Talk:History of the Metropolitan Police

Crimes

The assertion that '(burglars) were usually armed because it was then legal for the public to own firearms' claims a causative effect and implies that the british gun ban has improved the situation. In fact, british crime rates in general and specially gun crime have increased since the gun ban. By definition, criminals do not respect laws. A (lesser) administrative law prohibiting the possession of guns is not likely to have a dampening effect on a criminal who derives his income from breaking (greater) criminal laws. To the contrary, it provides the illegaly armed criminal with the confidence to confront a victim guaranteed to be unarmed. Compare the incidence of "hot" burglaries in the US (13%) and the UK (IIRC ca. 50%) 212.152.157.50 (talk) 10:16, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The Internet is louse with Yank twisters who willingly or ignorantly misrepresent the gun situation, debate, and politics in the UK - they and their input are best ignored.

e.g. most ant-gun measures in the last 30 years or so have been carried out by the Tory Party (the rough equivalent of the US Republican Party) not the Labour Party (who are like US Democrats). That is because the 3 gun massacres in the last 30 years (Hungerford, Dunblane, Whitehaven) all occurred under Tory rule (caused by the co-incidence that The Tories rule about 2/3 of the time and there aren't many gun massacres). Labour have simply then kept those new laws when ruling due to being anti gun (too) anyway. Both parties subsequently feeling justified on witnessing ongoing US massacres and so having no motive to change stringent path either concerning public safety or party politics.

Trying to explain that to "Republicans pro gun/Democrats anti gun" Yanks though fails in their `parallel' view of UK politics. Piers Morgan attempted that parallel explanation with them - which as Morgan found doesn't work and isn't the truth about Britain and guns anyway.

No, I think you are drawing a conclusion that is not trying to be made in the article. The article is stating that as there was no gun control at this time and house breakers tended to be armed (as could anyone legally). Officers who were unarmed were then granted special authority in the outer regions of London to be armed to combat these criminals. It is not saying that as a result of the gun ban things got better but merely showing how the police dealt with the problem at the time i.e. officers could carry guns under certain conditions. You are extrapolating that this is trying to imply something about gun control which it isn't - its merely stating the situation at the time. However your comments above are very pro-gun biased and I would challenge some of the assertions you are making. It is arguable that all crime rates have increased due to increased robust reporting to police and the increasing population etc etc. Oh and the crime rate in the US (with far less gun control) has also risen rapidly over the same period so your point is a bit mute.

For a start gun control laws in the UK are not "lesser administrative laws" as you put it. Here in the UK, gun possession laws are serious criminal offences and could in no way be described as administrative. In fact in this country it is extremely rare for a burglar to be armed with a firearm when going about their crimes. I would also challenge your comment re 'hot' burglaries as its very difficult to compare statistics due to differing defintions.

Homicide in the US is much much higher than the UK and further, homicide by firearm in the US is way beyond what we have here. So the argument about people defending themselves is also open to challenge. We generally police in the UK unarmed and on a day to day basis this causes no problems. The same could not be said about the US. So gun control obviously does have some impact. Dibble999 (talk) 12:33, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

'House breaking' and 'burglary' in the UK are slightly different offences. House breaking is a crime committed during the day, whereas burglary is the same offence carried out at night. The latter is thought to be more serious as it involves an element of stealth, where the resident may be present asleep on the premises and therefore vulnerable to the burglar's actions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

House Breaking and Burglary were different in the way you describe, but have been classed the same since the 1960's.

Peelers

There isn't a place in the section on Sir Robert Peel that ties his force to the name "Peelers", other than a captioned image and a redirect to the section. Morfusmax (talk) 23:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Links - Disambiguation

The link "Woman police constable" from the WPC Disambiguation page led me to an article titled "Woman police constable" and to a sub-paragraph titled "Female police officers". In that paragraph, there is another link also labelled "Woman police constable", but this time it leads to the subparagraph "United Kingdom and the Commonwealth" in the "Constable" article. Following two apparently identical links to different articles is confusing.

Can we either change the link destination or the text of the link to better reflect where we are going?

WesT (talk) 01:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Rephrase Needed

This sentence occurs in reference to the state of London for policing in the Second World War:

"The chaotic conditions of the City under aerial attack were followed by crime, such as looting, black market sales, and rationed goods." (User's emphasis)

The last three words do not make sense; I nominate them for deletion unless someone can make the sentence make sense as to what criminal activity concerned rationed goods.Cloptonson (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Citation Needed

Under the secction 2010 - Present, a citation is solicited for the mention of the poisonings in WIltshire. Might I suggest the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal as the citation? However, the sentence as currently written is vague enough to make the original author's intention as to reference uncertain. There may yet be an altogether different poisoning case in Whiltshire than the one involving the Skripals. Does anyone know of one (or more) of which the author might have intended to cite? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taimdala (talk • contribs) 21:22, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Pauline Clare

The section on Women Police Officers mentions Clare became the first woman chief constable, for Lancashire. I see nothing that links here with the police force who are the subject of this article, and it may get deleted as irrelavancy. If she was a MPS veteran it would be useful to mention it.Cloptonson (talk) 14:25, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Even if Clare was in the Met, I still don't think it's notable enough to include here. I would delete. Cassianto^Talk 16:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of the Metropolitan Police Service. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081006133430/http://www.met.police.uk:80/mpu/history.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/mpu/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:17, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of the Metropolitan Police Service. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090501202603/http://www.nettlesworth.durham.sch.uk/time/victorian/vindust.html to http://www.nettlesworth.durham.sch.uk/time/victorian/vindust.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100218043036/http://www.constabulary.com/mystery/rattle.htm to http://www.constabulary.com/mystery/rattle.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on History of the Metropolitan Police Service. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20081107224807/http://www.met.police.uk/history/archives.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/history/archives.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090426000459/http://www.met.police.uk/history/timeline1829-1849.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/history/timeline1829-1849.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081122044922/http://www.ndad.nationalarchives.gov.uk/AH/1/detail.html to http://www.ndad.nationalarchives.gov.uk/AH/1/detail.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060719203122/http://www.mpa.gov.uk/default.htm to http://www.mpa.gov.uk/default.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110521082704/http://www.televisionheaven.co.uk/juliet_bravo.htm to http://www.televisionheaven.co.uk/juliet_bravo.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718192032/http://www.fomphc.org.uk/faq.php?cat_id=8&rowstart=30 to http://www.fomphc.org.uk/faq.php?cat_id=8&rowstart=30

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Mr Thomas, Superintendent of Police

Mr. Thomas, circa 1829-1831

This portrait of "Mr Thomas, Superintendent of Police", dated circa 1829-1831, was published in London. Does anyone know who he is? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:05, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing, I've added some biographical data to that image's page on Commons. MaybeItsBecauseImALondoner (talk) 11:23, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@MaybeItsBecauseImALondoner: That's wonderful, thank you. I've created a Wikidata item, Q104819283, with much of that infomation; if you can add sources, please do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

More here, but uncited and 'unreliable'. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Overlap between this article and the ‘Controversies’ section of Metropolitan police

Are there any suggestions as to how this should be handled? Sweet6970 (talk) 12:59, 24 March 2022 (UTC)