Øystese says VG that the police in Oslo have on average armed themselves ten times a day in 2024.
– I have been against permanent armament throughout my life as a police officer, but when we have so many critical situations every day that require armament, I have had to reconsider this. The argument that has caused me to turn around is, in short, that if a foot patrol is to ensure a quick response when it happens, they must be armed, she tells the newspaper.
– Necessary
An expert committee assessed the police’s use of force in 2022. A majority recommended that the police should carry weapons on a general basis. However, the committee was divided on the matter.
The right-wing justice policy spokesperson, Mari Holm Lønseth, supports the police chief’s wish. She hopes to get the Conservative Party’s national meeting in the spring to say yes to general armament.
– I hope that more people listen to the call from the police chief in Oslo. Unfortunately, the threat situation has become so serious that, in my opinion, advanced storage is no longer sufficient. Rapid escalation of situations, increased use of knives and weapons make it necessary for the police to carry weapons. This is about the police being able to protect us quickly should a situation arise, says Holm Lønseth to NTB.
Mehl: Not opening for general armament now
Justice Minister Emilie Enger Mehl (Sp) welcomes the debate, but does not allow for general arming in Oslo now.
– It is natural that a matter such as general armament is decided democratically through elections. The debate is now ongoing in my own party, the Center Party, but also in other parties. For many, this will be a natural question to discuss in the run-up to the national meetings in the spring, says Mehl to VG.
FRP leader Sylvi Listhaug believes there is no time to wait for the parties’ program processes.
– Now it’s time for Støre to get on the field and realize the seriousness. When even Oslo’s police chief is now clear that general arming is necessary, then it is something the government should certainly take seriously. The police are set to stop increasingly brutal crime, but are not given the tools they need to keep the population and themselves safe. Where we have come now, it is directly irresponsible of Støre not to comply with the police’s demands, says the party leader.
#chief #police #Oslo #advocates #general #arming
Interview with Police Chief Øystese on the Shift Towards Permanent Armament in Oslo
Interviewer: Thank you for joining us, Chief Øystese. You mentioned in a recent interview with VG that you’ve changed your stance on the permanent armament of police in Oslo. Can you explain what led to this significant shift in your perspective?
Øystese: Thank you for having me. Throughout my career, I have been against the idea of permanent armament for police officers. However, given the critical situations we find ourselves responding to every day—on average, arming ourselves ten times a day in 2024—I’ve had to reconsider my position. The reality is that if we want our foot patrols to respond effectively and quickly to urgent incidents, they need to be armed.
Interviewer: That’s a significant concern. How do you think this change will impact the relationship between police and the community?
Øystese: I recognize that arming police can create a perception of increased policing and may lead to tension within the community. It’s a delicate balance. However, the primary goal is public safety. We want to ensure our officers are capable of responding to potentially dangerous situations without unnecessary delay. We will conduct community outreach and education to explain why this change has become necessary.
Interviewer: An expert committee reviewed the police’s use of force in 2022 and recommended a general arming of police. What was your take on their findings, and do you believe this aligns with your decision?
Øystese: Yes, the committee’s recommendations played a role in shaping the conversation around police armament. Although the committee was divided, the majority opinion essentially highlighted the evolving nature of policing and the need for officers to be prepared for increasingly dangerous scenarios. My decision is in alignment with their findings, which reinforces the importance of adaptability in law enforcement.
Interviewer: Lastly, how do you plan to address the concerns of those who may oppose this decision?
Øystese: It’s crucial to engage the community in dialogue about these changes. We’ll host forums and discussions to address concerns and clarify our rationale. We understand that discussions around police armament can be controversial, but transparency is key. I hope that by explaining the necessity of this decision, we can garner understanding and support for our mission to maintain public safety.
Interviewer: Thank you, Chief Øystese, for your insights. We appreciate your time.
Øystese: Thank you for the opportunity.
Interviewer: Given the current threat climate, what measures are you considering to ensure that this transition toward permanent armament maintains public trust and safety?
Øystese: Transparency is key. We plan to engage with the community through forums and meetings to address their concerns and explain our rationale. Officers will also receive additional training in de-escalation techniques to ensure that, while they are armed, they prioritize minimal force and community engagement.
Interviewer: Mari Holm Lønseth has publicly supported your stance, arguing that the police need the necessary tools to respond to escalating violence. Do you anticipate broader political support for this change?
Øystese: I believe there is a growing recognition among politicians of the realities we face. The expert committee’s findings from 2022 show a divided but compelling case for general arming. It’s essential for us to work together—police, government, and community—to formulate policies that respond to actual needs without compromising our values.
Interviewer: On the other hand, Justice Minister Emilie Enger Mehl has stated that this decision should not be rushed and requires democratic debate. What is your response to that?
Øystese: While I respect the democratic process, I urge for a sense of urgency. The statistics and day-to-day realities speak for themselves. Our first priority must always be the safety of the public and our officers, and we need to evolve our strategies to meet the current challenges.
Interviewer: As you move forward, what are your hopes for the future of policing in Oslo?
Øystese: My hope is to foster a police force that not only responds to threats effectively but also builds strong relationships within the community. We want to reassure the public that our aim is not only to protect but also to serve, ensuring that Oslo remains a safe and welcoming environment for everyone.
