shoot first - ask later

I see why all the Brits didnt want FBI at the olypics in London--since the locals cant handle a fucking traffic stop without a tactical team and marksmen...WOW.

"Police insiders stress that firearms officers have a highly dangerous job, the risks and realities of which are little understood outside law enforcement circles." < every cop in the US, and one does not get an Elite Unit just because someone is suspected of having a gun, lol.
Fucking scrubs.

disraeli weeps

reasonable belief their life or that of others was in danger -> 'e looked shifty en'e wes bleck

Since during the riots I was fed the fact that he had a gun, but barely within arms reach, was inside the vehicle this makes me sadface over British police.
They nearly blue-teamed when shooting at an unarmed target outside a vehicle.

And Falls, say what you will about the Police themselves, the SAS, who would handle anything major during the Olympics, have proved they're more than capable of doing what is required, and certainly more so than the FBI would be.

ahhh, youre right Im sure when something goes beyond what the police can handle (which clearly isnt much) the SAS will make a great damage control crew...unfortunate you think that is a positive thing, our Law Enforcement sucks but never fear the Special forces of our military can save their asses after the fact. Brilliant.

...
SAS aren't just Special Forces, they're counter-terror experts.

oh come on, it was quite obvious they were lying from the start

It started as a gunfight with an officer injured, then it turned into Duggan having drawn his weapon and then taken down with friendly fire, then to him having made a move towards the gun he had on him, and now the truth finally comes out that the gun wasn't even close to him, but rather 10 to 14 feet away.

they just shot him right away and they're not even competent enough to cover the murder

Oh, I'm fully aware of how poor the Met are at lying and cover-ups.
Remember Demenezez(?)?

The two are distinct?

Spetsnaz seem to think so.
Seriously though, yes. I think there is actually an SAS unit permanently available for counter-terror purposes such as hostage situations.

But after all, the US, Germany, France and others all have separate units for counter-terror/hostage-rescue and special forces. Germany because they consitutionally can't use an Army SF unit, and the US seem to think that a division of FBI law enforcement is better than a direct military unit.

Why do they use an FBI unit over SF?

Because the FBI HRT is just that good, considering they train with the USMC and US Navy SEALs.

What's the surprise there? Met already flagrantly lied over de Menezes, and I don't mean something that can be reasonably assigned to confused sources, exaggeration or even the typical type of bullshitting you expect from politicians, but blatant knee-jerk philandering when they realised they had fucked up. What makes it worse is that everything they lied about they knew was going to come out at the Coroner's hearing, so they're incompetent as well as dishonest. Safe to say anything they publicly deny is highly likely to be true. If they issued a statement to the effect that the sky is blue I would take a good look out the window.

You seem to have gross misunderstanding of what the FBI exactly is, and gross misunderstanding of roles.

Any unit Paramilitary, LE, or Military can be counter-terrorist.
I am also willing to bet you that if asked SAS who in america they would want to talk to about domestic CT the US Military or the FBI...they would say the FBI.

And the FBI CIRG(of which HRT is a part) has elements which qualify as SOCFOR.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cirg I tried to dig up some of my books but they are AWOL at present, as I have stuff specifically on the US Paramil forces.

That would largely have something to do with the fact that the US chose their primary counter-terror unit to be federal law enforcement, whilst the UK chose a specialist branch of military special forces.

I prefer the logic in that, but I fully see the logic of the law enforcement incorporated approach.

NO.
the Primary DOMESTIC CT is federal law enforcement.
The Primary Foreign CT is military.

However, since the situation in Britain is dealing with local Law enforcement, the FBI is organized specifically to that task. Since the Olympics will be what amounts to Domestic counter-terror operation, and the FBI is far better at playing nice with others than the Military or other Intelligence services.

Like I said, youre not really grasping(not slagging you) the scope here-- roles.
that being said, Americans are adverse to the military performing Law enforcement duties. I believe we CANT legally just send the army to go do some shit with in our borders.

There are many different forms of both counter-terrorist and military special operations. Sometimes they overlap.

Posse Comitatus Act isn't it?

While it's not a big role for them, the US Delta Force does train for hostage rescues and has provided assistance to foreign nations in training similar units.

Yeah many units in the MIL train for this-- However that is foreign CT and its post-event action. MIL units also train in FID operations as well but the Olympics is really basic prevention, a Law Enforcement task.

Yeah, Posse Comitatus is likely what I was thinking of-- reading it again however it is surprisingly weak and has been riddled with loopholes...sad.

Given the international statue of the Olympics, I think it's more than likely that we'd have to deploy whichever SAS Squadron is on Sabre if there was an incident.

Also, I remember reading somewhere that the POTUS can use something like Delta Force for up to 48 hours in an emergency, but I can't remember if it then requires retroactive permission from the Congress/Senate.

Actually, the President can use the army in an emergency, where local authorities are in able or in capable of providing order.

Riots, civil war, natural disasters, nuclear war.

That sort of thing.

Yeah, the exception for Delta Force, is as far as I know when none of those are happening. It's for counter-terrorism purposes rather than any of those.

actually no the insurrection act was amended back to the original 1807, which bar rebellion, secession, or an insurrection would limit the president's ability to act using the military potus can no longer command us forces to "restore order" in areas stricken by natural disaster, epidemics, or terrorist attacks so i dont think obama can order the marines in to "help" after another katrina

at least not accoridng to the wording of the original 1807 act, which is now law again since the repeal of the 2006 bush amendment that would have allowed that