has the highest rate of violent crime in Europe as we class many more things as violent crime than any other nation. When it comes to people killed or hospitalized by violence we are amongst the lowest in Europe.

          • The EU and UN aren’t using the Home Office’s silly puritanical
            definitions, they’re using their own standards and applying them to all
            countries surveyed. Again, if you use the same set of standards for all nations involved– as the European Commission and United Nations do in their published reports– the UK is still the most violent country in Europe, and is in fact more violent than the US.

          • kyphe

            UK is one of the least violent nations in Europe, you clearly have a lot to learn about the EU and the UK.

          • Don’t tell it to me, amigo– tell it to the EU and UN commissions that compiled the reports.

          • kyphe

            What you need to learn is how those reports are complied, like reading the disclaimers on the front page for example. The ones that say things like these figures come from local police forces who have different standards and definitions. What is clear is that when it comes to medical treatment for violence the UK (free healthcare so no reason not to) has amongst the lowest in Europe but the police will charge you for waving a screwdriver through your kitchen window at someone trespassing in your back yard in a threatening manner and record that as a violent offense. that is the only reason we have such a high level of police reported violent crime. We are hyper sensitive to any violence. We have a UK BLM movement calling our nation under a crisis as one known criminal was shot by police 5 years ago.

          • You make it sound so appealing.

          • The Forty ‘Twa

            That isn’t how homicides are recorded in the UK. I see loads of folks on here parroting that over and over again but it just isn’t true.

            From the ONS on how these are counted in E&W (basically the same applies in Scotland):

            “When the police initially record an offence as a homicide, it remains
            classified as such unless the police or courts decide that a lesser
            offence, or no offence, took place.”

            It clearly doesn’t just include murder as you claim and it isn’t based solely on convictions either. In short, you are speaking nonsense!

          • Nigel Tolley

            That’s an unfair comparison. When Lee Rigby was killed, the attackers stopped. Therefore there was no reason to storm in and risk further deaths of injury.
            Had it been an on-going situation then the police would’ve likely gone in with less-than-lethal tools like Tazer or, most likely, pepper/CS spray and batons, in order to protect people.

  • Alex

    Who knows why they don’t run their sights on the end of the rail. The MCX removable handguardrd specifically has an interfaces with the 12 o clock rail in the receiver-end to ensure it stays and returns to zero. Probably an order brought down by someone who doesn’t know any better.

  • Au-Yeong Soong-Kong

    The other part I have issue with is the mentioning of Downing Street and
    Parliament. Below is what you typically see at these locations. I wrote
    an article about British police armed with SMGs
    last year while I was touring the UK. I noticed these armed officers at
    places of money and power. They do not seem to be there to save the
    lives of ordinary citizens. If they were then why are they only at these
    locations? Perhaps a London local can shed more light on armed officers
    out in the public that perhaps I did not see? Are they more common that
    I witnessed? According to the Dailymail the Met has increased armed
    officer patrols in public parks. Which is where the photo below comes
    from.

    I’m not a British ‘local’ but have lived in the country for many years. The various police departments in the UK only have a small number of AFOs (authorized firearms officers) or ‘gun cops’. This is because the job requirements for psych fitness and physical ability are pretty high. Most Brit folk are not very enthusiastic about firearms in general, which co-relates with not many Brit cops volunteering to be AFOs.

    Also, the probability of a gun cop being criminalized if he makes the wrong call in shooting a criminal – especially if said perp turned out to not being armed – is very high. He could get hammered in an inquest lasting for years over a decision he made in a half second. Hence the small numbers of AFOs.

    So, with limited numbers, AFOs can only be deployed on a regular basis at sensitive sites like government and financial ‘centers of power’ or some public events. A lot of them are kept as QRFs in armed response vehicles (ARVs) – vans which drive over to any incident requiring a lethal response.

    The only two Brit police forces who are all armed are the MDP (Ministry of Defence Police) and Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC). They are not street cops like the regional police or national level British Transport Police and are very small forces.

    • Amplified Heat

      Question about the inquests; do gun-cops actually get prosecuted in practice? Hard to follow up as a citizen on that question when they are ashamed to show their faces.

      • Phil Hsueh

        It has nothing to do with shame, it’s about protecting their identity. Most special operations types, including those involved with LE do that so that the bad guys don’t learn their identity, track them down, and kill them. The British have lots of experience with this sort of thing from back in the days when the IRA was an active terrorist group. The SAS were the primary group responsible for dealing with the IRA and were hated by the IRA with a passion and they wouldn’t hesitate to torture and kill any SAS trooper they found and failing that I’m pretty sure that they’d settle for their families, which is why you always see them masked and when not masked, their faces are blurred. Fast forward to today, you don’t think that members of Al Qaeda, IS and their supporters wouldn’t hesitate to do the same if they could learn the identity of these C-Men?

        • Mr Mxyzptlk

          This. To clarify for the uninformed, the vast majority of armed British
          police are unmasked and can be readily identified by their collar number. CTSFOs do not display this and cover their faces as the nature of their job makes them a target.

      • Mr Mxyzptlk

        Whenever is somebody is killed by a police officer, or whilst in police custody, an investigation is first held to determiner whether or not it was an unlawful death. If the killing was lawful, then that is the end of it, if not it is then decided whether on not to prosecute any person individually or a force as a whole.

        To put things into perspective, since 1990 there have been less than 20 unlawfull deaths that the British police were responsible for, only 4 of which were shootings. Of these 4, 3 turned into prosecuutions, and none ended in the officers in question being convicted.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) are also routinely armed, for several reasons.

  • YZAS

    Not exactly an endorsement of the MCX (that they don’t even trust to put their front sight on the detachable rail/handguard segment despite Sig’s claim that it maintains zero). + 1 for good the old fashioned AR.

    • Dracon1201

      No shift from my experience. 1000 down the tube before I mounted any optics.

  • A Fascist Corgi

    Sad. London, just like tons of cities all around the world, are having to militarize their police in order to deal with terrorism. It’s a band-aid response when surgery is required. At least the firearm industry and the security sector is getting rich off of it…

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      The plate carrier is a special order from C2R I believe. I think that they released it to the public recently, but I cant find it as their site is dogshit.

    • joe tusgadaro

      You do know the Brits have had to deal with high levels of terrorism for the last 50+ years..
      I’m Irish my lot were the OG before the lads with the funny beards started acting up.
      There is this odd American idea that terrorism started in 1998..

      • ostiariusalpha

        Plenty of Americans remember the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing and 1993 World Trade Center Bombing just fine. The Simbionese Liberation Army and the Weather Underground were no IRA, but they and their ilk killed enough people that you couldn’t dismiss them as a joke either. Also, 19th century Continental anarchists were throwing bombs around while the Irish were still trying to figure out if independence was even possible.

        • joe tusgadaro

          We had rebellions like clockwork every generation for almost 400 years…we were in it for the long game. 😉

          • ostiariusalpha

            Rebellions that usually ended up with more terrorism coming from the landowners’ side than from the Hibernian peasantry, pretty typical stuff for any colonized land during that period. Though, I guess I’ll have to concede that there was some old-school bomb throwing terrorism during the 1867 Fenian Rising, so you guys were mixing it up same as everybody else.

          • joe tusgadaro

            Yeah but you think we would have gotten good at it slightly earlier then “a couple of centuries” 🙁 ….hmm

          • ostiariusalpha

            No kidding, the Fenian Rising was horribly disorganized; it went so badly that it took another 50 years before you tried again. But, lessons learned and all that.

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    Every time I see a cop walking around in long sleeves and all that other sh-t in the (Houston) heat I shudder.
    I’d never be a cop unless I could wear shorts and flip flops.

    • The polyester used in police uniforms is a miracle fabric: hot in the summer and cold in the winter.

      • And your own personal napalm overcoat if you ever get within five feet of a fire! I don’t know how they did it, but the standard LEO/security uniform manufacturers all seem to be able to make shirts and pants out of 187% polyester.

        • Billy Jack

          But you’re safe in an acid attack. That’s what really counts.

        • Core

          Cotton the fabric of our lives..

      • iksnilol

        Reminds me of the coverall I used for work a couple of years ago.

  • Colin S

    As an Englishman, I think that someone has watched to many Hollywood movies.
    Also, they aren’t doing anything that SO19 (or whatever PC name they go by now) have done for years.
    Just seems like PR bollocks, someone in government probably asked the sas to do a photo shoot, got told to Foxtrot Oscar and this is all they could come up with.

  • mig1nc

    The reason the front sight isn’t at the front of the hand guard is because they mount it as far forward as possible on the receiver rail. Remember the MCX hand guard slides onto the receiver rail.

    For some reason the Brits don’t trust the hand guard to retain zero.

  • Michael S

    I thought guns not politics…. 🙁

  • Mr Mxyzptlk

    Just to touch on your point about why you only appear to see power and wealth protected, this really isn’t the case. You only see foot patrols in areas which are definitely targets like political, royal or military establishments, or tourist hotshots. As for the rest of London, the patrols are done in vehicles which the general population wouldn’t be able to tell from a normal car. You do also see some armed foot patrols in high crime areas to provide a visible presence, but it aging you didn’t visit these sort of areas while you were here.

    • Phil Ward

      Wasn’t the first UK armed foot patrol in a Nottingham (?) sink estate with a very high violent crime rate?
      I was kinda surprised nobody ram raided the plod for their rifles then.

  • Mr Mxyzptlk

    About the idea that these are more just a show of force as a deterrent, I would disagree with that on the grounds that the CTSFOs have been around for a few years apparently without you or a lot of other people knowing about them. The only reason for this recent photo call is for the benefit of the public to show that we do have a London based CT capability that they were probably previously unaware of.

    The first time when you could really see them well was that big training excercise the Met did last year, and they were also seen after the Paris attacks (especially at the England/France football game immediately after). They are also used for close protection of some VIPs, such as Benjamin Netanyahu. Incidentally, this last role is one of the reasons that they chose the MCX, as it can be collapsed down to use inside a vehicle (normal armed officers do not actually carry their longs inside a vehicle, they are in a safe in the back and they have to get permission from their superiors before removing them).

    As for why they were established, they basically replace the role that the SAS would have had in responding to terrorist or hostage incidents in London. With an active shooter situation the few hours that it would take the SAS to arrive isn’t really acceptable (the old thinking was that the most likely scenario was something like a hostage situation like the Iranian embassy where they would have time to deploy. The CTSFOs are trained and equipped to a higher standard than previous firearms officers, and have capabilities that British police have not had before (which I won’t go into).

    In the case of very serious incident the SAS would still possibly deploy from Hereford, which should be a lot quicker in the near future as they are currently acquiring a number of Osprey aircraft so that they can travel to incidents around the country far quicker than they previously could.

  • codfilet

    Why not just stop letting “migrant” invaders flood your nation? Then you might not have to have an army patrolling the once-safe streets.

  • A bearded being from beyond ti

    This seems like a lot of politics and not so much guns.

    • Cymond

      But don’t you know? It’s not politics as long as they don’t mention specific parties or individuals.
      [/sarc]

  • Barry

    600 armed officers in London? So about the same as the Baton Rouge, Louisiana police department with a population of 229,000 citizens….

    • JSmath

      How large is their SWAT department?

      • Nigel Tolley

        Effectively, they are the first response SWAT. (Using the actual meaning of the term) They are Special Weapons & Tactics, they have equivalent training at least, if not far more. Second line is the double crewed ARVs and bigger vans, and the SAS are on route to anything major PDQ.

        Any terror attackers have a pretty small window before serious help arrives.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      Either Nicholas C or his source got it wrong, there are way more than 600 firearms officers in London. I believe that it is currently around the 2,500 mark. The story is that they are getting 600 ADDITIONAL armed officers, so the number will probably end up around 3,000.

  • Tassiebush

    Grey seems a very good choice of uniform colour for their context of an urban environment. Black has never made sense.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      The black (or very dark blue) was picked by special forces counter terrorist teams like the SAS for the opposite reason of camouflage, it was actually because they found this was the best way for them to see and identify each other in smoke filled rooms. Less secret squirrel people just liked the look and copied it, along with the fact that a lot of police equipment is already black so why not colour match?

      • Tassiebush

        My point is debunked! Different context makes all the difference

    • Bill

      Grey, and gray, are the new black. Foliage green works well also.

      And while no one will admit it, black, and camo, are often used for the intimidation factor, which isn’t all bad if it convinces the bad guys to behave.

      • Tassiebush

        Yeah those are both solid options. it seems that camo has become a style rather than a functional thing. All the straight lines patches and molle straps on gear doesn’t exactly suggest camo is prioritized. It’s pretty rare these days to see footage or pictures of any soldiers or SWAT type police actually looking well set up for avoiding being seen.

  • Cymond

    “I noticed these armed officers at places of money and power. They do not seem to be there to save the lives of ordinary citizens. If they were then why are they only at these locations?”

    First, I think that’s true just about everywhere in the world.

    Second, maybe they’re high value targets that are under greater threat from terrorism?

    • Every squad car in America has a rifle or a shotgun, and the very idea of unarmed police patrolling a major city is lolarious.

      Also rather quite a lot of Americans are already armed themselves. Maybe that’s part of why we have a much lower per capita homicide rate than the UK?

      • Mr Mxyzptlk

        I’ve seen other people try and make that argument about homicide rate, where the hell does it come from as it seems to be total BS. Figures that I can find all show that the UK has about a quarter the murder rate per capita when compared to the US, so where are you getting your figures from?

        • From actually being honest about how to define “homicide”.

          http://rboatright.blogspot.com/2013/03/comparing-england-or-uk-murder-rates.html

          • JLR84

            Even the author of that article states that we don’t know how those coroner reports would have been classified, so they simply assume that all of them should be counted as homicides. That’s incredibly lazy work.

          • Sure, if by “lazy work” you mean “applying the same definition to one set of data that you apply to the other set of data”. Did you not follow any of the links regarding UK law enforcement officials admitting that they’ve been deliberately throwing Lies, Damn Lies, And Statistics at the problem to make the UK seem safer than it actually is?

          • Billy Jack

            In fairness to Brittania, all modern first world metropolitan police departments fudge the stats. First world means sophisticated and sophisticated means lying. If you ain’t cheating you’re not trying hard enough.

          • Hey now, they could also be following the NYC model of instituting draconian city ordinances and heavyhanded authoritarian policing strategies, that would fit right in with the luridly intrusive totalitarian surveillance culture so popular with UK authorities.

          • Billy Jack

            NY has interesting demographics that drive their crazy train. But that’s one thing I never understood. How did the British government get people to go along with living in a surveillance state? Is Orwell only popular over here? Maybe it’s cultural like blood pudding.

          • Being a subject instead of a citizen is bad for the spirit.

          • Billy Jack

            Film Brittania
            Brittania films the knaves…

          • Ren

            Tell me where in the US you can go that is entirely free of CCTV. All your stores will have them. Every ATM. Every public building exterior. Damn sure most corporation’s buildings!

            Unless that’s a monarchy joke. In which case har-har, long live the Queen. 🙂

          • Not even close to “every public building exterior”, no; most small shops outside of large cities don’t even have a webcam, and most businesses with internal cameras on the registers and expensive item displays don’t cover their parking lots unless they either move high volumes of money or are large enough to have their own site security protocols. Many cities have installed traffic monitoring cameras at intersections and along major roadways to speed responses to collisions, but most of the cities I’m aware of (outside of California, at least) have specific ordinances restricting those cameras to display only, and the data isn’t recorded or stored.

            That’s still several orders of magnitude below Every Streetcorner In Every Major UK Metropolitan Area, For The Deliberate Purpose Of Peeping At The Citizenry Subjects.

          • Billy Jack

            Just a ribbing about the perceived level of camera coverage in England or the UK set to Rule Brittania. It seems maybe that is just a media stereotype.

            Anyway you don’t need CCTV or monarchs. You’re totally covered with C-Men!

          • Ren

            They didn’t. It’s just crept in bit by bit and it’s not exactly a goverment thing outside of some ‘safety intiatives’ in city centers and license-plate checkers on motorways, which you can kind-of understand. More recordings are likely corporate-owned – bars, club, offices facades, stores interior etc. mostly useless beyond the deterrant factor and proof of an incident anyway. Simply not much in the way of opposition to it in the UK – although there’s fair resistance against sneaky speed cameras and the likes.

            Are you being CCTV observed everywhere? Not even close.Not until they start fitting the things to every lamppost anyway, or companies start aquiring data to track people’s every move. THEN we’re screwed and you’ll see a revolt. ;D

            Thinking of it, they could get better data from simply tracking mobile phones. There is more resistance coming up that way than to things like CCTV, especially since some are looking at being legally bound to mantain data logs for years now.

          • FarmerB

            It’s much more than that, there is almost pervasive CCTV in the UK and it’s not majority privately owned – it’s estimated there are more than 6m available to police. But the systems are reportedly fairly hodgepodge and have interop issues. But recently a lot of work has been going on with upgrades to make them more automatic and “smarter”. Think face recognition and the like. Even more than that, over the past few years, many have been upgraded with ANPR so that they can capture automobile movements. These are stored for some time (years) in a purpose built data center.

          • Billy Jack

            Here in the US British media make it seem like the UK govt have CCTV on most public streets throughout the nation. You make it sound like it is here in the US. Sounds like it is much more like the US after reading about the new security bill in England. They’re playing us against each other. Each nation will agree to only hack foreign cell phones then share the information with each other.
            The head of the FBI was asking Americans to please not sue the FBI over privacy issues a day ago.

          • Mr Mxyzptlk

            Well, right off the bat the assumption at the end is absolute bullshit, a narrative verdict in no way means that it is a homicide. Searching for Narrative coroner verdicts comes up with stuff like suicides, accidents and road traffic collisions. The only potential homicides that would fall under the heading of narrative verdicts are strange unexplainable cases, like that guy who was found inside a padlocked North Face bag.

            As for the rest of the article, it doesn’t show a homicide rate higher than the US, only higher than the previously reported figures. I would even disagree with the numbers he gets here, as if nothing else he is counting a lot of suicides and accidents in that number which I assume is not the case for the US, such as an accidental strangulation (e.g. child on a blind cord which happens a lot),

      • JLR84

        > Maybe that’s part of why we have a much lower per capita homicide rate than the UK?

        wut? The US murder rate is roughly 4 per 100K population. The UK murder rate is about 1 per 100K.

        You might be confusing reports that the UK has a higher violent crime rate than the US with homicide rates. Homicides of course being an extreme subset of violent crimes.

        • The UK murder rate is 47% higher if you apply the same standards to both.

          • Ren

            Depends how it’s classed – actual deaths? charges laid? convictions? potential homicides? 47% higher rate seems remarkably unikely. Pretty much every set of data is going to be skewed since they rarely if ever measure exactly the same thing.

            I wouldn’t doubt the UK crime rate (violent or otherwise) is generally lower than the US per million (we lack, or at least have much smaller scale, of the deadlier violence-generating issues the US has and I don’t mean firearms) – especially considered over a long time period but the ratio of fatalities is liable to be drastically less simply because guns tend to kill efficently – especially in the hands of a trained or practiced wielder intending to kill in defense or offense. Most UK gun crime is going to be very amateur by comparison, or more survivable in general when firearms are not used, especially if it’s not straight up pre-meditated murder.

            Plus, y’know, our healthcare system may be a lot of things but it’s generally quick to respond to a possible imminent death and the UK is a very small place compared to most US states, getting to a hospital is rarely a long trip by car, let alone helicopter. If someone might survive given all the factors, their odds are pretty good by default making a ‘homicide’ death become a mere ‘violent incident’ if you want to spin it.

          • Oh, bollocks, you’re right– I was getting my UK# > US# figures
            transposed; in fact the UK homicide rate is 77% higher
            than the US homicide rate. The whole point of this article: http://rboatright.blogspot.com/2013/03/comparing-england-or-uk-murder-rates.html is that when you
            are measuring exactly the same thing– applying the same definition of “homicide” to the UK numbers as is applied to the US numbers– those UK numbers are 77% higher.

            And the UK not only has a higher violent crime rate than any other (for now) EU nation, it has a higher rate than the US and South Africa: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html

          • Ren

            Really shouldn’t use the Daily Mail as a source. They’re sensationalist trash. All are, but that one is particularly bad for spinning anything to get more eyeballs. :

            As for the blogspot, well, it’s still oranges to meatloafs. I suspect gettig an accurate number is impossible.

            77% though, that gave me a chuckle. 😛

          • I hate to interrupt all that truthiness you’ve got going on, but
            if you’d actually followed the link you’d have seen that they get their
            numbers from reports published by the European Commission and the United Nations.

            What should “dismissing the source rather than responding to the actual information it presents” be called, anyway? It’s not quite ad hominem since it’s directed at an institution rather than a person. The Wikipedia Fallacy, or The Footnotes Fallacy, maybe?

          • Ren

            Your own source states they can’t get a real comparison – as the data simply isn’t available.

            It’s about two-thirds of the way down, past various links.

            There’s much data there certainly, I personally find your assertion amusing based entirely on my personal experience but since I don’t have the drive to go digging through all that data in search of an elusive answer that professionals and interested amateurs cannot find I simply leave you with my opinion and view. 🙂

            Your mistake is in thinking your stating some flawless fact; it’s not and you left out a few key parts, like the source admitting they themselves cannot get a true comparison. They did the best they could; but their numbers are flawed and they admit as much.

          • You’re still tapdancing around the central issue here; your claim that the UK has a lower homicide rate is based on a facetious attempt to compare two completely different reporting methods on the false premise that the units of measurement are the same. It has no more validity than claiming that consumer goods are cheaper in the UK because you’re directly comparing prices marked in £ to prices marked in $, or claiming that a football is larger than a soccer ball because you’re measuring its volume in cubic centimeters instead of cubic inches. If you used the same reporting methods that the UK uses, the US numbers would be vastly lower.

          • Ren

            Not really. I’m not claiming *anything* based on Empirical Evidence or anyone elses claim to it. Your doing that. I personally estimate it unlikely, in the extreme, that the UK has a higher murder or homicide rate than the US. That simple. I could debate from now till doomsday but this isn’t really the place and ultimately the supreme proof is unobtainable. I could try factoring in things to run the debate but well, I’m not THAT interested. xD

            I simply found it amusing that you would consider the US rate to be lower and threw a viewpoint out, that’s all. Be clear here; there’s no way of proving it in either direction. NONE WHATSOEVER. Partly because the comparison is flawed, partly because the figures themselves are always flawed since those are only known figures. The goverment is not all-knowing – or at least not honest about it, if your inclined that way. 😀

          • So… truthiness, then. Truthiness with an extra large helping of “any numbers that don’t agree with my feels-based position must be ~~unknowable~~”.

            If it weren’t for accident of geography, you’d make a heck of a US Presidential candidate.

          • Ren

            Maybe if I make a dozen billion or so to finance it like Trump. Although in my case it’d be Prime Minister.

            As for the figures, all I personally have to go on is experience; I don’t deny the core figures of the HO/FBI/wherever as baselines, but when the source itself says the figures and comparisons are a problem; I tend to agree the figures are a problem and treat the source as an estimate if I lend if credence at all.

          • Ben Pottinger

            You cover a number of points that are easy to assume if your data comes from your typical news sources (who chase tragedy for views). First, most gun crime in the US is amateurish and happens in dense urban areas, places just like it does everywhere else on the planet. As for hospitals, again, it’s assumptions based on how things work there. I live in an area that would be considered borderline rural in the UK and there is a hospital within a 6-10 minute drive in 3 of 4 directions and I know, I’ve been to each one thanks to failing health).

            But regardless the statistics the biggest difference is mindset and beliefs. Weapon control has *never* been about the safety of the “peasant” it’s about the safety of those in power. You didn’t keep swords away from the peasants to protect them from each other, you did it to protect those in power from the peasants. Its always been that way.

            There also seems to be a idea among many EU folks that the US is massively violent but it’s not true. You’d need to live in a select few areas to see any consistent violence and if you don’t then your likely to live out your life without hearing a shot fired in anger.

        • Stuart Smith

          A stabbing in the UK every four minutes now.

    • Ominae

      Those places mentioned were once targeted by PIRA during the Troubles campaign. That’s why you see armed officers with provisions for averting IED-borne vehicles and mortars. The latter was used once.

  • Good to know the rich and powerful of the UK are being protected from the unwashed hoi polloi by the best toys Cobra™ can provide. Is Destro™ behind this? Seriously, they look like Stealth Serpent Troopers™ posed with the Stealth Serpent Trooper™ Weapon And Accessory Pack and the Street Snake™ Stealth Cycle™.

  • Kivaari

    Nice guns for the unarmed British police

  • Wolf Grey? Is that the tea they drink? I’m not familiar with that one. 🙂

  • Ghost930

    With all the squabble from the Libtards about why can’t we be more like the British Police, I’ll say yes let’s be more like them, after I saw all of these pictures. Equip our patrol guys with Hi-cap 9mm pistols on drop rigs, level IV armor, tasers, and an optic equipped HK MP-5 with flashlight (or HK G36K), and I agree. Why can’t we be more like the British? LOL

    • Nigel Tolley

      They mean the training, I expect.

  • Gonow

    I lived in London in 95-97 .Back then I use to see Brit cops with long arms and the Brit Army with SA80s all the time .This was due to a terrorist threat from the IRA.Its nothing new.

  • Fruitbat44

    Grey is the new black.

  • smartacus

    why is it after every terrorist attack,
    they show pictures of para-military LEO’s with carbines at low-ready???
    …Sometimes with helmets, and sometimes at parade rest;
    but always AFTER the fact

  • Sgt. Stedenko

    Who said the war on terror isn’t being won…by defense contractors and the three letter agencies who support them.
    As usual, the taxpayers get stuck holding the bill

  • CruisingTroll

    Serves as a nice example of the self-inflicted collapse of the Brittania. They don’t even have enough national pride (or concern) to use Triumph Tiger 800s rather than those Beemers. Nor, apparently, do they even have the capability of arming their people with Brit made firearms.
    Pathetic.

  • meatcurry

    Anyone got any ideas why the SIG is the AR15 of choice here, and why the G36 is not really in the picture anymore?

  • Craig MacMillan

    geez the guy in the last pic needs to lay off the pork pies

  • pa

    ahh = this is the country where they are now demanding registration of Airsoft guns?

    so if i am staying over in somones house and they did not register the Airsoft rifle a C-Man will come in with his Full Auto

    oh yeah i feel safe now……

    • The Forty ‘Twa

      There is no requirement for airsoft guns to be registered, not sure where you’ve got that gem from!

      • iksnilol

        They are classed as airguns.

        And RIF (Realistic Imitation Firearm) are banned (need to be coloured brightly). You can get an exception of you are an registered airsofter.

        • The Forty ‘Twa

          That’s not true, not all airsoft guns are air guns. Some airsoft guns are considered to be air weapons but it is not the case that they all are. Plenty will fall out-with the definition.

          RIFs themselves are not banned in that the possession of one is not an offence in and of itself. The sale, manufacture and import of them is however prohibited. Anything sufficiently brightly coloured is not a RIF by definition.

          There is also no legal requirement to register as an airsoft player, this is a big misconception about how things work over here. So long as the seller is satisfied that the buyer is genuinely involved in airsoft then an airsoft gun can be sold legally with any form of registration. The registration scheme is not a legal requirement, it is something that has come about as a practical and easy way of proving that the buyer is involved in airsoft.

          • iksnilol

            For an RIF you need to a registered skirmisher or airsofter. For regular brightly painted airsoft then it doesn’t matter.

          • The Forty ‘Twa

            At the risk of repeating myself, no, you do NOT have to be registered.

            There is no legal requirement to be registered and you can purchase a RIF as a skirmisher/airsofter without being registered if the seller is happy that you are legitimately an airsofter/skirmisher.

            In practice, many places will not sell a RIF to somebody who is not registered but that is not a requirement and a RIF can quite legally be purchased by somebody who is not registered. Registration is done with trade bodies and as the seller commits the offence, not the buyer, it is a backside covering exercise rather than a legal requirement!

            The owners of a site may for instance sell airsoft guns as a sideline. One of their players may not be registered with one of the trade groups but if they are turning up every weekend the seller could quite legitimately sell the player a RIF without them being registered as it would be reasonable to assume that they will use it in pursuit of their hobby.

            I suggest you go away and read the legislation and regulations surrounding this, you’ll soon realise that there is no legal requirement for registration.

            With the greatest possible respect, as a police officer who has worked in firearms licensing here in the UK I may know a wee bit more than you think.

          • iksnilol

            I just went with what airsoft retailers said online.

            I wonder tho, what is the joule limit for an airsoft gun to be counted as an airgun?

          • The Forty ‘Twa

            A little research of your own may be fruitful in future!

            An air gun is legally speaking a firearm. Below 1 joule of muzzle energy something would generally not be considered to be a firearm.

            Really when talking about air weapons earlier the more appropriate term would have been firearm but it is one we were generally discouraged from using in the context of air weapons due to the confusion it causes.

            An air pistol with less than 8 joules of muzzle energy and any other air weapon with less than 16 joules of muzzle are not subject to the requirement for a firearms certificate (in GB, things are different in NI).

  • Scouse

    With 20lbs of gear, slung all over? Getting off and on BMW motor bikes? What a joke. In speaking to a couple of Bobbies, in the UK, they said they would quit if they had to be armed! As a firearms Instructor, I felt they were terrified of guns!
    Can you imagine the C-Men, trying to maneuver in a building?
    Think of a US Police Officer, doing a traffic stop, then a foot chase? Those young US Cops do good in the run them down dept. C-men? Half the gear would fly off if they had to run.
    In my mind, all UK Cops should be armed, Glock 19s and 17s, ASP baton, Taser, and stab vest.
    And a one, or two day, 500 round training course, this is not brain surgery.
    Simplify the rules of engagement, some yob comes at a Cop with a knife, two rounds in the chest (or more) worn on body camera. To subdue a drunk? Taser. 80% less injury’s, for both sides.
    And this will shock the Brits, Pubs close at midnight! They sucked up the no smoking rule did they not?

  • Core

    Good kit, if you ask me. SIG makes great stuff. 🙂

  • MartinWoodhead

    Well the Uk doesnt have a vast number easily avilable firearms last terrorist attack the terrorist was armed with a 100 year old pistol. The thing with letting everyone be armed means the bad guys have easy access to weapons as well and are morel likely to carry and use said weapons being criminals. Armed police on static tend to be placed where they may be a threat.
    Outside the main citys they spend more time chasing idiots with airsoft or pellet guns or being called out because someone is shooting rabbits on farmland at the back of the university.

  • Mikial

    The Brits are doing too little too late, but they are still light years ahead of the Germans and Swedes. Sad, but Europe is dead. Killed in an apparent suicide.

  • brainy37

    One thing that is really disturbing is that none of these guys seem to know how to wear body armor or drop leg holsters. The tall one with a red number 12 on his vest has most of his heart exposed with his plate carrier that low. Others wear them relatively low exposing the tops of the lungs and tips of the heart. This is increased if they’re in a tipped over position while aiming the rifle. The guy with the NVG mount is the only one coming close.

    The drop leg holsters all hang really low. They probably flop around like a fish out of water when they run. NVG guy has his reaching all the way down to his knee as do some of the uniformed cops. The holster should be reeled all the way to the top of the best with the leg straps has high up as they can go. This means near the crotch area but not cinched down tight. It keeps the pistol from flopping but allowing easy access to the gun.

  • Doom

    Strange Britain didnt need these guys when they were all British, but now that they are flooded with middle easterners and Africans they suddenly need security cameras and police all over the place… im sure the two are unrelated though, nothing to do with peoples iron age belief systems. I guess congrats to Britain? you get heavily armed officers you didnt need before now due to terrible choice after terrible choice? I cant wait for hilldawg to enrich us an extra 550% per year once she is elected and disarms us in any way she can.