• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

[CBC] RCMP to recieve MP5s

Snaketnk

Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
All proper Copyrights and caveates
source: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/07/rcmp-parliament-submachine-guns.html#socialcomments
Submachine-guns to join RCMP Hill arsenal
Last Updated: Wednesday, April 7, 2010 | 4:34 PM ET Comments526Recommend121
CBC News

Mounties guarding Parliament Hill will soon be armed with submachine-guns as part of the force's move to beef up security at the centre of Canada's government.

RCMP officers on duty on the Hill currently carry handguns as primary weapons, while their secondary weapons, shotguns, are stored in vehicles.

The force confirmed Wednesday the Heckler & Koch MP5 will be reintroduced in the next few months once its officers are trained to use them.

RCMP Sgt. Greg Cox said the MP5s are more accurate and have a better range capability as opposed to a shotgun, which fires a round that often spreads beyond its intended target.

The Mounties carried MP5s in the 1980s to guard Parliament Hill and embassies, but the firearms were phased out.

The submachine-guns, like the Mounties' current secondary weapon, won't be visible and will only be pulled out if needed, Cox added.

"The one instance that comes to mind is that there may be a shooter inside one of these buildings randomly shooting targets," he said. "This is a better suited option to deal with that threat."
Embarrassing security breach

The move follows a two-month review of an embarrassing security breach for the Mounties in December, in which 19 Greenpeace activists climbed onto the roof of the West Block of Parliament and unfurled banners calling for action on climate change.

Despite the fact that the protest was peaceful, the Dec. 7 incident revealed a serious weakness in Parliament security and shows a need for increased measures, said expert Michel Juneau-Katsuya, a former senior intelligence officer at the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

"Where they were on the top of a roof was an excellent place for a sharpshooter to be capable to position himself in a place where he could have targeted any politician going in, including the prime minister," Juneau-Katsuya told CBC News.

In addition to the new weapons, more security cameras and alarms will be installed inside Parliament, while House of Commons constables will be getting bullet-proof vests. They are currently only equipped with a baton, handcuffs and — since the H1N1 pandemic — hand sanitizer.

The Commons constables will still be unarmed to preserve the image that Parliament is accessible and welcoming.

Juneau-Katsuya said the moves are about keeping a balance between an open democracy and preserving security in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States.

"Turning the place into a bunker would give a victory to the terrorists at the end of the day," he said.

Watch the accompanying video... the two people reporting it have no notion of what firearms are (and admit so) and then make a couple of... unenlightened comments.
 
One thing I will never understand is a fear amongst Canadians to arm law enforcement officers, or to have them visibly armed.

1) The submachine-guns, like the Mounties' current secondary weapon, won't be visible and will only be pulled out if needed, Cox added.

A visibly armed officer provides a higher level of deterrence versus that of an officer who is only seen carrying a traditional sidearm.

2) In addition to the new weapons, more security cameras and alarms will be installed inside Parliament, while House of Commons constables will be getting bullet-proof vests. They are currently only equipped with a baton, handcuffs and — since the H1N1 pandemic — hand sanitizer.

It seems rather anachronistic in this day and age to continue to have unarmed protective services defending the seat of the federal government.
 
I just hope this time the officers get better training and learn from accidents in the past involving the MP5.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/returning+Ottawa+Mounties+despite+troubled+past/2775567/story.html
lots of stories with accidental shooting and discharges .
 
FormerHorseGuard said:
I just hope this time the officers get better training and learn from accidents in the past involving the MP5.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/returning+Ottawa+Mounties+despite+troubled+past/2775567/story.html
lots of stories with accidental shooting and discharges .

That Article has some omitted info...  like how they failed to mention the CF member who shot himself was carrying a Sterling and not an H&K MP5...

Plus I imagine that just like when the CF starts giving people new stuff, they would train them on it...  talking about things that happened 20-30 years ago seems rather silly... if we applied the same context to the CF most people here would say "That was 30-40 years ago... things are different now" and I would tend to agree...
 
Ex-SHAD said:
One thing I will never understand is a fear amongst Canadians to arm law enforcement officers, or to have them visibly armed.

[...]

A visibly armed officer provides a higher level of deterrence versus that of an officer who is only seen carrying a traditional sidearm.

You've almost answered your own question: that higher level of deterrence comes from the intimidation factor inherent in larger weapons.  Intimidation at the sight of a rifle is not limited to the criminal classes.

It seems rather anachronistic in this day and age to continue to have unarmed protective services defending the seat of the federal government.

It will only become an anachronism when the current level of armament proves to be inadequate, and that will happen when armed something-or-others get into the House and do something dangerous.  So far so good.  (Tree huggers putting a sign on the roof don't count.)

In general, I'd suggest that "more guns" is rarely the right answer to any problem outside of an operational theatre.
 
N. McKay said:
In general, I'd suggest that "more guns" is rarely the right answer to any problem outside of an operational theatre.

I'd suggest that is a bad Idea when it comes to our National Parliament Buildings...

I'm not about to discuss security on the Hill on an open forum (what little of it I do know...), but there is always room for improvement... In my opinion this is the RCMP acting Pro-actively rather then Re-actively... which is refreshing for a change...

It's not like they are carrying them at the low ready here 24/7.... They are going to be in the Cars, and/or quickly accessible if a situation occurs.

That's just sound planning for National Security in my opinion...  That and a couple bucks will buy you a coffee at Tim's  ;)
 
Back
Top