{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0182370820668693, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003799392097264438, 'mean_word_length': 4.825221238938053, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Constitutionally, Can Police Officers Be Replaced by Soldiers in Times of Crisis?

The increasing evidence of violence in the towns and cities of the United Kingdom, both by armed criminals and rioting mobs, has increased the debate about arming police officers and using other non-police personnel to enable police officers to concentrate on their 'core' duties and responsibilities. One resource available to assist the police is the military. However, the use of soldiers poses a number of legal and constitutional dilemmas. An examination of the role of the police and army within Northern Ireland society during the period of the "Troubles" raises issues which are central to the constitutional relationship between the police, the army and society. It involves questions relating to the use of lethal force by the police in regulating society in their role as law enforcers. Northern Ireland has been the only region within the United Kingdom where this constitutional relationship between the police and the army has moved from theory into practice. For 26 years the army have been deployed on the streets of Northern Ireland in an operational role often described in different ways, eg, "in a peace-keeping role"; "in support of the RUC" or "in counter-terrorist activity". The constitutional position ofthe army has evolved from the period of theEnglish Civil War whichended in favour of Parliament; as aconsequence of this there was a reluctance to allow the army to be solely under the command of the king. The Bill of Rights which followed the Revolution of 1688 stated that the raising or the keeping ofa standing army within the kingdom in time of peace was illegal without the consent of Parliament. Mutiny Acts were passed annually to enable the monarch to maintain an army. In 1955 the Army Act was passed which now has the maximum life of five years. Thus the control of the army rests with Parliament and not with the Crown. The army is therefore under the political control of Parliament and can be ordered into action by the government in power, using statutory powers and the royal prerogative. Although the police are very often equated with the army because of their uniformed appearance and rank structure, the constitutional position of the police is somewhat different. A police officer holds an "office" and is answerable only to the law. Each member ofthe police service holds the same "office" of constable, but may have a different rank. For example a police superintendent is a constable with the rank of superintendent. The rank structure within the police is for administrative purposes. A superior