I live in the centre of Brighton and, upon leaving home the other day, saw two policemen holding huge guns walk into the main shopping centre.

A little wary of approaching an AKA-wielding policeman, I asked security staff at Churchill Square what exactly was going on.

They answered that the police were securing the area against the threat of a terrorist attack.

So, let me get this clear, if a terrorist is spotted in BHS, they will be able to react quickly, spraying him full of bullets without hitting thousands of innocent shoppers?

I wondered why British police, after having experienced years of IRA terrorist attacks and bomb scares on domestic targets, only now, after terrorist attacks in America and Madrid, deem it justifiable to carry around heavy weaponry in a public place.

It used to be the guns arrived only after a threat or an actual terrorist attack.

Is there really any need for the police to make their guns so visible? What is the actual aim of this increased security?

In my opinion the motives are the same ones that led the Government to distribute leaflets advising citizens on what action to take in case of a terrorist attack, namely as a method of increasing feelings of paranoia and insecurity among the public, feelings that allow the Government carte blanche to pursue its aggressive policies in the Middle East and erode our civil liberties.

I'm not saying there isn't a possibility of an attack. How could there not be after our unjustified invasion of Iraq?

What I am saying is that the police have managed to do their anti-terrorist work in the past without parading heavy artillery up and down our streets.

If so much danger is entailed by having the Labour Party conference in Brighton, why don't they have it in a business park where the only targets will be the Government itself and we can live in a town that doesn't resemble a war zone?

-Felicity Hughes, Brighton