Paul Birch – The Daily Sceptic July 11, 2026
Does anyone remember the death of Tony Keeble? How about David Joyce, or maybe Giedrius Vasiljevas? These men were all shot dead by the police in the United Kingdom in the last three years, but I would imagine that very few people will recall them because they were white.
Contrast those with the police shooting of career gangster Chris Kaba in 2022, where selective media and ‘community’ outrage dressed up as public conscience led to a Metropolitan Police firearms officer being tried for murder. Kaba (pictured above) was shot in Streatham, South London, in September 2022 after he had driven towards armed officers whilst trying to ram his way out of a police roadblock. He had been stopped as part of a pre-planned operation – called a ‘hard stop’ – as he was known on intelligence databases to be a habitual carrier of firearms.
The copper who fired the fatal shot, publicly named as Sergeant Martyn Blake (despite concerns for his safety), was subsequently acquitted of murdering Kaba by a jury at the Old Bailey in October 2024, after just three hours of deliberation. However, he had still been left facing allegations of breaching professional standards and the possibility of a gross misconduct hearing that could have ended his career. But following a review of rules governing the police use of force and their retrospective application this week, it now looks as though that disciplinary case against Sgt. Blake will be withdrawn. Police regulations seem to have finally caught up with common sense.
But why do we remember the likes of the Chris Kaba case or, indeed, that of Mark Duggan, but not others? The answer lies, predictably, in the politics of race and the wholesale importation of American ‘anti-racist‘ culture into the United Kingdom. This has led to the bizarre sight of protesters in London shouting “Hands up, don’t shoot!” at police officers armed with nothing more dangerous than some pepper spray and a stick.
The rhetoric of some self-appointed community groups can be corrosive. Genuine concern after a death involving the police is both legitimate and necessary. Families deserve answers and the public deserves transparency. But there is a world of difference between demanding accountability and pursuing a racially based anti-police narrative that treats an armed officer as being guilty from the outset. Too often, the language of ‘community justice’ appears to leave no room for the possibility that an officer acted lawfully and honestly.
Firearms officers are also under terrifying pressure, because they know full well that a lengthy investigation will automatically follow a discharge of their weapon. Their uniform and firearm will be seized and forensically examined, they will be suspended and they will feel very much alone. Their loved ones will be placed under immense strain for a protracted period and, if all that isn’t enough, they may have to face a criminal trial at the end of it.
Activists seem far quicker to issue statements condemning police action than to acknowledge the circumstances that brought armed officers to the scene in the first place. They speak fervently about the trauma of policing but far less often about the trauma inflicted by violent offenders, the terror of the victims who call for help, or the impossible burden carried by the officers who answer those calls. Certainly, the Kaba family sought to stop the release of footage showing their boy marauding through a nightclub with a gun and shooting a man in the days before his death.
There is also a significant democratic problem when self-appointed spokespeople claim to speak for ‘the community’ while advancing their own narrow political agendas. Communities aren’t monoliths. I know from experience that most law-abiding residents in high-crime areas want, regardless of their ethnic background, more effective policing, not less. They want police to arrive quickly, confront dangerous people decisively and keep the streets safe for their families. Their voices are too often drowned out by activists who treat policing itself as the enemy, rather than asking how it can be made fair and effective.
This matters because the pressure they generate and diffuse doesn’t remain confined to press releases and placards. It seeps into politics, management and oversight. Senior officers are reluctant to defend their own people, lest it damage their own promotion prospects – especially if race is a factor. Ministers speak the language of confidence while allowing systems to grow ever more punitive. The result is a culture in which officers may be judged less by the evidence than by the volume of performative outrage surrounding the case.
Worst of all, this approach can deepen the very mistrust it claims to heal. If every police use of force is immediately framed as proof of institutional prejudice, no verdict, investigation or factual finding will ever be enough. Acquittal becomes irrelevant, context becomes an excuse and evidence becomes secondary to the ideological narrative. That isn’t justice for families or accountability for the police. It is permanent grievance politics, and it leaves the public with a distorted picture of what armed officers actually face.
This is the impossible position into which the state places its firearms officers. They are asked to volunteer for one of the most dangerous roles in policing, to run towards armed criminals and life-threatening situations, and to make decisions in fractions of a second that others will later spend years dissecting in offices, courtrooms and inquiry rooms. If they hesitate, members of the public or their fellow officers may die. If they act, they risk prosecution, public exposure, disciplinary proceedings and professional ruin.
The figures underline how rare it is for armed police to fire, even though they are sent repeatedly into situations where others may be armed, violent or otherwise dangerous. In the year to March 2025, there were 17,249 police firearms operations in England and Wales, yet police firearms were discharged in only four incidents. There were 6,367 authorised firearms officers, of whom 5,753 were operationally deployable. These are not trigger-happy figures, and this is not the United States – despite some community leaders acting like it is. The evidence reveals a small cadre of officers, repeatedly put in high-risk encounters, who almost always resolve them without firing a shot.
Nobody is arguing that armed police should be above scrutiny. The power to use lethal force must always be subject to searching examination. But scrutiny is not the same as suspicion by ideological default. A system that treats every shooting as a potential career-ending offence, even after a criminal acquittal, risks creating precisely the paralysis that the public can’t afford when the prospect of lethal danger is immediate.
The cost of that suspicion isn’t borne by lobbyists or professional campaigners in the anti-racism industry. It is borne by the armed cop at the scene and by the public who expect police to intervene when violent people threaten others. When more than 100 Met firearms officers reportedly stepped back from armed duties after the murder charge in the Kaba case, they weren’t merely grandstanding. If armed officers conclude that their careers, liberty, anonymity and family safety are at risk simply for making a good-faith decision under colossal tension, some will step back from the role and others will hesitate when hesitation is deadly.
That wouldn’t serve justice and it wouldn’t serve the communities most often threatened by armed criminals – the very communities on behalf of which the bad actors claim to speak.
Paul Birch is a former police officer and counter-terrorism specialist. You can read his Substack here.
look how the authorities constantly play the race card with stephen lawrence
they really milked that one
makes me sick how our own government treats us
WHAT IS BLACK PRIVELIDGE ?
Two-tier policing refers to the perception or claim that police treat different groups or incidents unequally, though its existence in the UK is widely disputed by racist authorities.
After the 1981 London race riots, it became law that ” positive discrimination” was given to coloured folk, e g preference for jobs homes and opportunities, over white folk.
If a white man harms a black its a hate crime and gets fast tracked,
but if a black person harms a white person, its nota hate crime, its down played.
The government every few weeks plays the race card over black lad Stephen Lawrence
over the 18 months after his death 30 white folk died at the hands of Blacks
This is 2 tier policing
I was stabbed and robbed on the London underground, i was visited by a police man in hospital, who looked at my knuckles, he told me, if i had fought back,
his superior said to nick me. Two tier policing does exist,
the laws on Positive discrimination proves it, and must be repealed.
Giedrius Vasiljevas? Very “british”.
“a habitual carrier of firearms”
So they were saying “guns bad”, not “pwoor raghead”.
“breaching professional standards and the possibility of a gross misconduct hearing that could have ended his career”
His “career” huh? “What did you do today daddy?” “Oh, gunned people down. You know, the usual.”
“But why do we remember the likes of the Chris Kaba case or, indeed, that of Mark Duggan, but not others?”
You don’t remember anything. Nothing at all. If someone were to get you to write down how sick and evil britain is, you’d have a hard time coming up with a dozen points.
“Genuine concern after a death involving the police is both legitimate and necessary”
Because it legitimises cops shooting people – right? They can have guns but we can’t. It also creates the illusion that they, being so very good, are there to “protect” us. With the guns. That they have. But we’re not allowed to have. In case we shoot them.
“Firearms officers are also under terrifying pressure”
The pwoor little jew boys.
“Activists seem far quicker to issue statements condemning police action than to acknowledge the circumstances that brought armed officers to the scene in the first place”
The “circumstances” as you put it, are letting in millions of sacks of shit. What you’ve done there is like saying “look, I flooded your town, but now I’m tossing you a floatie.” But it’s worse than that, because you’re also saying “how dare you complain that I flooded your town, and if you do I’ll shoot you”.
“There is also a significant democratic problem when self-appointed spokespeople claim to speak for ‘the community’”
There is no community. There is no “democracy”. And your pretend “democracy”, is exactly that. One person speaking for everyone, none of which agree with him.
“It seeps into politics, management and oversight”
The dictators don’t give a shit. It isn’t “seeping” anywhere. If dribbles down not up.
“If every police use of force is immediately framed as proof of institutional prejudice, no verdict, investigation or factual finding will ever be enough”
Every single person that’s ever come into actual direct contact with the “police” knows full-well what every single “officer” is. You’re trying to project the lie that they’ve all “nice guys” and “there to protect you”. They’re all absolute and utter cunts, there to protect the money.
“This is the impossible position into which the state places its firearms officers”
A cop with a gun (or a baton, or a “taser”) is a facist sack of shit. Not a “firearms officer”.
“If they hesitate, members of the public or their fellow officers may die”
How I detest your “retoric”. These shit joined up specifically to have power over those they control. They aren’t “worried by what might happen”. They enjoy it. Every “encounter” shows that. You have these utter cunts walking around, doing whatever they please to whoever they please, with every single one of their victims utterly defenceless. Look what happens if someone – shock horror – “knocks their hat off”. Or calls them a cunt. Or tells the truth about their “country” in any way.
“The figures underline how rare it is for armed police to fire”
Yeah. Nice. Now let’s have the “figures” for the number they “tase”, beat up, arrest, threaten or simply verbally or otherwise “abuse”. Not to mention those they rape and murder. Not to mention the niggers they help and protect. Not to mention the numbers of them that ARE niggers and gays and rapists and immigrant filth.
“Nobody is arguing that armed police should be above scrutiny”
Nobody wants the “police” to exist at all.
“That wouldn’t serve justice and it wouldn’t serve the communities most often threatened by armed criminals”
Justice? What’s that? That you get to own and control everything and the 99% live in shit? The “armed criminals” are you and you “police”. The ones you’re spewing about, the ones “threatening” the “community” are the ones you let in and the ones that you “protect” by arresting anyone who speaks out against them. You’ve systematically and completely destroyed any semblance of “community”. Do you think a cesspool of niggers, turd worlders and british is a “community”. With gays and trannies marching through the streets, “grooming” (raping) the children, dealing drugs, running prostitutes, robbing and destroying everything they touch? You make me sick. All of you do. Every piece of shit with “money”, sitting in their “house”, telling the world to do as they say, claiming to be “good”. Just fuck off and die.
This Kaba fellow might be why establishment figures and the England football team started ‘taking the knee’. It’s from around that time.
This is the key statement of this excellent discourse:
‘If every police use of force is immediately framed as proof of institutional prejudice, no verdict, investigation or factual finding will ever be enough. Acquittal becomes irrelevant, context becomes an excuse and evidence becomes secondary to the ideological narrative.’
Well said indeed, Paul Birch! The Police Force is much the weaker for your having left it. You challenge the idiotic ‘institutional prejudice in the police force’, a lame-brained tenet that has become all-pervasive, albeit nothing more than a snatch of amateur sociology spun by whoever were its intellectually underprivileged spinners.
This mischievous rubbish should be scrubbed out of police awareness. Unfortunately, the current research does not even glance in this direction:
‘Policing in the UK: Current structures and proposals for reform’
Briefing, 23 March 2026 by William Downs
Rhttps://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8582/
any white anglo sachson must be nuts to defend as
soldier this corrupt decomposed jewish perfide Abilon
or he has some jewish blood infested spirit . lot of
lords, tories + windsors have it .