The Brits have LOST IT!


PDA






cls12vg30
September 30, 2004, 04:15 PM
I found this hard to believe. How can a nation be so afraid of firearms? Has every British male been castrated?


Troops Aren't Allowed Live Ammunition Despite Terror Threat


By Christopher Leake
Source: Mail on Sunday

CEREMONIAL troops guarding the Royal Family at Buckingham Palace cannot open fire on terrorists because their rifles have no bullets.

They are issued with live ammunition only when there is a specific threat to the Monarch and the last time this applied was during last year's invasion of Iraq.

But, after recent security scares, including the one this month when fathers' rights campaigners broke into palace grounds, senior Army officers are campaigning for the no-bullets rule to be scrapped.

The same bizarre situation applies to Clarence House the London home of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles Kensington Palace and Windsor Castle.

And, although Britain is on the second-highest level of terrorism alert, the soldiers protecting the Monarch currently the Duke of Wellington's Regiment have no rules of engagement, as they would have if they were in combat.

This means they would have to be given a specific order before firing on an intruder, wasting vital minutes and putting the Royals at even further risk.

The farcical procedure followed in Royal Palaces means that troops are given live ammunition by a senior officer when they report for duty but, once they have checked it, it is handed straight back and locked away in a strongbox in the guard room.

One senior Army officer told The Mail on Sunday last night: 'It is plainly ridiculous that our chaps are being forced to stand guard without any bullets. It is an appalling problem which must be addressed.'

The disclosure that soldiers guarding the Queen carry empty weapons comes as Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens and Army chiefs conduct a major review of Royal security.

If you enjoyed reading about "The Brits have LOST IT!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
sendec
September 30, 2004, 04:22 PM
Who wants to bet that one of these guys leaked the story, knowing full well that after this "security breach" they'd have to be given ammo, now that everyone knows the big secret.

Sly, very sly.....;)

fistful
September 30, 2004, 04:31 PM
Reminds me of the rules of engagement in Bosnia, according to which I was sitting in a HMMWV behind a .50 cal, fair game for any bloke who could shoot me before I could put the belt on the feed tray, close the lid (nomenclature?) and charge the weapon. At least they could have given me more practice in that procedure than the ONE live fire session I got at Fort Hood.:confused: Seems the besmirching of some officer's career by a ND in his unit is worse than a lowly gunner getting taken out of the action before the fight even starts.

SMLE
September 30, 2004, 05:30 PM
I have spoken to a former Guardsman. He told me that any time you see a Guardsman with a weapon it has ammo in it. The Household Division is an elite unit within the British Army. I would guess that this "story" is some kind of red herring. I sure as heck am not planning of trying to force my way past any of those chaps.

Perhaps one of our members in GB can fill us in.

Lone Star
September 30, 2004, 05:54 PM
I can't name any names, but a friend of mine who had official contact with a protective officer for the Royal Family said that when Princess Anne and Capt. Mark Phillips were shot at and their bodyguard killed (he may have been just wounded; I can't recall) some years ago, Anne, not liking guns, had ordered him to lock his PPK in the boot (trunk) of the car. Thus, he couldn't return fire.

Officially, the press was told that his gun had jammed.

The man who talked with my friend was carrying a S&W M36, with ordinary roundnosed bullets. Not the best protection!

I really think the only thing that's stopped the IRA from killing Royals is the concern about public indignation hurting their cause. The Al-Queda crowd may not be so restrained.

As for the officer who wants "bullets" for his men, he should be more ambitious. He should ask for complete cartridges! It's a damned shame that a military officer doesn't know the difference. Maybe the reporter just misquoted him, as reporters usually don't know the difference.

Lone Star

FRIENDLY
September 30, 2004, 07:22 PM
Americans shouldnt laugh at this situation - in Lebanon at the Marine barracks the sentries were NOT carrying ready to fire weaponry and over 200 Marines DIED because of that stupidity.If you are on guard duty in a bad situation you MUST be ready to use your weapon not ask the bad guys to wait just a moment while you load and chamber a round

R.H. Lee
September 30, 2004, 07:35 PM
"Ceremonial troops"? Aren't they just standing there like targets anyway?

RobW
September 30, 2004, 07:59 PM
Didn't the "guards" on board the Cole have no ammo in their weapons due to an order of the "Commander in Chief" Bill Clinton???

Don't know if it's true. But I go with Dan Rather: "Yes, the documents are faked, but the contents are true!" :evil:

CZ-100
September 30, 2004, 08:11 PM
Well if one of them do take a bullet, oh well.. :D

Dorian
September 30, 2004, 08:23 PM
here's a post I recently made on sigforum... it started as me venting about one thing, but ended up talking about how we don't carry ammo on guard.

http://sigforum.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=674608412&f=230601935&m=80210218

RevDisk
September 30, 2004, 08:48 PM
Didn't the "guards" on board the Cole have no ammo in their weapons due to an order of the "Commander in Chief" Bill Clinton???

The incident with the Marine Barracks was a mix of commanders covering their rear's and blissninny State Department folks. There are a number of blissninny State Department folks don't like any "peasants" having guns, and write up Rules of Engagement that are insane. The exact ROE's are usually classified, for damn good reasons, but there are examples that border on insane when you decode the lawyer talk.

Some careerist officers, of any Service, don't want ND's on their records. Understandable, but when careerism endangers lives...

Look up pictures of soldiers guarding airports, nuclear power plants, etc. Look at the magazine well of their M4's and M16A2's.

Standing Wolf
September 30, 2004, 10:14 PM
England is the country that lost the American revolution.

G36-UK
September 30, 2004, 10:19 PM
Indeed. It seems ironic that our troops who serve a great purpose in the world are given pretty crap guns without ammo, but the ARU teams that guard the Royal Family (who serve no purpose) are armed with some of the best weapons we can get a hold of.

Hang on, did I say ironic? I meant moronic.

P95Carry
September 30, 2004, 10:29 PM
Paradox? Anachronism? heck - not sure what best describes this ... other than assinine and delinquent!!

''Guns for show''? Total and utter joke. I wonder if last time I was in London Heathrow, the cops with MP5's actually had any ammo.

A firearm carried by an LE or any ''protector'' is about as useful as a blunt instrument without ''bullets'' .... and, I wonder if those guys carry cell phones ... so over there they can dial 999 and ''ask for assistance'' . Well, at least make sure the coroner turns up later to collect the bodies!:rolleyes: :(

MrMurphy
September 30, 2004, 10:31 PM
Well the dudes guarding my local airport (Waco, TX) at the time I was there and NG troops were there, had 30 in the mag IN the gun, and 3 more 30s in the pouch. The fact I was on a friendly terms with the CO, CSM and XO of the unit meant when I asked (being media) I didn't get blown off.

simmonsguns
September 30, 2004, 10:33 PM
g36-uk,i need a good haggas recipe.

P95Carry
September 30, 2004, 10:50 PM
Haggis Simmon ....... :neener:

You ought to go visit there, when they pick the fully ripe haggis off the trees! :D

simmonsguns
September 30, 2004, 11:02 PM
are the haggas fields next to the spagetti trees.here we have haggas pups,kind of a hot dog type,not very good,i grew up eating the haggas my grandmother made fresh,really fresh.sometimes things that would normaly make your stomach turn, when it brings back memories of a better time in your life are worth it.besides,all scottish food is based on a dare. 1/2 scottsman and wish i was there.

MICHAEL T
October 1, 2004, 12:42 AM
At the end of my 2nd tour in Nam 71-72 I was sent to Can Tho to a Radio Research unit , (Army Security Agency , We were never there) When I pulled my first guard duty I was issued a Sealed Ammo can that could only be opened in a ground attack and then only at a officer command. Well being a trouble maker I opened the can. Found 1, 20 round mag loader with all tracers and 100 more loose rounds also all tracers. Next morning I was taken to CO Yes Sir I opened the can and this what I found . SHTF and none flew at me. Even our military has morons in it.

4v50 Gary
October 1, 2004, 01:21 AM
Perhaps we should march them back to the Royal Armory and issue some Brown Bess instead. At least they'll have one shot.

SMLE
October 1, 2004, 01:41 AM
Perhaps we should march them back to the Royal Armory and issue some Brown Bess instead Brown Bess is a much more effective club than the L85 as well.

Delmar
October 1, 2004, 02:27 AM
How can a nation be so afraid of firearms

Sounds like most of both sides of the American political system.

My best friend was a tin bender in Thailand, stationed at "nekked fanny".

They put him on guard duty one day-typical issue, M16 (not A1), canteen and a night stick. No ammo or pouches. The VC occasionally came up and banged on their wire, and he asked the Sgt of the guard to take back the weapon if he was not going to be issued ammo. Sarge asked why, and my buddy told the SOG it was just going to slow him down as he ran for his life.

In contrast, I get 6-30 magazines full for guarding a motor pool in ROK, and a 12 gauge shotgun to watch over a deactivated area of Ft Bliss, Tx - not even sure what it was, but it looked like a BCT area.

agricola
October 1, 2004, 08:48 AM
The story is probably misinformation, though whether those in public view (ie: those in the boxes) are armed and intended to be the actual guards, is a separate matter (the Horseguards at Horseguards Parade on Whitehall are armed with nothing more than sabres). Dont forget that just across the roadfrom the Palace is a barracks (where the Guard come from during the changing, and outside of which is a small reconnaisance vehicle as a memorial), and there is one two minutes away in Hyde Park as well, which is where the bulk of the actual response would probably be.

Certainly the police officers that accompany the Royal Family are armed, both the Special Branch protection officers, as well as the uniformed Royalty Protection crowd (who actually drew and threatened to shoot one of the Fathers for Justice people during the recent breach in security).

As for the IRA not hitting the Royal Family, well they have and would have (but for security measures) - they blew Lord Mountbatten, his wife and some kids up during the 1970's, and there were several ASU on the mainland who would have loved to do it, but probably chose easier targets, like the Horseguards themselves, or Harrods for that matter.

sendec
October 1, 2004, 09:55 AM
Blather all you want, cause we are all the experts anyway, but if you think that British security is a joke make a move on the Royals - go ahead, I dare ya.

We see what they want us to see. The Brits have a long and colorful history of killing bad people that we in the States may not be so aware of. Any bureacracy has its twits, but somehow we manage to survive.

After you've been patched up from trying to break in to Buckingham, try invading the Vatican - hell, how tough can the security there be, they wear bloomers

trapperjohn
October 1, 2004, 10:15 AM
given the fact the brits don't let the common people bear arms. Why should royal guards have ammo?

cls12vg30
October 1, 2004, 11:20 AM
After you've been patched up from trying to break in to Buckingham, try invading the Vatican - hell, how tough can the security there be, they wear bloomers

Hehe...I'm pretty sure the guards at the Vatican are Swiss, aren't they? They're called the Swiss Guards. I wouldn't mess with them.

Checkman
October 1, 2004, 11:37 AM
When we toured the Vatican the guide informed us that the Swiss Guard are still recruited from Switzerland. The ones on tourist patrol look to be armed with no more then a pike or Halbred. But considering that there are so many postings on this very forum (THR in general) about the dangers of a knife wielding assailant I would seriously reccommend you think twice before attacking somebody with that "ancient"weapon. A Halbred has a ferocious amount of cutting power. Take your arm right off. And if a bunch of Swiss farmers armed with pikes were able to defeat everything that was sent at them during the middle agesI'd like to see what would happen to somebody nowdays. I also observed that the cops assignned to the perimeter carried Beretta smgs and wore heavy body armor - the type designed for rifle bullets. I've also read that the Swiss Guard maintains a very real QRF with modern firearms (probably all made by Sig) and armored cars. I'm not a huge fan of the Europeans, but I also think that it's pretty foolish to underestimate them. They may not be real solid allies, but don't underestimate them.

joe sixpack
October 1, 2004, 02:26 PM
[Brit speak] Gor Blimey! What a load of cobblers. What do they want us
to do throw bangers and mash at them or get them down and
rub haggis in their eyes? [/Brit speak]


cheers,

cls12vg30
October 1, 2004, 02:43 PM
Well it's not generally accurate to lump all the Europeans together. The Swiss can be very tough when they need to be, but they tend to not get involved (except financially) in any conflicts anywhere.

The Germans should of course not be underestimated.

The French should not be over-estimated. :D

The Brits used to be solid, and their military forces still are, but as a nation, well, you read the article.

Robert J McElwain
October 1, 2004, 03:13 PM
Some folks have difficulty comprehending the first rule of a gun fight.

!. Have a LOADED gun.:banghead:

Bob

Cosmoline
October 1, 2004, 03:34 PM
Watch "Zulu Dawn" for another example of British thinking on issuing ammunition. :D The Zulu wariors are overruning the position and the stuffy quartermaster is still handing out one small box at a time.

Cosmoline
October 1, 2004, 03:36 PM
Americans shouldnt laugh at this situation - in Lebanon at the Marine barracks the sentries were NOT carrying ready to fire weaponry and over 200 Marines DIED because of that stupidity.If you are on guard duty in a bad situation you MUST be ready to use your weapon not ask the bad guys to wait just a moment while you load and chamber a round

That's true, but we at least learned from our mistakes. Any checkpoint runners these days are blown away six ways from Sunday.

roo_ster
October 1, 2004, 03:47 PM
Seems the besmirching of some officer's career by a ND in his unit is worse than a lowly gunner getting taken out of the action before the fight even starts.

Ain't that the truth. I had the misfortune of having just such an XO. Luckily my other two XOs were top-knothc, "follow into the gates of H*ll," kind of guys.

Firethorn
October 1, 2004, 05:50 PM
I think that the guard over the tomb of the unknown soldier should have a loaded weapon. Chrome and polish it all you want. Heck, polish the cartridges if you want. But it should be an operational, loaded weapon and the Soldier should have a reasonable ROE. I think police officer level engagement unless attempting to deface/damage tomb. Then the perp gets enemy status and military shoot on sight. I think that the ceremonial honor guard for the flag should be the same way. Chrome the 1917 all you want, but it should be operational and loaded.

My bases have at least always issued live ammo and firearms to auxillery guards, even during exercises. You see a person with a M16 or M9, and you can count on it having a loaded magazine (if not one in the chamber).

nomadboi
October 1, 2004, 06:22 PM
I'll have to remember this the next time someone talks about how bayonets are useless these days...

Wingshooter
October 1, 2004, 06:34 PM
Simmonsguns,

I have a good Haggis recipe, PM me if you want it.

bytor94
October 3, 2004, 03:15 PM
While stationed in Germany in the early and mid 80's, we had to pull guard duty on the family housing complexes when Bader-Meinhoff was active. As the Sergeant of the Guard (SOG) I was given 3 (three) 5.56 cartridges for a guard force of 16 troops.

To top it all off, I was required to maintain them with me in the ops room which was on the 9th floor of one of the apartment buildings. The guys on duty on the grounds didn't even have a d@%@ bayonet!!!!.

I can see it hasn't gotten any better over the years. :banghead: :cuss: :fire:

F4GIB
October 3, 2004, 08:16 PM
Government provided "security" is mostly a matter of appearances.
Just ask the TSA. Looking good while lulling the sheeple.

If you enjoyed reading about "The Brits have LOST IT!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!