Talk:Specialist Firearms Command

message: While the article implies the berets are no longer worn, there was a photo published in Metro on 2005-08-02 that showed two armed officers at Liverpool St Station, both wearing berets and dark blue shirts.  I've seen a different photo recently  of officers wearing berets, although I can't find any online. Zoganes 22:54, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
:The clue is that this was at Liverpool St Station. The officers were from the City of London Police firearms unit, not the Metropolitan Police. --Sapient 06:38, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berets 

message: The Met Firearms Unit has moved from Specialist Operations (SO) to Central Operations (CO) and is now called CO19. This has not been a popular move, apparently... It will take a while for this to be established so I suggest we leave this page as SO19 for the moment. --Sapient 06:38, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In the media senior officers are now referring to it as CO19 and the new name has been appearing in the newspapers. I've updated the article accordingly and will move it with appropriate redirects. The official websites are out of date, but if you don't believe me, have a look here, or here. Sapient 14:53, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change of name - now CO19

message: I think the Glock model used is the 17 as the 22 is not in 9mm ?
Can someone please clear this up ?? --139.168.204.172 09:04, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glock 

message: Surely a bit biased?
April 2007
: May be true, but needs corroboration. Nick Cooper 09:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exhibit B: 
The ARV officers are all issued with the Glock 17 self-loading pistol in addition to an MP5 or an X26 Taser, one of our [emphasis added] current less-lethal options... In the 2006/07 financial year, the TST teams undertook over 280 deployments.
 
Sounds like an armed police officer has been writing about this (use of 1st person, exact details). Does this not suggest a conflict of interest when combined with the statement above? Naturally an AFO would be comfortable thinking that he was better equipped and trained than (for example) GSG-9,the SAS, Delta Force and other special ops units. Editus Reloaded 18:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Posted some of that section from a freedom of information act release infront of me. Will ammend.  Caffine Junky
No one can make this wild sentance up without being in every single police counter terrorist unit in the world. Because if you havent how do you know one is better than the other if you havent been in it??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Police,Mad,Jack (talk • contribs) 13:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The SFO teams are better equipped and trained than many national counter-terrorist teams" 

message: Under the ARV section it says "In their first year, they were actively deployed on 132 occasions. In 2006, they deployed 2,232 times in response to 11,725 calls to spontaneous firearms incidents." 2,232 seems rather high for 1 year in 1 city! This would make more sense if it was 2,232 times in total since 1991 (their first year) since it would mean roughly 150 per year. Since there is no source quoted for this statistic, I can't check whether it's true or just a typing misunderstanding. I recommend it be changed or removed completely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ninj4 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 18 September 2007
:The relevant CO19 page states that ARVs were first used in 1991, and that:
::"The workload of these ARV's has increased dramatically since their inception. In their first year they were actively deployed on 132 occasions. In 1999, they deployed 1,440 times. 2000 this figure was 1,441. In 2001 it was 1,058 and 2002 2,490 times."
:The figure of 2,232 in 2006 does not, therefore, seem out of step. Nick Cooper 17:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ARV Number of deployed times

message: When I inserted the list of firearms issued to CO19, I did it in a list format so it could easily be read and more friendly to gain information from. As after all the weapons it has their individual classifications etc. This list is the same as another page, and an anon deleted the list and redirect it to the other page. However, I think this is wrong due to people wanting the information readily avaliable. Any comments/suggestion or general thoughts on the matter would be appreciated, many thanks. Yours, Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 11:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: List of firearms issued 

message: It may be an idea to observe more accurate weapon classification in future, the MP5 is not a semi-automatic carbine, it is a submachine gun, as it is chambered for handgun caliber ammunition.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.241.212.210 (talk) 20:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Firearms classification: 

message: The image :Image:Met-police-logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Met-police-logo.svg

message: I know that in the Daniel Silva novel 'The Secret Servant', the official cover story after Gabriel Allon and Mikhail were photographed at the end, was that they were operatives of the MPS's SO29. SO19 was also talked about a bit earlier in the book.L.J. Tibbs (talk) 17:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  SO/CO19 in Popular Culture

message: My attention was drawn to the UK flag in the infobox, and I was wondering if that was appropriate if this is a London-based organization rather than a national organization.  The infobox  might not be the right choice, though I'm not sure if  is suited to the subject. Reidgreg (talk) 15:58, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox choice 

message: https://twitter.com/KyleGordonMPS/status/1063128149175820289
inasmuch as it a Police officer's account.
Sammartinlai (talk) 04:53, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Pending a more reliable source it is accurate however.  The police officer in question the chief officer in charge of Firearms policing for London (amongst other things), which is verifiable. Bowchaser (talk) 12:09, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  No it is not. It doesn't meet . It is not a verified account. Sammartinlai (talk) 06:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be so, but that is the Chief Officer who is in charge of firearms policing in London and the name is still SCO19.  If you look at @MPSonthestreet they are using the hashtag #SCO19 for a series of Tweets about the unit and did not challenge the Chief Officer confirming what it is. THE @MPSonthestreets is a verified account.  Happy?  Bowchaser (talk) 11:00, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Leave it at SCO19. That Commander's account is followed by Met verified accounts - it's clearly not fake, albeit not fitting into the reliable source guidance. 07Alpha55 (talk) 22:16, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Read up Wikipedia guidelines Sammartinlai (talk) 03:05, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  My own twitter account is followed by several verified acccounts so should use it on Wikipedia? Your argument does not stand. Sammartinlai (talk) 03:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of the Chiefs account being verified or not, the @MPSonthestreets account (which is verified) is clearly continuing to use "SCO19" in its tweets.  Common sense has to come into this at some point! Bowchaser (talk) 09:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now removed the previous WP:TWITTER source and added a FOI response which does indeed confirm that the MPS uses SCO19 as the public name of the unit. I hope this resolves this controversy. Johntalk 00:47, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Perfect, thanks.  Bowchaser (talk) 11:11, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twitter is not a reliable source 

message: SCO19 as a whole is undergoing a rename to MO19 which seems to include divisions like Specialist and Organised Crime Unit (SOCU). However, the change is reportedly mostly internal so should this page be updated accordingly? ThatOneGuy000 (talk) 17:20, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  SCO19 becoming MO19 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The article states that there are four tiers of armed officers, then goes on to describe only two; armed response vehicles and counter-terrorist officers. Where are the other two? Or do the three different roles in armed response vehicles count as separate tiers? — The Anome (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four tiers?