Don't even know where to start with that tbh, was going to go in to detail as to why you're wrong but there's absolutely no point. For example, you still can't see why there might be a higher security presence in a state funeral with world leaders and royalty, than there would be at carnival. That's actually such a simple concept that if you don't understand, there really isn't any point getting into it with you.
Funny thing is, you've actually said in that post exactly why theres a need for police officers to be drafted in and you don't even realise it.
FYI, I don't need to research carnival. Funnily enough I'm actually from Acton, next door. Research that. Don't really know what kind of event you think it is but hey ho.
Christ, you’re really struggling to get this aren’t you.
A higher security presence based on pure numbers does not automatically equate to managing the risk better if that higher security presence and numbers aren’t qualified to deal with the risk. Why can’t you get that? Please get it, it’s so simple.
Drafting in normal police constables from all over the U.K. who are not skilled, qualified or don’t have the armour to deal with the highest relevant perceived threats/risks this week poses doesn’t automatically equate to better risk management or the best use of resources. It just means you have lots and lots of police officers on show.
Oh you think you know about the policing and crime behind the carnival because you live two central line stops away from Notting hill
I’ll try one more analogy to help you understand.
If a gunman walks into a bank everyday and robs the bank.
Would that bank be better equipped dealing with him by having 20 unarmed security guards or 2 armed security guards?
Now if 20 people walk into that same bank unarmed looking for a punch up, what would be more appropriate to deal with that, 20 unarmed security guards or 2 armed officers?