Our little tank

I hear one of our deputies is defending our new tank by likening it to the airport fire trucks. Both are rather expensive and rarely used.
 
But is this a fair analogy?
 
The UK Civil Aviation Authority statistics for 2011 show that our airport had just short of 56,000 flights during that year. Each flight has the potential to go wrong and might need the services of our on site fire service. No argument there and having the kit is a sensible precaution because every year there are 56,000 chances of this equipment being used.
 
Let’s now look at our new armour plated jeep.
 
Unfortunately we still don’t know the operational reasons used to justify purchasing this expensive piece of kit so we’ll have to play guessing games. I did this in a previous blog on the subject but couldn’t come up with too many answers.
 
I now have three main candidates.
 
1. Protecting visiting dignitaries
2. Pursuing a lone gunman
3. Quelling a riot
 
We usually have someone important over every couple of years but seem to have managed without a jeep so far. However the threat of a terrorist attack on what is perceived to be a soft target cannot be discounted.
 
However I stick to my original comment. Let the UK protection team bring over their own specialist protection officers and kit. These guys protect for a living so will be more able to deal with a situation that our guys no matter how good our training.
 
Thankfully we have yet to experience a lone gunman going on a rampage. Even in the UK with their population of 62 million, it is a rare occurrence. Maybe once every three years at most.
 
Should it happen here, would the jeep be useful?
 
The most likely weapon for the gunman would be a shotgun which is a short range weapon. Maybe he might illegally import a pistol or perhaps a sub machine gun; again, both short range weapons.
 
On this basis, the best way to bring the rampage to a close would be to use long range snipers. A jeep would get you close enough to shout but a megaphone would be equally effective. So, no real use for our jeep apart from being an expensive mobile shield.
 
Maybe it would come into it’s own during one of our regular riots - if we ever have one. To be honest, if we did have a substantial riot then our police service would not have the manpower to deal with it. What use would a jeep be then?
 
But let’s return to our deputy’s analogy with the fire trucks.
 
56,000 potential opportunities for use per year compared to what?
 
1 or 2 visits a year from a possible foreign target
 
1 possible gunman every three years from a UK population of 62 million compared to our 65 thousand with our greater restrictions on gun use and minimal if any stocks of illegal weapons.
 
1 riot, which is so statistically unlikely as to be irrelevant.

You can see where I’m going with this, can’t you. The analogy does not hold water. It is ill thought out and statistically wrong.

I’m not saying that there isn’t a good justification for buying some better form of protection. I just can’t see it yet and our authorities aren’t helping to clear the fog. Quite the opposite in fact.
 
Now why would they want to create a smokescreen?
 
You tell me.


Better still, tell me the real reason for buying the jeep in the first place. If it is a justifiable expense then I will be the first one to say so.