The Biggest Threat to the Role of Police Officers
Every summer about a dozen journalists gather at a former army training camp north of London to spend the day watching the training of London's special armed police unit. These are the people who regularly have to tackle the increasing number of criminals who are prepared to carry guns.
The journalists also get a chance to shoot a gun on the practice range; none of it seems that difficult, and we put most of the bullets somewhere on the target. But then we move on to the next stage of the training, where some of the problems which actually crop up on the street are imitated. The lights on the range are dimmed and we are stood in front of a large screen. We still have guns, but the bullets are fake, and videos are played where actors act out various types of situations.
Does the man holding a woman in front of him really have a gun or not? Is the man apparently preparing to surrender really going to, or is he going to raise the gun in front of him and shoot? We have to decide whether to shoot and when, just like the police officer has to when faced with this situation for real. The journalists' results here were not so impressive. I am afraid we killed many an innocent person carrying nothing more lethal than a stick.
The debate over whether more police in Britain should be armed with guns has been going on for years. The current policy is to have a small number of specialists available in each of the 43 police departments in Britain. They are kept up to scratch with intensive and regular training.
But the wisdom of that policy has been questioned as the amount of violence encountered by the police has grown. It is usually the ordinary street officer who is on the wrong end of this, rather than the armed experts who arrive rather later.
To see the direction in which the British police are heading, consider the experience of the Northumbria police who have responsibility for law and order in 5,000 square kilometers of Northeast England. The population is 1.5 million, living in rural areas and a few urban centers. The 3,600 police officers in the force deal with all the typical problems thrown up by the Britain of the 1990s.
John Stevens, head of the Northumbria Police Department, has just published his review of the past years. During 1994, for example, 61 officers (54 men and seven women) were forced into early retirement after being attacked on duty. Before being allowed to leave the police for medical reasons, they lost between them 12,000 days on sick leave: the equivalent of 50 police officers off the street for a full year.
Stevens makes this observation: "The personal cost of policing has never been so high. One third of the officers leaving were disabled in the very worst degree and will suffer for the rest of their lives for their efforts in the fight against crime."
This picture of a policeman's lot could be repeated in many other parts of Britain, yet the police themselves still oppose more widespread arming of their officers. The most recent survey, conducted last year, showed that only 46% were in favor.
The general public, however, likes the idea: 67% favored wider issuing of guns. But they, of course, would not have to carry them and maybe even use them. Recalling my own experience shooting a gun on the practice range, I certainly would not want the responsibility.
It is clear to everyone that the police need more protection against the gun and the knife. They already carry longer clubs to replace the old ones. They have access to knife-resistant coats and gloves.
The likely next step is agreement from the Government to test pepper spray, an organic substance derived from peppers which disables an attacker if sprayed in his face. If used properly, the discomfort, although extreme, is only temporary. Provided the spray is washed away with water, recovery should be complete within a couple of hours. Unpleasant, certainly, but better than being shot.
Many people in Britain would not mind seeing their police with longer clubs or even pepper spray. They would just like to see them at all. I have lost count of the times we have been filming police officers on the street when local residents have come up to us and told us it is the first time in weeks they have seen police in the area.
Actually the biggest threat to the traditional image and role of police officers does not come from guns and armed crime but the increase in the tasks we expect the police to carry out. New laws and police priorities are taking up so much time that many forces simply cannot afford to let their officers walk up and down the streets. Politicians are now asking members of the public to watch the streets. In some prosperous areas, local people pay private security firms.
Many officers believe it is all these extra duties, rather than the fear of being shot, that have really changed their role. In future, if you want to know what time it is there might not be much point asking a policeman. He either will not be there to ask or will not have the time to answer.
Words: 899
對警察職責(zé)的最大威脅
每年夏天,總有大約十幾名記者聚集在倫敦北部的一個舊軍訓(xùn)營,用一整天來觀看倫敦特警部隊的訓(xùn)練。 特警通常要對付日益增多的攜帶槍支的犯罪分子。
記者們也有機(jī)會在練習(xí)場射擊。射擊似乎并不難,我們的子彈幾乎都打到靶上了。 然后進(jìn)入訓(xùn)練的下一步:模擬在街道上實際會出現(xiàn)的一些問題。 場上的燈暗了下去,我們面對一塊大屏幕站著, 手中仍有槍,但子彈是假的。屏幕上演員在扮演著各種場面。
那個抓著一名婦女擋在身前的人真拿著槍嗎? 那個看似想投降的人是否真會投降,還是要舉槍射擊? 我們必須判斷是否該開槍,何時該開槍,就像警察真實地面對此情此景時必須做出判斷一樣。 記者們在這一階段的表現(xiàn)不太出色。 恐怕被我們打死的不少人是無辜的,他們手中最致命的東西只不過是一根棍子而已。
多年來,對于英國是否該給更多的警員配槍一直爭論不休。 目前的做法是在英國所有的43個警局中都配備少數(shù)特警, 他們定期接受強(qiáng)化訓(xùn)練來保持達(dá)標(biāo)。
但是隨著警察遭遇的暴力事件逐漸增多,人們對這一做法是否明智提出了疑問。 通常,正是在街上巡邏的普通警察因此遭殃,而不是姍姍來遲的武裝特警。
為了了解英國警方面臨的局面,可以看一下諾森布里亞郡警局的情況。該局負(fù)責(zé)英格蘭東北部5,000平方公里區(qū)域內(nèi)的治安。 轄內(nèi)的鄉(xiāng)村和幾個城區(qū)居住著150萬人口。 那里的3,600名警察要應(yīng)付英國20世紀(jì)90年代常見的各類事件。
該警局負(fù)責(zé)人約翰·史蒂文斯最近發(fā)表了他對過去幾年工作的述評。 例如,1994年,共有61名警員(男性54人,女性7人)由于履行職責(zé)時遭受攻擊而不得不提早退休。 在因健康原因而獲準(zhǔn)退休前,他們共請病假12,000日,相當(dāng)于50名警員休假一年。
史蒂文斯這樣評論道:"警務(wù)的人力成本從未如此之高, 離職的警員中嚴(yán)重傷殘的達(dá)三分之一,他們因打擊犯罪而將在余生中承受痛苦。"
警察的這種遭遇也發(fā)生在英國其他地方。不過警察當(dāng)局本身仍反對擴(kuò)大為警員配備武器的范圍。 去年進(jìn)行的最新調(diào)查表明,贊成者只占46%。
但是普通老百姓贊成這一做法,他們中的67%贊成擴(kuò)大配發(fā)槍支的范圍。 但他們自己當(dāng)然不想帶槍,甚至不必用槍。 回想一下我自己在練習(xí)場射擊的經(jīng)歷,我肯定也不想負(fù)這個責(zé)任。
人人都清楚警察需要更多的保護(hù),以防刀槍。 他們現(xiàn)在所攜的警棍較以前的要長。 他們也有了防利器的上衣、手套。
下一步可能的做法是政府同意試驗胡椒噴霧劑,一種從胡椒中提取的有機(jī)物質(zhì)。如果噴在臉上,它能使襲擊者喪失行動能力。 運用得當(dāng)?shù)脑?,所產(chǎn)生的不適只是暫時的,盡管很強(qiáng)烈。 只要用水沖洗,幾個小時內(nèi)應(yīng)可徹底恢復(fù)。 這當(dāng)然是難受的,但比挨槍子要好。
很多英國人不反對警察攜帶加長的警棍或胡椒噴霧劑。 他們實在很愿意警察這樣做。 不知多少次,當(dāng)我們在街上拍攝警察鏡頭時,總有當(dāng)?shù)鼐用裣蛭覀冏邅砀嬖V我們說這是幾周以來他們在此地第一次看到警察。
實際上,對傳統(tǒng)警察形象、職責(zé)的最大威脅并非來自槍支和武裝犯罪,而是來自我們要求警察做的日益增多的工作。 新的法令和重點警務(wù)工作占去了大量時間,結(jié)果使得很多警隊就是派不出警員上街巡邏。 官員們要求民眾守街。 在一些繁華地區(qū),居民們雇請私人保安公司。
很多警員認(rèn)為正是這些額外工作,而不是擔(dān)心被槍擊,才改變了他們的職責(zé)。 今后,如果想知道時間,去問警察恐怕會沒有用。 要么你連見都見不到他,要么他沒有時間回答。