For god sake Suse, grow up. You say, "I would hope our police don't solve crimes by 'shoot first, ask questions later' mode". How many questions does it take to establish that an armed offender is threatening to kill his hostage. Who the hell cares why they are doing it, They will be no less dangerous to everyone after they serve any time or treatment they might be given.

If our lot had taken out the hostage taker in Martin place, a couple of innocents would still be alive.

You, Pall & the like would procrastinate until we totally loose control of our streets & our boarders, then complain at the result.

Time to issue any of our cops, who prove they can handle one, a sniper rifle to dispense suitable quick justice. Just think, the savings in judges & legal aid might fix the budget.

If 'growing up' means I have to agree with anything you say Hasbeen, then I am comfortable remaining young thanks.

As for the Martin Place siege, we can all look at that situation in hindsight and think we know better than the police that were involved did, but that would be ignorance in the extreme if we aren't trained police ourselves and understood the whole situation.

But I realize that police siege situations and guns in general are your specialty...in your own mind.

Suse, look what you have to look forward to, when you grow up, and reach the ripe old age of 110! You can become a crusty old bloke, who's down on the whole wide world! Such fun awaits.
I myself hope to become the Sheriff Of Dodge City taking over from the scourge of the criminal class Sheriff Hasbeen, who in 30 years personally dispatched summery justice to no less than 1000 law breakn' varmints, everyone from the Dillinger Brothers to jaywalkers, they all ended up on Boot Hill! Alas at the age of 147 Sheriff Hasbeen hung up his trusty colt 45 and went to the big roundup in the sky.

Hasbeen, I'm not sure if there is a police force in the world yet that meets your ideal, but possibly the police force on Haiti comes close they like to shoot first and don't ask questions later.

The vast majority of British police officers do not carry firearms (except in Northern Ireland). The image of a Metropolitan Police officer in a custodian helmet is an archetypal image of a police officer. They've been a highly effective police force for almost 200 years. Certainly Britain does not have crime on the scale that you see in many countries where the police do have firearms.

So you obviously don't need to give police firearms for them to be effective. Indeed, if we are to compare to Britain to, say, South Africa or Mexico, then maybe the reasonable conclusion to draw is that police without firearms are actually more effective than the alternative.

Paul1405,

How was that 'shooting first and asking questions later' as you and some others allege?

What about the right of the innocent bystander/victim to police protection?

BTW, if the person kidnapped happened to have (say) a metal hair styling comb* in a pocket or purse and was fortunate enough to score a hit in the offender's throat, ear or temple where upon he bled out, should the victim be charged with an offence?

Here is one in Sandalwood,
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00PBYT8ZI?psc=1

Remembering of course that in Australia excepting NSW if she did agree with a police officer who smilingly asked the distraught victim after the attack if she ever imagined her comb might be useful for self defence, she would likely end up on serious charges herself.

In Australia the leftists who have no thought for victims of crime and whose first priority is criminals's rights have changed the law over years to make it an offence to be proactive in defence by having or carring anytying that might at a stretch be construed an overzealous, career-scrabbling constable or police prosecutor (more likely) as a 'weapon'.

Toni Lavis, ".. if we are to compare to Britain to, say, South Africa or Mexico, then maybe the reasonable conclusion to draw is that police without firearms are actually more effective than the alternative"

False comparison.

Then again, the reckless diversity that Britain has to have thanks to the leftists has resulted in serious crime. See here,

<Labour wanted Mass Immigration to make UK more Multicultural, says Former [Labour Party] Adviser

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".

As a result, the public argument for immigration concentrated instead on the 'economic benefits'(sic) and need for more migrants.
Critics said the revelations showed a "conspiracy" within Government to impose mass immigration for "cynical" political reasons.
Mr Neather was a speech writer who worked in Downing Street for Tony Blair and in the Home Office for Jack Straw and David Blunkett, in the early 2000s>
http://tinyurl.com/labours-diversity-scam

Police and their loved ones should have the right and reasonable expectation that they will be going home unharmed at the end of a shift. There is a scream of protest if other workers are not afforded comprehensive proactive workplace health and safety conditions.