Talk:Counter terrorist specialist firearms officer

First CTSFOs?
CTSFOs have existed for many years, only made public in 2015 as a deterrent to terrorists. In fact a document from 2013 cites that West Midlands CTSFOs were sent to London to assist the met in the wake of the Lee Rigby murder -

Can anyone provide a source to cite the claim in the opening paragraph of this Wiki article? 82.13.65.96 (talk) 10:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Counter Terrorist Specialist Firearms Officer
A copy of my personal CV has been referenced in this article (2. ^ "Tony Morgan CV" ) I have not authorised this nor have I given permission for anyone else to. I want it to be removed forthwith and I would also like to know who posted it!! 86.8.252.112 (talk) 17:17, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The information was sourced from the website Cops on Film And TV. This was verified by the profile on LinkedIn. The use of the reference is to identify the source of information that the Metropolitan Police Service developed the Counter Terrorist Specialist Firearms Officer and also that it was developed prior to the London 2012 Olympics. The following two other references could also be used for that source:- the Firearms Training - Commissioner Briefing Paper and the A Career Policing London's Skies article .--Melbguy05 (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No, Wikipedia policy is on the IP's side. Self-published sources, which includes CVs, generally should not be used to verify information. I replaced it with the first alternate reference. Altamel (talk) 04:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits
Hello, can you please explain why you removed:-
 * 1. MPS SC&O19 "includes females"? as it unusual for females to be in Police Tactical Units worldwide and their equivalent military comparison Special forces units. Females have to compete with the physical strength of males in selection.
 * 2. Why you removed the paragraph of SC&O19 on their equipment? Police Tactical Unit articles on Wikipedia describe equipment as do military special forces unit articles.--Melbguy05 (talk) 14:47, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, "including females" sounds like we're talking about a zoo. First, I prefer "women" over "females", but that's just me, and second, "unusual" doesn't mean much. I suggested it sounds like editorial commentary since "unusual" strikes me as an observation by you and thus "includes females" is commentary. You reverted an IP and I accept their argument. On the gun fetishism, the Daily Mail is deprecated as a source on Wikipedia, and "...displaying the CTSFO teams to the public with officers equipped with SIG Sauer SIG 516 and SIG MCX carbines and paraded the BMW F800GS motorcycles" is the kind of language we know so well from the "arming of" type scene that in Western culture goes back to Homer (see this footnote, for instance). If this were written up entirely differently the fetishism wouldn't be so obvious, but it needs a better source than the Daily Mail--everything needs a better source than the Daily Mail, really, including Operation Strong Tower. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * 1. It is rare/unusual for females to be part of a police tactical unit see for example this [U.S. study] in 2014. The term female is used throughout this study/report by the way. There are many adjectives to describe "it became obvious that very few militaries and law enforcement agencies have integrated women into their mixed-gender elite teams". 2. Also, there were many news report on SC&O19's public display of their equipment the same as the Daily Mail article. I did not want to overcite. So if I change the citation, there will be no issue with that paragraph? I don't know how you would write differently that there was an open police display of equipment (which is rare for a police tactical unit/military special forces unit to do-that is worldwide) and state the equipment. The equipment is of note as the whole CTSFO concept involves standardised equipment. Operation Strong Tower there were many news reports once again. I did not want to overcite. --Melbguy05 (talk) 15:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Melbguy, I think there is a huge difference between "Special Forces armed with SIGs and more SIGS paraded with their BMW motorcycles" and "Equipment used includes..." For use of the Daily Mail please see Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 220--it is always better to not use it, so if there's plenty of sources it shouldn't be hard to improve the article with a stronger source. Again, about the women, you seem to be missing the point: you're saying that you think it is unusual for tactical units to include women, and you're wanting to stick that in an article on a UK squad. What you're linking is a study on the efficacy of mixed-gender elite teams (not exactly the same) in the US. First, I don't see the point; second, what you are trying to say seems not to be judged as noteworthy by secondary sources. Until it is, it's original research, and that you're not drawing some crazy conclusion or making some outrageous statement doesn't really matter. Does a good source discuss this? It's in. Is there none? It's out. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * BTW I changed the title: it wasn't just me, and my name is irrelevant in the title. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * , 1. You didn't respond if the wording of "displaying the CTSFO teams to the public with officers equipped with SIG Sauer SIG 516 and SIG MCX carbines and paraded the BMW F800GS" is any issue? elite units are normally camera shy avoiding public displays. You could imply this was done to alleviate concerns of terrorism that there is a high terrorist risk in the UK and that the police did that in an attempt to calm the public. Someone reading the article who is not familiar with the UK may form that view. Instead of writing the "equipment used is..." 2. The U.S. study found that females are not normally part of a police tactical unit. This may indicate that the unit is not as elite as military units or other police units in which comparisons are always drawn. Elite units generally select only the best volunteers during the selection course over days in which volunteers are pushed mentally and physically and in terms of females they have lower physical strength as such a male will be selected over them (See Jegertroppen I am working on - reported to be the first female special forces unit - females failed in past as they could not compete with the physical strength of males). Female CTFSOs may mean that CTSFO selection is not gender neutral and that females have their own selection standards or that there is a quota for females - this was in the study. Information on military special forces units/police tactical units is very limited so one will not know if this is the case. There will be comparisons on how elite the CTSFO teams are to the military in the UK and to other police units worldwide. It is worthy of inclusion. The FBI Hostage Rescue Unit in the study would be compared to CTFSOs teams and it was found that "no woman has yet qualified for HRT" and "two women have attempted HRT assessment and selection; one was eliminated early in the process for medical reasons and the other did not pass the board selection at the completion of the course". --Melbguy05 (talk) 16:40, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but this is all way too investigatory. Yes, that wording is precisely the issue. "Equipment" is neutral and factual. "Normally camera shy" is yet more editorial commentary and it's just not necessary. And I'm really not interested in an argument about strength and conditioning and the Norwegian muscle mass and all that. If your note "including females" is noted by secondary sources you can included it somewhere, though I would argue that it is not for lead, in the defining sentence for the article. Drmies (talk) 17:14, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You've lost me. It was neutral and factual they "held a press conference", "they displayed the team to the public", "officers equipped", "paraded" "motorcycles".   I was asked, I thought, to justify why including females was necessary in the composition of teams. I referred to one study and to recent news reports. For which do I require a secondary source?. There was no other place to put it other than in the composition of the team which is in the first paragraph of that section. Female CTSFOs in SC&O19 are reported in the Sun. The Sun reported that not the lead but the heading. --Melbguy05 (talk) 18:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Huh? Your language was not neutral. Your answer is a whole bunch of research, some of which may actually pertain here but it's still original research. If all this is too complicated, I'm sorry. You keep jabbering about "teams"--it's all completely irrelevant. You need to explain why it's important to include that odd, odd remark in this article, and you have to do it without referring to tabloids that feature women because of their boobs. This is an encyclopedia: you require a secondary source basically for everything and if I lost you there, I'm truly sorry. Drmies (talk) 23:20, 25 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Your issues seem to be in relation to the sources rather than the content by stating in the edit summary "is this gun fetishism sponsored by the Daily Mail?" for specifying SC&O19 equipment in the article and now in Talk you state "referring to tabloids that feature women because of their boobs" for stating in the article females are operators in SC&O19. Equipment is stated with sources and since the equipment was displayed to the public and also that a public display was made the date is stated. Police Tactical Unit articles as do military Special forces unit articles specify equipment. Women/females as part of SC&O19 is stated with two sources The Sun (United Kingdom) and Daily Mail. It is included as police tactical unit operators are typically all male with U.S. research finding this is so which I have mentioned - two more sources source 2 and source 3. Conversely, if there had of been a source stating no females were in SC&O19 I would have included that in the article (with no conflicting sources stating SC&O19 had females). This is a police tactical unit article with females noted GIGN. Military special forces units are typically all male with females noted in 707th Special Mission Battalion, Delta Force, Special Operations Battalion (Croatia), GSOF - Georgian Special Operations Forces, Kommando Spezialkräfte, SASR and this paratroop unit National Special Operations Force (Malaysia). If you continue to have an issue I will raise a WP:THIRD or WP:DISPUTE--Melbguy05 (talk) 12:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Do what you like. I can't make heads or tails of some of your comments here (a grammar issue). I don't understand what is so difficult here and I am tempted to write it in all caps: for these guns, your sourcing is terrible, and your text not neutral and encyclopedic; for the women comment, you're applying original research. WTF to I care what Delta Force or the Croatian paratroopers do? Drmies (talk) 14:34, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Melbguy05 asked me on my talk page to look in on this discussion. Regarding the presence of women in this force, it would be interesting to include if some numbers were available given that it remains unusual for women to serve in SWAT teams and the like - do any sources comment on the proportion of female members of this force compared to, for instance, the overall UK police forces? Regarding the guns, the Daily Mail isn't a reliable source, but it is pretty common for these kinds of articles to note the equipment used: because it's highly unusual for police forces to use military-grade weapons, this does attract attention (for instance, in relation to the 2014 Sydney hostage crisis where some experts argued that the military rifles used by the police led to avoidable civilian casualties while others argued that the police should have had even more powerful sniper rifles). Nick-D (talk) 10:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) in 2015 released that 5.68% of all authorised firearms officers in the MPS are women that is the total number of firearms officers across several units not just SC&O19 that houses the Armed response vehicle (ARV) officers and CTSFO officers. The MPS equality policy for firearms officers states “continually review the recruitment and retention of female officers in an attempt to create a more balanced profile within the workplace.”. Also, “All firearms officers are expected to undergo the same selection procedures and to reach the same levels of fitness in order to achieve and maintain this status.” which would cover CTSFO. Prior to the new CTSFO standard, the highest standard was a Specialist Firearms Officer (SFO) that the MPS commenced in 1992. A 2013 book states that in 2012 SC&O19 had over 500 officers with 26 women in total, however, with no breakdown into ARV and SFO. A 2008 report has 2.9% of CO19 (SC&O19 was formerly CO19) were women with again no breakdown. In 2008, the Daily Mail reported according to a CO19 source that only 3 women had ever become SFOs. I found a gender study for UK firearms units written in 2011 which has statistics for one police force including specialist firearms officers, however, those officers were not trained to the ACPO national SFO standard so it is of little value. The 2014 U.S study noted that there is very little information available to the public regarding women in elite law enforcement teams. I put SC&O19 CTSFO included females officers in the article based solely on the Sun newspaper that stated "Women in squad" referring to SC&O19 CTSFO and the Daily Mail newspaper that stated "Female 'robocops' dressed in military fatigues..." referring to SC&O19 CTSFO. I’m not sure of the reliability of the sources. If there were women SFOs in SC&O19 in 2012 they would have been required to upskill to the CTSFO standard. 2016 information is that there is a 2 day selection course followed by 6 weeks of training. There is very little information on the other police forces that have officers trained to the CTSFO standard such as if any have women officers. The use of the SIG 516 assault rifle was reported in the Guardian, Telegraph, Standard, Mirror and BBC. The use of the new SIG rifle the MCX was reported in the BBC and the Sun. Then there is the Daily Mail article the only one I cited, which in hindsight I should have includes others, it had the best photos and best video. A firearms blog website commented that "what we see here is probably the first operational use of the Sig Saur 5.56x45mm MCX that has reached the mainstream media" they are referring to military special forces units let alone police tactical units. The MCX can be chambered in a new rifle cartridge .300 AAC Blackout that was described in an Australian newspaper article regarding an Australian police tactical unit being issued with new guns as "supersonic rounds" and "described as “devastating’’ at short range". No UK media reports that CTSFOs are using this cartridge. SC&O19 CTSFOs uniquely use motorcycles with an armed officer as passenger the BMW F800GS sources are Motorcycle news, Telegraph, Express and Daily Mail.  The motorcycle concept was introduced in 2014 known as the single Armed Response Vehicle service according to an official MPS publication – a first for the UK - although all media have reported 2016 when a public display was made. The MPS introduced the ARV (Car) in 1991 which was replicated across the UK.--Melbguy05 (talk) 23:02, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Quick note to above, I wasn't aware of the context of the Daily Mail article on female CTSFO operators from the online version. They ran a page 1 story less than respectful to a highly trained operator referring to her as "She" and continued on page 4 after it was noticed one of the CTSFOs was a female at a football/soccer game in November 2015. Again, I wasn't aware of the Sun article context from the online version. It was even less respectful referring to the female operator as "The HERminator". That seems to be their basis for stating women officers. From the online version I didn't release the photos were supposed to be of a female operator I was too interested in the kit. It is likely this a photo of a female CTSFO operator at a fatal shooting in December 2015. The Standard newspaper with due respect described as a female armed police officer - the firearms officers involved were described as specialist firearms officers. I came across a 2011 CO19 presentation with the presenter answering 19 females in CO19 and that "Some female officers were SFOs." --Melbguy05 (talk) 08:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

I propose to include "SC&O19 CTSFOs are equipped with SIG516 and SIG MCX carbines and BMW F800GS motorcycles used for deployments in central London." using the BBC, Motor Cycle News and the Telegraph as sources after the Operation Strong Tower paragraph. Depending on consensus, I could include "The SC&O19 CTSFO unit is gender diverse including women which is rare for police tactical units." using the Sun newspaper as the source. The Law Enforcement Executive Forum Journal in March 2015 published an article titled “Women and SWAT: Making Entry into Police Tactical Teams” by Thorvald Dahle. In the introduction he states "SWAT units remain largely the domain of men" and "Results of this study find that women are rarely represented on SWAT teams" and in the discussion states "The results of this study indicate that female SWAT operators are rare, with only eight women (0.47%) working in SWAT among the 1,704 total SWAT operators in the 41 police agencies included in this study".--Melbguy05 (talk) 16:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

สภาวะจับตัวประกันแอบความฝ่ายแบบติดตัว นอกหน้ากระจก
หมายกฎ 2001:44C8:4704:140C:1:0:D2E3:638D (talk) 02:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC)