FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

a Dangerous Man?

Jump to newest
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents".

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right"

The first role of govt is the protection of its citizens, to make such a comment in light of recent events is quite ridiculous from a leader of the opposition. Some of his politics are to be admi_ed, but hi naivety is inc_edibly worrying.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

It's his own words, not establishment spin.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right"

So you don't think he is being attacked because he is getting it wrong !!!!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right"

It's not just the media/establishment who attack Jeremy Corbyn, more often than not its his own Labour MP's, lol.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iSTARessWoman
over a year ago

London


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right"

I've not studied his policies in detail and no doubt this concept has been plucked from somewhere, potentially out of context, and then distorted by the same neocon media that we have.

There are some who have wet dreams when this tittle tattle is distributed, their little neocon heads spinning gleefully.

The man appears to be amongst the few in parliament who have decent principles, and not particularly in it for the power and ego. The vast majority of people in this country aren't particularly well understood or represented in parliament, except for how to best manipulate their minds to get votes and then shaft them, once they're in power.

Comparing the police forces of the USA and the UK, I much prefer our own, in part due to the fact that they don't carry weapons as standard. I think this makes the streets safer for the public and the police personnel. My gut feel is that we probably need some staff to be armed but after the Brazilian young man's death, it was obvious that they were not working appropriately.

Mind your heads with all the spin going around.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

"

No No, he does that all by himself. I don't need the daily fail to point that out to me. I just watch his inter_iews and think for myself.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

Not seen the full article you refer to but i will say i am not happy as a citizen and an ex member of the armed forces to be in a situation whereby we may have our armed police and or the military in a situation where they do have to take that decision but if they do have to then i hope they are not acting on piss poor intelligence and afterwards will not be made the scapegoats..

i also don't want to see another innocent person shot dead..

OP when one engages with a person in the situation refer_ed to one never shoots to wound..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

If someone can post a link to reputable, unbiased source for the data, it would be helpful.

Otherwise it's like a game of Chinese whispers. I feel that we're almost like little pawns being played with by someone. And it won't be Corbyn.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Remember Jean Charles de menezes?

No wonder the establishment always win. Most people couldn't think their way out of a paper bag.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Not happy" is not the same as "won't allow".

I agree with Jez, though it's a bit of a politically naive time to say such things with passions and emotions so aroused.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *eorgeyporgeyMan
over a year ago

Warrington


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "
Shooting to wound and making an error is not shooting to kill.

Corbyn is very misquoted....

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"If someone can post a link to reputable, unbiased source for the data, it would be helpful.

Otherwise it's like a game of Chinese whispers. I feel that we're almost like little pawns being played with by someone. And it won't be Corbyn."

Checking Labour MP's Simon Danscuk's twitter feed may be worth a shot, he's usually one of the first to launch attacks at Corbyn.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I've found something on the BBC, so allowed via Fab's policies for links posting:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34832023

It doesn't go in to great detail, nor does the question get asked upon whether the police should ever kill, if it was the only way that they could prevent someone from killing others - which is probably a more pertinent question for them to have asked.

Primarily our police won't be aiming to kill a suspect, as their first priority, but to restrain and prevent casualties among the public - so it was a bit of a straw man argument.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"If someone can post a link to reputable, unbiased source for the data, it would be helpful.

Otherwise it's like a game of Chinese whispers. I feel that we're almost like little pawns being played with by someone. And it won't be Corbyn."

Jeremy Corbyn 'not happy' with shoot-to-kill policy - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34832023

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

So you don't think he is being attacked because he is getting it wrong !!!!!"

No, I think he is being attacked because he dares to offer something different from the bullshit we are spoonfed by the media and the Establishment it supports.

There is a reason why he has been a politician for so long. The electorate elected him. Are you saying the electorate are morons?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

I've not studied his policies in detail and no doubt this concept has been plucked from somewhere, potentially out of context, and then distorted by the same neocon media that we have.

There are some who have wet dreams when this tittle tattle is distributed, their little neocon heads spinning gleefully.

The man appears to be amongst the few in parliament who have decent principles, and not particularly in it for the power and ego. The vast majority of people in this country aren't particularly well understood or represented in parliament, except for how to best manipulate their minds to get votes and then shaft them, once they're in power.

Comparing the police forces of the USA and the UK, I much prefer our own, in part due to the fact that they don't carry weapons as standard. I think this makes the streets safer for the public and the police personnel. My gut feel is that we probably need some staff to be armed but after the Brazilian young man's death, it was obvious that they were not working appropriately.

Mind your heads with all the spin going around."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7. "

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hopefully, before to long it will be the norm for the MET to be armed rather than having to wait for armed response. Currently the only defence they have is harsh language.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why politics? Mr W

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm not happy for people to be shot on our streets either. Not happy for anyone to be shot anywhere for any reason, actually.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *edMan
over a year ago

cambridgeshire

Don't believe the movies. Shooting at another human, bad or good is a stressful experience that will make it impossible to shoot with pin point accuracy in a combat situation.

Imagine yourself in a situation where you believe the opponent is armed and may shoot at you, and/or others. Imagine he or she may be about to trigger a suicide vest. Imagine you adrenalin levels at this point. Adrenalin might be good in a computer game where you know you can reply if you screw it up. It's not so good in a real life and death scenario.

In that scenario police will, and should keep shooting until the threat is removed.

If Jeremy Corbyn really expects police or military to shoot to wound he is a complete plank.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago

Titz Towers, North Notts

There was a lovely section in Private Eye a while ago with what the media claimed he said and what he actually said. Very different.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hopefully, before to long it will be the norm for the MET to be armed rather than having to wait for armed response. Currently the only defence they have is harsh language."

The UK police is one of a few in the world to be unarmed as standard. That is one of the reasons (there are others) why we have such a low incidence of gun crime in the UK. The Police that are armed are trained to an extremely high standard and undergo almost constant evaluation. That makes me feel quite safe and reassu_ed. I wouldn't want all Police to be armed. So the belief is "lets have fewer Police armed, but train them better so that less is more"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda. "

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Hopefully, before to long it will be the norm for the MET to be armed rather than having to wait for armed response. Currently the only defence they have is harsh language."

You forgot truncheons and tazers, but they are about as effective as harsh language against someone brandishing an Ak-47 full of live rounds.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"There was a lovely section in Private Eye a while ago with what the media claimed he said and what he actually said. Very different. "

Watch the video in the link.

Jeremy Corbyn 'not happy' with shoot-to-kill policy - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34832023

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda. "

Well put, our armed Police move heaven and earth before they open fire. You only have to watch how they spend countless hours negotiating with some d*unken idiot waving a knife, to know that using lethal force is always a last resort

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?"

That's quite extreme; it could be just a person who isn't white, on a tube with a rucksack.

Let's not forget.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

I think he is a fool but I don't like the constant beating up of him.

I don't like those games that the press play

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *lovisMan
over a year ago

Twickenham

Ordinary people run from danger

The police and emergency services run towards the danger.

Give them the means and support to protect us and themselves.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You have to decide whether you want someone that gives you an answer to your question based on their beliefs (Corbyn) or fails to provide a direct answer and abdicates responsibility like Cameron - from the BBC website:

Asked about the prime minister's own opinion of the shoot-to-kill policy, David Cameron's official spokesman said such matters were ultimately "an operational decision for police on the ground".

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

That's quite extreme; it could be just a person who isn't white, on a tube with a rucksack.

Let's not forget.

"

Extreme? Perhaps you missed what happened in Paris just a few days ago? We are talking in light of that situation. So how would you deal with it?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?"

The UK Police, as they at the current time, are very well prepa_ed to deal with 'several, seperate, fast moving incidents'. The hold regular exercises to train to deal with this very scenario, and have been doing so ever since the Mumbai attacks.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"You have to decide whether you want someone that gives you an answer to your question based on their beliefs (Corbyn) or fails to provide a direct answer and abdicates responsibility like Cameron - from the BBC website:

Asked about the prime minister's own opinion of the shoot-to-kill policy, David Cameron's official spokesman said such matters were ultimately "an operational decision for police on the ground".

"

That is the correct answer. Corbyn isn't going to be face to face with the terrorists in these situations, but he thinks he can prejudge the situation. Its the man on the ground with his finger on the trigger and potentially hund_eds of lives in his hand who has to make the final call. That is an awful lot of responsibility.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

The UK Police, as they at the current time, are very well prepa_ed to deal with 'several, seperate, fast moving incidents'. The hold regular exercises to train to deal with this very scenario, and have been doing so ever since the Mumbai attacks. "

And you don't think their current plan involves the use of lethal force?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *eorgeyporgeyMan
over a year ago

Warrington


"You have to decide whether you want someone that gives you an answer to your question based on their beliefs (Corbyn) or fails to provide a direct answer and abdicates responsibility like Cameron - from the BBC website:

Asked about the prime minister's own opinion of the shoot-to-kill policy, David Cameron's official spokesman said such matters were ultimately "an operational decision for police on the ground".

That is the correct answer. Corbyn isn't going to be face to face with the terrorists in these situations, but he thinks he can prejudge the situation. Its the man on the ground with his finger on the trigger and potentially hund_eds of lives in his hand who has to make the final call. That is an awful lot of responsibility."
Are you suggesting, then, that the police do not have operational guidelines, written by civil servants under the direction of politicians? Or that the police ignore those rules and regs...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *edMan
over a year ago

cambridgeshire


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

Well put, our armed Police move heaven and earth before they open fire. You only have to watch how they spend countless hours negotiating with some d*unken idiot waving a knife, to know that using lethal force is always a last resort"

And regretfully, times they are a changing. The threat now is not some d*unk, its terrorists. Terrorists that will likely outgun the police. And do not have to play by any rules except the rules of hat_ed. You cannot talk to a rampaging terrorist.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That guy was at the same tube station as my brother and look very similar. Both South American too. To me that incident hits a nerve for me. It opens up to racial discrimination too.

Do you justify collateral in wars too?


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *thwalescplCouple
over a year ago

brecon


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

You cant shoot to wound, it takes great skill just to be able to hit "centre mass", let alone hitting an arm or a leg!!

An inju_ed terrorist can still shoot, or press a bomb trigger.

Forget what you see in the movies with guns being shot out of the bad guys hand etc, in reality the ONLY way to stop someone like that is to shoot them in the middle of the chest, and keep doing it until they are down.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Did he say he wasn't happy in the sense that it's not a order he would be prepa_ed to give? Because I wouldn't imagine any leader is "happy" about having to issue it but if they have to, they will.

I work with an awful lot of traditional Labour supporters who are becoming increasingly turned off by Corbyn and what's perceived as a kind of Guardian, London, student and social media bubble. They'll never vote conservative, so fuck knows who they'll end up voting for next time.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

a suicide bomber, there is likely to be one exit. either on her/his own or taking others with him.

there will be a split second to decide.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

So you don't think he is being attacked because he is getting it wrong !!!!!

No, I think he is being attacked because he dares to offer something different from the bullshit we are spoonfed by the media and the Establishment it supports.

There is a reason why he has been a politician for so long. The electorate elected him. Are you saying the electorate are morons?"

Absolutely not. I for one would be delighted to see him as labour leader at the next election.

The best scenario for me is that Boris leads the Tories, JC leads labour and David Milliband defects and leads the Lib Dems. Then you have a real choice.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

The UK Police, as they at the current time, are very well prepa_ed to deal with 'several, seperate, fast moving incidents'. The hold regular exercises to train to deal with this very scenario, and have been doing so ever since the Mumbai attacks.

And you don't think their current plan involves the use of lethal force? "

Of course it does and rightly so. I realy don't think Corbyn would want to stop them doing this, in the right situation.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

The UK Police, as they at the current time, are very well prepa_ed to deal with 'several, seperate, fast moving incidents'. The hold regular exercises to train to deal with this very scenario, and have been doing so ever since the Mumbai attacks.

And you don't think their current plan involves the use of lethal force?

Of course it does and rightly so. I realy don't think Corbyn would want to stop them doing this, in the right situation. "

To me it sounded exactly as though he wanted to stop them doing that. Hence the thread.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *he Ring WraithMan
over a year ago

Bradford

In opposition politicians can say what they want.

They criticise the party in power and say what they think and what there policies are.

They do not have to make policy, or deal with the issues in anyway.

This is true of all parties and politicians.

To decry someone else's policy is easy, to make and operate one is not as easy.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Speak to the members of our armed police units around the training they do to incapacitate suicide bombers and the consequences of getting that call wrong. They are highly trained and in the circumstances of high risk to major loss of public life I feel they should shoot to kill. I don't think we should have a fully armed police force, but in the current environment having small rapid response units for our protection seems appropriate to me.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"That guy was at the same tube station as my brother and look very similar. Both South American too. To me that incident hits a nerve for me. It opens up to racial discrimination too.

Do you justify collateral in wars too?

You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist."

Obviously it is very sad and regrettable that in 1 anti terrorism operation 1 innocent person has been killed. But what if he had been a suicide bomber and he had detonated and taken out a whole carriage of passengers? Would that have been better?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Is there just a tincy wincy ever so slight chance he might have been either mis-quoted, or what he said 'taken out of context'

Not that the media would ever do that to someone

Never

Totally unheard of

Cos we are British after all and believe in fair play

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hmmmm. I have every faith that your average armed copper or squaddie will take the right decision with the evidence available to him/her at that point.

What goes wrong is the politicians trying to cover their arses after the fact when some 'opinion' writer decides that in the calm of their office they could of done better.

There is no such thing as shoot to wound. You're there to stop the bugger from what he is immediately about to do. If the threat is such that you need to open fire, killing is a reasonable use of force.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I dont think he said that...what i believe he said was shoot on sight

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *rightonsteveMan
over a year ago

Brighton - even Hove!

If a guy had a bomb and was about to blow himself and others up, I'd expect the police or army to shoot him in the head. ka-pow!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He's an idiot in my humble opinion.

God forbid if he ever became Pm.

Spinless and should probably be in charge of lib party.

So a group of terrorists are running amok in a British town or city.

And what are our security services going to do? Ask them politely to stop?

Sorry but I listened to the whole inter_iew on radio today and I think he has committed political suicide. Wait for the back track and change in stance over next 48hrs.

The coming months and years are going to extremely difficult for the world and tough decisions will need to be made.

I want someone in charge who puts the safety and security of the public and the country at the helm.

Thanks.

That's all I am saying.

I don't read any particular newspapers or am I a conservative or alighed to any party.

I just don't think corbyn is the person to lead our country at such a difficult time.

I hated Thatcher, but right now she would be great in the hotseat.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

The first role of govt is the protection of its citizens, to make such a comment in light of recent events is quite ridiculous from a leader of the opposition. Some of his politics are to be admi_ed, but hi naivety is inc_edibly worrying."
did you know that is the last 5 years police in America have shot and killed more American citizens than terrorist? So much for protecting citizens

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *edMan
over a year ago

cambridgeshire


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

The first role of govt is the protection of its citizens, to make such a comment in light of recent events is quite ridiculous from a leader of the opposition. Some of his politics are to be admi_ed, but hi naivety is inc_edibly worrying.did you know that is the last 5 years police in America have shot and killed more American citizens than terrorist? So much for protecting citizens"

Some of those citizens are very bad people with guns though, to be fair..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is there just a tincy wincy ever so slight chance he might have been either mis-quoted, or what he said 'taken out of context'

Not that the media would ever do that to someone

Never

Totally unheard of

Cos we are British after all and believe in fair play"

Maybe it's something to do with the infinitely vague language he uses to indirectly and cryptically answer every question?

I watched various inter_iews and debates at length and the guy speaks for 5 minutes but doesn't say anything. Then his supporters cry that he was mis-quoted. Every time. You wouldn't believe that part of being a politician is choosing language that isn't easy to misquote.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

The UK Police, as they at the current time, are very well prepa_ed to deal with 'several, seperate, fast moving incidents'. The hold regular exercises to train to deal with this very scenario, and have been doing so ever since the Mumbai attacks.

And you don't think their current plan involves the use of lethal force?

Of course it does and rightly so. I realy don't think Corbyn would want to stop them doing this, in the right situation.

To me it sounded exactly as though he wanted to stop them doing that. Hence the thread. "

You weren't alone in thinking that. Our ears probably misquoted him though.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

The first role of govt is the protection of its citizens, to make such a comment in light of recent events is quite ridiculous from a leader of the opposition. Some of his politics are to be admi_ed, but hi naivety is inc_edibly worrying.did you know that is the last 5 years police in America have shot and killed more American citizens than terrorist? So much for protecting citizens"

Yes, thank you. As I have said elsewhere I don't believe in a fully armed police force, nor in the fucked up crazy gun laws in the US. I think we have it about right and in the current environment a small highly trained group of armed policemen trained in situations where there is an immediate threat to life should be allowed to shoot to kill.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In that perspective it's true. On the otherhand how the situation was handled then was not.

I prefer more of an intelligence approach and more long term.

The IRA was not eradicated by killing all the Irish or going to war. I want a future without fear for our future generations.


"That guy was at the same tube station as my brother and look very similar. Both South American too. To me that incident hits a nerve for me. It opens up to racial discrimination too.

Do you justify collateral in wars too?

You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

Obviously it is very sad and regrettable that in 1 anti terrorism operation 1 innocent person has been killed. But what if he had been a suicide bomber and he had detonated and taken out a whole carriage of passengers? Would that have been better? "

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

You cant shoot to wound, it takes great skill just to be able to hit "centre mass", let alone hitting an arm or a leg!!

An inju_ed terrorist can still shoot, or press a bomb trigger.

Forget what you see in the movies with guns being shot out of the bad guys hand etc, in reality the ONLY way to stop someone like that is to shoot them in the middle of the chest, and keep doing it until they are down. "
again you are wrong have you never heard of the dead man's switch? The device is armed when pressed and when the button or trigger is released then the bomb goes off so when you shoot and the died then they blow up

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is there just a tincy wincy ever so slight chance he might have been either mis-quoted, or what he said 'taken out of context'

Not that the media would ever do that to someone

Never

Totally unheard of

Cos we are British after all and believe in fair play

Maybe it's something to do with the infinitely vague language he uses to indirectly and cryptically answer every question?

I watched various inter_iews and debates at length and the guy speaks for 5 minutes but doesn't say anything. Then his supporters cry that he was mis-quoted. Every time. You wouldn't believe that part of being a politician is choosing language that isn't easy to misquote. "

He's not vague, it's the "new politics" and we just don't get it

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

You cant shoot to wound, it takes great skill just to be able to hit "centre mass", let alone hitting an arm or a leg!!

An inju_ed terrorist can still shoot, or press a bomb trigger.

Forget what you see in the movies with guns being shot out of the bad guys hand etc, in reality the ONLY way to stop someone like that is to shoot them in the middle of the chest, and keep doing it until they are down. again you are wrong have you never heard of the dead man's switch? The device is armed when pressed and when the button or trigger is released then the bomb goes off so when you shoot and the died then they blow up "

OK, so say you don't shoot the guy with the suicide vest then, you think he will go home and have a cup of tea? What's your solution to your situation?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I work with an awful lot of traditional Labour supporters who are becoming increasingly turned off by Corbyn and what's perceived as a kind of Guardian, London, student and social media bubble. They'll never vote conservative, so fuck knows who they'll end up voting for next time. "

Um, just to say that the Guardian recommended it's readers vote Lib Dem in 2010 and Yvonne Cooper in the Leadership Election.

It's definitely not Corbynite (although many of us readers are)

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is there just a tincy wincy ever so slight chance he might have been either mis-quoted, or what he said 'taken out of context'

Not that the media would ever do that to someone

Never

Totally unheard of

Cos we are British after all and believe in fair play

Maybe it's something to do with the infinitely vague language he uses to indirectly and cryptically answer every question?

I watched various inter_iews and debates at length and the guy speaks for 5 minutes but doesn't say anything. Then his supporters cry that he was mis-quoted. Every time. You wouldn't believe that part of being a politician is choosing language that isn't easy to misquote.

He's not vague, it's the "new politics" and we just don't get it "

Sorry, I'm brain washed by the daily mail, that I don't read, and the Tories have poisoned my water supply, that I don't drink.

Yeah so get with the programme, this is the "new" (1983) politics. Orwell would have been proud of that one. Or cringing.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I work with an awful lot of traditional Labour supporters who are becoming increasingly turned off by Corbyn and what's perceived as a kind of Guardian, London, student and social media bubble. They'll never vote conservative, so fuck knows who they'll end up voting for next time.

Um, just to say that the Guardian recommended it's readers vote Lib Dem in 2010 and Yvonne Cooper in the Leadership Election.

It's definitely not Corbynite (although many of us readers are) "

I did say "perceived as"

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk"

So how would you like to be told you were no longer allowed to shoot to kill?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He is being attacked because he has the others sca_ed David Cameron is a bully boy only shoot to kill if absolutely certain.

How can we have more police or military on the street when there budget gets cut time and time again x

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk

So how would you like to be told you were no longer allowed to shoot to kill? "
well no but the question if you were the solider or the police with a family to go home to would you Wana be the one doing the shooting. Or would you try to save yourself for your family ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk

So how would you like to be told you were no longer allowed to shoot to kill? well no but the question if you were the solider or the police with a family to go home to would you Wana be the one doing the shooting. Or would you try to save yourself for your family ?"

This is a silky question you do not go into the army to save yourself. Being in the army is a very selfless task and everyone in the armed forces should be totally respected. Do they go to war to save themselves really x

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Really so soliders life doesn't matter? Do their kids deserve to be fatherless? Should they just stop bullets with there body? Soldiers and police are human too

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Really so soliders life doesn't matter? Do their kids deserve to be fatherless? Should they just stop bullets with there body? Soldiers and police are human too"

Yes but police,army or fireman yes are human but they don't do it to be selfless do they x

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?"

I agree with the above. I'd like to see British police tactics to be similar to the French. ..

Don't fuck about, if it's a terrorist waving a gun, shoot the bastard dead before he kills lots of people!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 16/11/15 18:51:17]

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ah but shoot and he has a body suit full of explosives have to be so careful x

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *uietlykinkymeWoman
over a year ago

kinky land

Yay, pay the solders and police force less, then line them up on the street, incorrectly protected/lacking in basic bullet proof vests with a no shoot policy. Cracking idea!!

Meanwhile continue selling arms and sending volunteers (hostages) over to the terrorists until they pop up (come out) en mass on our streets.

Or

Arm our police force, arm our military personnel, give them decent wages, give them decent protective clothing and trust in the training they got to protect us, here on our streets, in our cities; because no politician is going to. Any fool can stand up and shout. I'd rather stand behind one of our solders/police (wo)men any day.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I wonder how many currently serving Police officers, would be willing to carry guns, with a full shoot to kill policy.

Get the decision wrong and your dead, or an innocent person/child is dead.

Hey dont worry about it PC Plod. its fine, because its all cove_ed by our shoot to kill policy and accidents happen in all walks of life.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

If this gentleman came to power does that mean the military & police would have to retrain & shoot to wound rather than aim for the centre of the visible mass?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk

So how would you like to be told you were no longer allowed to shoot to kill? "

it's never going to be an option that any PM of this country will try and put it on the statute..

ever..

despite what the _ed tops and the right wingers politics wise would want anyone to think may be on the cards if Corbyn were elected..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

If this gentleman came to power does that mean the military & police would have to retrain & shoot to wound rather than aim for the centre of the visible mass?"

No..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why are people so worried about a no mark like Corbyn he won't have a say for four and a half years and by then hopefully the world will be different.

What does worry me in France they have 278.000 Police all with the ability to be armed. If something like Paris happened in somewhere like Milton Keynes your looking at an armed car with two Police officers turning up with a response time of 20 mins. A lot of bad stuff can be done in that time and who's to say the Po Po wouldn't get shot too.

We would be fucked and not in a good way.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

then maybe the present Government should stop its intended cuts to the police service..?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

.there is no such thing as shoot to wound anyway.

They all aim for center of mass to get the best chance of a hit (guns and the people firing them in combat situations are really not that accurate, nothing like movies would lead you to belive anyway).

Center of mass though tends to be where most people keep their cardiovascular systems main bits so it does usually result in death.

For the suicide attacks I belive the guidance is to basically keep shooting and try to nail the head as well so that they can't set off a vest

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk

So how would you like to be told you were no longer allowed to shoot to kill?

it's never going to be an option that any PM of this country will try and put it on the statute..

ever..

despite what the _ed tops and the right wingers politics wise would want anyone to think may be on the cards if Corbyn were elected.."

I doubt the right wingers worry about it too much to be honest. Most of them paid £3 to vote for JC in the first place.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why are people so worried about a no mark like Corbyn he won't have a say for four and a half years and by then hopefully the world will be different.

What does worry me in France they have 278.000 Police all with the ability to be armed. If something like Paris happened in somewhere like Milton Keynes your looking at an armed car with two Police officers turning up with a response time of 20 mins. A lot of bad stuff can be done in that time and who's to say the Po Po wouldn't get shot too.

We would be fucked and not in a good way. "

In Manchester when I reported a pair of kids being abducted I got 4 police cars (one from each road of the crossing) including armed response in well under 10 minutes.

As much as the police are crap for day to day stuff like car theft they certainly seem on the ball when it's something important

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why are people so worried about a no mark like Corbyn he won't have a say for four and a half years and by then hopefully the world will be different.

What does worry me in France they have 278.000 Police all with the ability to be armed. If something like Paris happened in somewhere like Milton Keynes your looking at an armed car with two Police officers turning up with a response time of 20 mins. A lot of bad stuff can be done in that time and who's to say the Po Po wouldn't get shot too.

We would be fucked and not in a good way.

In Manchester when I reported a pair of kids being abducted I got 4 police cars (one from each road of the crossing) including armed response in well under 10 minutes.

As much as the police are crap for day to day stuff like car theft they certainly seem on the ball when it's something important "
try that in the provinces dude. You may get a PCSO.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right"

Interesting system. Does it work for Hitler and Pol Pot or Idi Amin? I think there might be a case to be made for him (though I can't find it) but just because someone is judged by others doesn't make them all wrong. Surely the debate on who is fit to lead should go deeper than that?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Really so soliders life doesn't matter? Do their kids deserve to be fatherless? Should they just stop bullets with there body? Soldiers and police are human too

Yes but police,army or fireman yes are human but they don't do it to be selfless do they x"

Not so sure about firemen.

My towns station is parttime/retained only.

So that means they're all paid a retainer of around 2.5k a year (thats only if they provide the maximum 120 hours availability a wee) about 3 pound for each call out and 10 pound an hour for the time they are called out.

You can hardly say they're in it for the cash can you.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is no solution unless you can clear the area I've been in the armed forces for 9 years now and I can tell you against a suicide bomber it's no fair fight and not much of a choice shooting these guys and close range usually means putting your own life and risk

So how would you like to be told you were no longer allowed to shoot to kill?

it's never going to be an option that any PM of this country will try and put it on the statute..

ever..

despite what the _ed tops and the right wingers politics wise would want anyone to think may be on the cards if Corbyn were elected.."

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why are people so worried about a no mark like Corbyn he won't have a say for four and a half years and by then hopefully the world will be different.

What does worry me in France they have 278.000 Police all with the ability to be armed. If something like Paris happened in somewhere like Milton Keynes your looking at an armed car with two Police officers turning up with a response time of 20 mins. A lot of bad stuff can be done in that time and who's to say the Po Po wouldn't get shot too.

We would be fucked and not in a good way.

In Manchester when I reported a pair of kids being abducted I got 4 police cars (one from each road of the crossing) including armed response in well under 10 minutes.

As much as the police are crap for day to day stuff like car theft they certainly seem on the ball when it's something important try that in the provinces dude. You may get a PCSO. "

I thought Milton Keynes was a big place?

Oh and my village had no police station any more we actually do just have pcso and one special lol.

But we have 2 speed camera vans :/

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

I agree with the above. I'd like to see British police tactics to be similar to the French. ..

Don't fuck about, if it's a terrorist waving a gun, shoot the bastard dead before he kills lots of people!"

The french and German tactics for anti terrorism are derived heavily from the British tactics.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ornynwcplCouple
over a year ago

Preston

Lots of people do things or put up with things we're uncomfortable with or unhappy about. Corbyn is being criticised for being honest. Perhaps people would prefer him to make pre election promises which people want to hear, and just weeks later completely reverse his _iews.

Or perhaps you'd prefer him to be bowing 45o to the head of a terrorist state, the biggest exporters of terrorism internationally like Cameron did to the Saudi King..

The current government are the biggest threat to national security, who are currently overseeing massive cuts to the police forces across the country,as well as the military.

It's all well and good having a shoot to kill policy, but not so good when you have no one to pull the trigger because of cuts to the police.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *iss_Samantha_LovecockTV/TS
over a year ago

bmth /poole sometimes blandford

why should he be happy about that

strange that u think thats something to be happy about..

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why are people so worried about a no mark like Corbyn he won't have a say for four and a half years and by then hopefully the world will be different.

What does worry me in France they have 278.000 Police all with the ability to be armed. If something like Paris happened in somewhere like Milton Keynes your looking at an armed car with two Police officers turning up with a response time of 20 mins. A lot of bad stuff can be done in that time and who's to say the Po Po wouldn't get shot too.

We would be fucked and not in a good way.

In Manchester when I reported a pair of kids being abducted I got 4 police cars (one from each road of the crossing) including armed response in well under 10 minutes.

As much as the police are crap for day to day stuff like car theft they certainly seem on the ball when it's something important try that in the provinces dude. You may get a PCSO.

I thought Milton Keynes was a big place?

Oh and my village had no police station any more we actually do just have pcso and one special lol.

But we have 2 speed camera vans :/"
Live in a Village by the border with Northants. The Armed Police in that part of the world have a handful of cars covering from Derby all the way down to Northampton so in theory at a handover time as they all share cars armed response can be over 45 mins away which is Scandalous and a result of the Tory government. It would only take a switch in tactics from a main populace to a large town and it would be a huge death toll.

I actually think if the world wasn't fucked right now Corbyn would make a good leader. Pre 2000 he would have been awesome. It's just not his time.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Lots of people do things or put up with things we're uncomfortable with or unhappy about. Corbyn is being criticised for being honest. Perhaps people would prefer him to make pre election promises which people want to hear, and just weeks later completely reverse his _iews.

Or perhaps you'd prefer him to be bowing 45o to the head of a terrorist state, the biggest exporters of terrorism internationally like Cameron did to the Saudi King..

The current government are the biggest threat to national security, who are currently overseeing massive cuts to the police forces across the country,as well as the military.

It's all well and good having a shoot to kill policy, but not so good when you have no one to pull the trigger because of cuts to the police.

"

There is no shoot to kill policy or shoot to wound that's just all bollocks

Policy is "shoot the biggest bit so it's easier to hit and it makes them fall down the fastest".

Heck the bullets they use are of a calibre designed to wound rather than kill anyway. Least they get hollow points now though unlike the army.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *omaMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

He has also stated that IF the United Kingdom is attacked by any other state using nuclear weapons he would NOT retaliate with our arsenal.

Seems like this man will throw the towel in whatever the threat or harm caused to British Citizens.

He certainly does not represent the well being of this nation

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The truth is that if a suicide bomber gets to the point where they are standing in a public area wearing a suicide bomb, there is very little that can be done to stop what is about to take place, even if the Police are armed. Shoot to kill policy or otherwise. It makes not a bit of difference.

It's too late and something in our Policing and Intelligence system has gone wrong.

That's why we rely on the Police and intelligence services. To pick it up early and prevent it getting to that point.

The intelligence services thwart many attacks that we never get to hear about. Both our Police and Intelligence services are the envy of the western world. They aren't perfect and sometimes they get it wrong, but they are still some of the best in the world.

There is no need for a fully armed Police force.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The truth is that if a suicide bomber gets to the point where they are standing in a public area wearing a suicide bomb, there is very little that can be done to stop what is about to take place, even if the Police are armed. Shoot to kill policy or otherwise. It makes not a bit of difference.

It's too late and something in our Policing and Intelligence system has gone wrong.

That's why we rely on the Police and intelligence services. To pick it up early and prevent it getting to that point.

The intelligence services thwart many attacks that we never get to hear about. Both our Police and Intelligence services are the envy of the western world. They aren't perfect and sometimes they get it wrong, but they are still some of the best in the world.

There is no need for a fully armed Police force.

"

Were one of the top exporters of intelligence and electronic survilence equipment too

It is very advanced compa_ed to most other stuff produced.

Our client list isn't the most pleasant though

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ornynwcplCouple
over a year ago

Preston


"He has also stated that IF the United Kingdom is attacked by any other state using nuclear weapons he would NOT retaliate with our arsenal.

Seems like this man will throw the towel in whatever the threat or harm caused to British Citizens.

He certainly does not represent the well being of this nation "

So in your hypothetical scenario, another country has just fi_ed nuclear weapons right at us. We're doomed.

So that means our nuclear deterrant failed...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The truth is that if a suicide bomber gets to the point where they are standing in a public area wearing a suicide bomb, there is very little that can be done to stop what is about to take place, even if the Police are armed. Shoot to kill policy or otherwise. It makes not a bit of difference.

It's too late and something in our Policing and Intelligence system has gone wrong.

That's why we rely on the Police and intelligence services. To pick it up early and prevent it getting to that point.

The intelligence services thwart many attacks that we never get to hear about. Both our Police and Intelligence services are the envy of the western world. They aren't perfect and sometimes they get it wrong, but they are still some of the best in the world.

There is no need for a fully armed Police force.

Were one of the top exporters of intelligence and electronic survilence equipment too

It is very advanced compa_ed to most other stuff produced.

Our client list isn't the most pleasant though"

No, we do tend to keep some 'undesirable' company

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"He has also stated that IF the United Kingdom is attacked by any other state using nuclear weapons he would NOT retaliate with our arsenal.

Seems like this man will throw the towel in whatever the threat or harm caused to British Citizens.

He certainly does not represent the well being of this nation

So in your hypothetical scenario, another country has just fi_ed nuclear weapons right at us. We're doomed.

So that means our nuclear deterrant failed...

"

Depends on the type.

There's a big mixture of weapons for the West and Russia and China a nuke is something that can be launched from anywhere to anywhere

For nations such as Pakistan, India and Korea (and potential the middle east as they get them) nukes are more like the cold war era weaopns they can be delive_ed by plane or missile but only in and fairly limited range (reach Europe at all would be unlikely for most) and in very small numbers.

So it would be insane to use them really.

If a nuke was going to be used it would likely be smuggled in by a group rather than fi_ed at us by a state.

So nuclear retaliation would be rather useless anyway

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Last comment, then I'm going to go and have a dump.

This thread was about Corbyn so my last comment will be about Corbyn (unless someone 'riles' me, in which case I will return post-dump)

Out of Corbyn and that posh, Eton Educated, self serving, porcine rogering, Establishment protecting twat, David Cameron, I would choose Corbyn. At least with Corbyn you know what you are getting, good or otherwise. With people like Cameron, they would sell their own mothers to get into power. Lying scumbags just in it for their own self preservation and that of their posh porcine rogering mates.

Right, I'm off for a dump.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Last comment, then I'm going to go and have a dump.

This thread was about Corbyn so my last comment will be about Corbyn (unless someone 'riles' me, in which case I will return post-dump)

Out of Corbyn and that posh, Eton Educated, self serving, porcine rogering, Establishment protecting twat, David Cameron, I would choose Corbyn. At least with Corbyn you know what you are getting, good or otherwise. With people like Cameron, they would sell their own mothers to get into power. Lying scumbags just in it for their own self preservation and that of their posh porcine rogering mates.

Right, I'm off for a dump.

"

At least Cameron, Farage and Miliband (David) have had real jobs outside of politics. The last thing we need is another career poltician.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified by the Establishment because they don't like what he represents e.g. people who can think for themselves.

They have, and will continue, to portray him as some sort of lunatic who is going to deliver us into Armageddon.

The prolific attacks have made me turn from someone who had no time for Labour, into quite liking the bloke

For them to attack him so mercilessly and frequently he must be doing something right

So you don't think he is being attacked because he is getting it wrong !!!!!"

It's because he threatens to upset the status quo. To many lords, MPs and Whitehall mandarins could lose out.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist."

They managed to kill one totally innocent bloke, because he was running and looked "foreign".

How many more will be killed accidentally when the police are armed en masse?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There was a lovely section in Private Eye a while ago with what the media claimed he said and what he actually said. Very different. "

Viz comic did a brilliant pisstake of the right wing media's vilification of him.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?"

Most suicide vests employ a dead man's switch. Shooting them is really not a good idea.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

They managed to kill one totally innocent bloke, because he was running and looked "foreign".

How many more will be killed accidentally when the police are armed en masse?"

Is anyone advocating the mass arming of everyday police?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well fully armed Police works every time.

Positive proof of it on Friday unfortunately.

Forgive me for not rushing to join you in your moment of blind panic wont you.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

can't be bothe_ed to read everything but, as a lifelong Labour supporter - I am no longer a Labour supporter - the man is a complete liability in my humble opinion.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

They managed to kill one totally innocent bloke, because he was running and looked "foreign".

How many more will be killed accidentally when the police are armed en masse?

Is anyone advocating the mass arming of everyday police?"

Reread some of the posts on here!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ornynwcplCouple
over a year ago

Preston


"can't be bothe_ed to read everything but, as a lifelong Labour supporter - I am no longer a Labour supporter - the man is a complete liability in my humble opinion."

Why is he a liability, in your humble opinion?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

They managed to kill one totally innocent bloke, because he was running and looked "foreign".

How many more will be killed accidentally when the police are armed en masse?

Is anyone advocating the mass arming of everyday police?

Reread some of the posts on here!"

Can't recall anyone advocating arming our everyday bobbies, but I'm too lazy to re-read th whole thread. I have positively argued that would be wrong and our current structure of a small number of highly trained rapid response armed units is right in the current environment.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

At the moment i dont think its jeremy corbyn we should be worrying about but rather the people in power at the moment, in all countries.

They are the ones with the power and its quite frightening.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

They managed to kill one totally innocent bloke, because he was running and looked "foreign".

How many more will be killed accidentally when the police are armed en masse?"

Do you really believe that the ONLY reason why he was shot because he was running and foreign? Do you not know that his building was under surveillance, and then a breakdown in communications and misunderstandings unfortunately lead to the shooting. There were lots of people involved, it wasn't just some bobby on the beat pulling his gun out and getting his rocks off by shooting someone.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"Lots of people do things or put up with things we're uncomfortable with or unhappy about. Corbyn is being criticised for being honest. Perhaps people would prefer him to make pre election promises which people want to hear, and just weeks later completely reverse his _iews.

Or perhaps you'd prefer him to be bowing 45o to the head of a terrorist state, the biggest exporters of terrorism internationally like Cameron did to the Saudi King..

The current government are the biggest threat to national security, who are currently overseeing massive cuts to the police forces across the country,as well as the military.

It's all well and good having a shoot to kill policy, but not so good when you have no one to pull the trigger because of cuts to the police.

There is no shoot to kill policy or shoot to wound that's just all bollocks

Policy is "shoot the biggest bit so it's easier to hit and it makes them fall down the fastest".

Heck the bullets they use are of a calibre designed to wound rather than kill anyway. Least they get hollow points now though unlike the army."

You make it sound as though it's because the Army cant afford hollow points. They have actually been banned in warfare since 1868, and are currently banned under the Hague Convention of 1899.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *inky-MinxWoman
over a year ago

Grantham

I love Politics think it's a fascinating subject. Studied it too.

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

Anyway, in the bad old days politicians didn't get paid much. They did it for the good of the country or a fetich of theirs, who knows. It wasn't for the salary.

Then the put up MP's salaries way too high. So now Politics is like the film or music industry. Get in and you can have fame & fortune.

I personally believe a lot of politicians are not there for the good of GB but for the good of themselves.

And in politics, being infamous is just as profitable as being famous in other arenas. I think a lot of the politicians who say divisive/radical/mental things know exactly what they are doing.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

"

It'll never happen because the politicians would never agree what the national curriculum on the subject should contain. Ironically.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I love Politics think it's a fascinating subject. Studied it too.

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

Anyway, in the bad old days politicians didn't get paid much. They did it for the good of the country or a fetich of theirs, who knows. It wasn't for the salary.

Then the put up MP's salaries way too high. So now Politics is like the film or music industry. Get in and you can have fame & fortune.

I personally believe a lot of politicians are not there for the good of GB but for the good of themselves.

And in politics, being infamous is just as profitable as being famous in other arenas. I think a lot of the politicians who say divisive/radical/mental things know exactly what they are doing."

I don't believe many do it for the salary now. Desire for power, desire for fame and influence, public service, duty, all possible options. But why on earth would you put yourself through all that for £67k even with the ever generous expense scheme? If I was an old Etonian with PPE from Oxford and I wanted the salary you'd take it into investment banking or something and get more than that just as a bonus.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I personally believe a lot of politicians are not there for the good of GB but for the good of themselves,"

You'd think that being that it is a career path quite likely to attract sociopaths but in reality it is far from the truth; in order to work your way up the food chain (from a local councillor to a member parliament) you will hardly earn a living wage.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *ornynwcplCouple
over a year ago

Preston


"

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

It'll never happen because the politicians would never agree what the national curriculum on the subject should contain. Ironically. "

Agreed. They're far too comfortable with the status quo, and the majority of the population being politically illiterate, relying upon the sun for who to vote for. Usually based upon a picture of who not to vote for, based upon how he looks eating a bacon sandwich. Or the angle of a bow.. That's pretty much the standard of the UK electorate

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

It'll never happen because the politicians would never agree what the national curriculum on the subject should contain. Ironically.

Agreed. They're far too comfortable with the status quo, and the majority of the population being politically illiterate, relying upon the sun for who to vote for. Usually based upon a picture of who not to vote for, based upon how he looks eating a bacon sandwich. Or the angle of a bow.. That's pretty much the standard of the UK electorate "

Yup, I'll get interested in politics when there's an open swinger in the commons! But there won't be because it's just about electing people that sound good on paper. There's a good old trick about "would you like a leader who was fit, didn't drink and was a dedicated vegetarian or a fat, smoker who was often d*unk?" - oh so you prefer Hitler to Churchill then...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

Most suicide vests employ a dead man's switch. Shooting them is really not a good idea."

Where did you get that idea?

Hoe do you expect a man to hold, fire and reload a rifle with one hand holding a button or trigger switch constantly?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *an_WoodMan
over a year ago

Stafford


"can't be bothe_ed to read everything but, as a lifelong Labour supporter - I am no longer a Labour supporter - the man is a complete liability in my humble opinion.

Why is he a liability, in your humble opinion? "

Time will tell if he's a liability for Labour. The by election result will be interesting. Paying the price for an under qualified rebel ?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

Most suicide vests employ a dead man's switch. Shooting them is really not a good idea.

Where did you get that idea?

Hoe do you expect a man to hold, fire and reload a rifle with one hand holding a button or trigger switch constantly?"

I don't think he was talking about the Paris attacks.

In most attacks that are just a suicide vest (not a gun as well) the explosives are trigge_ed by releasing a button rather than pressing it. That way, if the suicide bomber gets cold feet, its more difficult to disarm.

Also, if he looks like he is going to back out, and those who sent him are close-ish by, they can shoot him using a sniper and he explodes anyway.

It's relatively common in places like Iraq for there to be an 'audience' to film the incident so they can upload it to YouTube.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Lots of people do things or put up with things we're uncomfortable with or unhappy about. Corbyn is being criticised for being honest. Perhaps people would prefer him to make pre election promises which people want to hear, and just weeks later completely reverse his _iews.

Or perhaps you'd prefer him to be bowing 45o to the head of a terrorist state, the biggest exporters of terrorism internationally like Cameron did to the Saudi King..

The current government are the biggest threat to national security, who are currently overseeing massive cuts to the police forces across the country,as well as the military.

It's all well and good having a shoot to kill policy, but not so good when you have no one to pull the trigger because of cuts to the police.

There is no shoot to kill policy or shoot to wound that's just all bollocks

Policy is "shoot the biggest bit so it's easier to hit and it makes them fall down the fastest".

Heck the bullets they use are of a calibre designed to wound rather than kill anyway. Least they get hollow points now though unlike the army.

You make it sound as though it's because the Army cant afford hollow points. They have actually been banned in warfare since 1868, and are currently banned under the Hague Convention of 1899."

I know they're banned... the police are slowed to use them though and given hat the 5.56mm calibre we use was designed to wound and create casualties in a war with the soviets they aren't great things for the current wars were fighting. Which is why there is more interest in returning to the larger calibres.

But at least the police get hollow points which are much more suited for this kind of use

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *inky-MinxWoman
over a year ago

Grantham


"

I personally believe a lot of politicians are not there for the good of GB but for the good of themselves,

You'd think that being that it is a career path quite likely to attract sociopaths but in reality it is far from the truth; in order to work your way up the food chain (from a local councillor to a member parliament) you will hardly earn a living wage."

In the beginning yes, but I am talking about MPs and not all of them spend a long time in local politics. I genuinely believe some use it as a route to fame/infamy.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *inky-MinxWoman
over a year ago

Grantham


"

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

It'll never happen because the politicians would never agree what the national curriculum on the subject should contain. Ironically.

Agreed. They're far too comfortable with the status quo, and the majority of the population being politically illiterate, relying upon the sun for who to vote for. Usually based upon a picture of who not to vote for, based upon how he looks eating a bacon sandwich. Or the angle of a bow.. That's pretty much the standard of the UK electorate "

It does play a big part in things.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Always said it should be taught in school so that people understand what it really is about.

It'll never happen because the politicians would never agree what the national curriculum on the subject should contain. Ironically.

Agreed. They're far too comfortable with the status quo, and the majority of the population being politically illiterate, relying upon the sun for who to vote for. Usually based upon a picture of who not to vote for, based upon how he looks eating a bacon sandwich. Or the angle of a bow.. That's pretty much the standard of the UK electorate

It does play a big part in things."

Or lining their own pockets x

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i second that!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". "
Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway? "

i agree. i dont like shoot to kill principle. look a that poor dude on the tube who got shot 7-8times... and he was innocent!

shoot to wound... i agree with that... fuck... shoot them in the balls !

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"At the moment i dont think its jeremy corbyn we should be worrying about but rather the people in power at the moment, in all countries.

They are the ones with the power and its quite frightening."

i fear no one... but white people

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I personally believe a lot of politicians are not there for the good of GB but for the good of themselves,

You'd think that being that it is a career path quite likely to attract sociopaths but in reality it is far from the truth; in order to work your way up the food chain (from a local councillor to a member parliament) you will hardly earn a living wage.

In the beginning yes, but I am talking about MPs and not all of them spend a long time in local politics. I genuinely believe some use it as a route to fame/infamy."

Really? There are so many that have wanted to be MPs but have never been 'called up'. It's not like how you think at all and certainly not something I'd like to go through.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"can't be bothe_ed to read everything but, as a lifelong Labour supporter - I am no longer a Labour supporter - the man is a complete liability in my humble opinion."

On the other hand, I can think of at least three people that I know personally who have joined the Labour Party since Corbyn became leader, and this is in the Tory heartlands of the south of England.

(I'm not one of them by the way)

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable "

Is it really so inconceivable people would vote Lib Dem instead!?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable

Is it really so inconceivable people would vote Lib Dem instead!?"

Tim Farron?

Yes.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"can't be bothe_ed to read everything but, as a lifelong Labour supporter - I am no longer a Labour supporter - the man is a complete liability in my humble opinion.

On the other hand, I can think of at least three people that I know personally who have joined the Labour Party since Corbyn became leader, and this is in the Tory heartlands of the south of England.

(I'm not one of them by the way)

"

Could get interesting then, I personally know of people up here in the labour heartlands turning away in droves (probably not enough to make a difference, but you never know)

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"can't be bothe_ed to read everything but, as a lifelong Labour supporter - I am no longer a Labour supporter - the man is a complete liability in my humble opinion.

On the other hand, I can think of at least three people that I know personally who have joined the Labour Party since Corbyn became leader, and this is in the Tory heartlands of the south of England.

(I'm not one of them by the way)

Could get interesting then, I personally know of people up here in the labour heartlands turning away in droves (probably not enough to make a difference, but you never know) "

I'm slightly tempted because I believe that he is at least genuine and is certainly not from the elite.

It seems that most people who are being turned on to him are young and get a lot of their news from social media.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ask yourself a question you and you loved ones eating to board a tube or plane going to watch a movie, u see a guy acting suspiciously and police/ sas what ever around him. They try to talk to him but he doesn't listen he presses the trigger, he kills a member of your family your friends all the people that were stood anywhere near him including the police/sas.

All you see are bodies around you and devistation.

Can some of you even contemplate what that must feel like??!! I couldn't.

And yet you say there shouldn't be a shoot to kill policy.

Get real one person being shot is worth risking hund_eds being killed or seriously inju_ed.

And before the usual suspects say well

If it was your family member they killed blah blah if anyone is acting that suspiciously it draws such attention then they really are doing no good.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It seems that most people who are being turned on to him are young and get a lot of their news from social media.

"

I think social media has little to do with it an it's more his intentions; a genuine politician with socialist ideals and an anti-war sentiment will attract a lot of the more enlightened youth of today. Contrast that against his p_edecessors and opposition, and it's a wet dream for most liberal youth.

And I tend to agree.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"Lots of people do things or put up with things we're uncomfortable with or unhappy about. Corbyn is being criticised for being honest. Perhaps people would prefer him to make pre election promises which people want to hear, and just weeks later completely reverse his _iews.

Or perhaps you'd prefer him to be bowing 45o to the head of a terrorist state, the biggest exporters of terrorism internationally like Cameron did to the Saudi King..

The current government are the biggest threat to national security, who are currently overseeing massive cuts to the police forces across the country,as well as the military.

It's all well and good having a shoot to kill policy, but not so good when you have no one to pull the trigger because of cuts to the police.

There is no shoot to kill policy or shoot to wound that's just all bollocks

Policy is "shoot the biggest bit so it's easier to hit and it makes them fall down the fastest".

Heck the bullets they use are of a calibre designed to wound rather than kill anyway. Least they get hollow points now though unlike the army.

You make it sound as though it's because the Army cant afford hollow points. They have actually been banned in warfare since 1868, and are currently banned under the Hague Convention of 1899.

I know they're banned... the police are slowed to use them though and given hat the 5.56mm calibre we use was designed to wound and create casualties in a war with the soviets they aren't great things for the current wars were fighting. Which is why there is more interest in returning to the larger calibres.

But at least the police get hollow points which are much more suited for this kind of use "

5.56mm cartridge is deadly enough, with _educed recoil of a larger round allowing for quicker follow up shot. It is unlikely to be much of an issue for the police, but you can carry twice as much 5.56 than you can 7.62.

If you dont think its deadly, then you go and stand down range of it!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ask yourself a question you and you loved ones eating to board a tube or plane going to watch a movie, u see a guy acting suspiciously and police/ sas what ever around him. They try to talk to him but he doesn't listen he presses the trigger, he kills a member of your family your friends all the people that were stood anywhere near him including the police/sas.

All you see are bodies around you and devistation.

Can some of you even contemplate what that must feel like??!! I couldn't.

And yet you say there shouldn't be a shoot to kill policy.

Get real one person being shot is worth risking hund_eds being killed or seriously inju_ed.

And before the usual suspects say well

If it was your family member they killed blah blah if anyone is acting that suspiciously it draws such attention then they really are doing no good.

"

Jean Claude De Menezes family might think otherwise

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"It seems that most people who are being turned on to him are young and get a lot of their news from social media.

I think social media has little to do with it an it's more his intentions; a genuine politician with socialist ideals and an anti-war sentiment will attract a lot of the more enlightened youth of today. Contrast that against his p_edecessors and opposition, and it's a wet dream for most liberal youth.

And I tend to agree."

The reason that I mentioned social media is to highlight that this is where young people are getting their news from - the newspapers and the television news have less and less of a hold on the thoughts of a nation.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

Its good to see senior Labour MPs like Keith Vaz coming out against Corbyn on this ridiculous position.

It's funny how Corbyn spent his time on the back benches rebelling against everything, but now expects everyone to follow his whip and party line. You cant have it both ways!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ask yourself a question you and you loved ones eating to board a tube or plane going to watch a movie, u see a guy acting suspiciously and police/ sas what ever around him. They try to talk to him but he doesn't listen he presses the trigger, he kills a member of your family your friends all the people that were stood anywhere near him including the police/sas.

All you see are bodies around you and devistation.

Can some of you even contemplate what that must feel like??!! I couldn't.

And yet you say there shouldn't be a shoot to kill policy.

Get real one person being shot is worth risking hund_eds being killed or seriously inju_ed.

And before the usual suspects say well

If it was your family member they killed blah blah if anyone is acting that suspiciously it draws such attention then they really are doing no good.

Jean Claude De Menezes family might think otherwise"

Yes they might do indeed however in this day and age and in the worlds current climate why risk another 353 more funerals over one!!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *artytwoCouple
over a year ago

Wolverhampton

Most of us have lived through years of tv gunfights where no one gets killed and if they do get shot there is a gentle swoon to the ground. The wound is a tiny hole with a little trickle of blood.

Those of us who have been in action or around weapons or explosives know it to be very far from that scenario.

We've also grown up with situations on tv, films and even reality where the terrorists took hostages and had demands. The hero(s) always saved the day as in Entebbe, Iranian Embassy thing ,Bruce Willis etc.

These days terrorists don't want anything material or even anything we can understand, they just want to destroy life and property.

Like in the film 'Independence Day' when the Pres, Bill Pullman, asks the alien "What do you want us to do?" "Die" is the answer.

So, Corbyn and people like him saying we shouldn't have shoot to kill policies?

Maybe they are right because when you kill martyrs it plays into their misguided ideology and just encourages more of them to self sacrifice.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *eorgeyporgeyMan
over a year ago

Warrington


"Ask yourself a question you and you loved ones eating to board a tube or plane going to watch a movie, u see a guy acting suspiciously and police/ sas what ever around him. They try to talk to him but he doesn't listen he presses the trigger, he kills a member of your family your friends all the people that were stood anywhere near him including the police/sas.

All you see are bodies around you and devistation.

Can some of you even contemplate what that must feel like??!! I couldn't.

And yet you say there shouldn't be a shoot to kill policy.

Get real one person being shot is worth risking hund_eds being killed or seriously inju_ed.

And before the usual suspects say well

If it was your family member they killed blah blah if anyone is acting that suspiciously it draws such attention then they really are doing no good.

Jean Claude De Menezes family might think otherwise

Yes they might do indeed however in this day and age and in the worlds current climate why risk another 353 more funerals over one!!"
While I agree that the goals and ideology of the IRA and ISIS aren't comparable, the aftermaths of their attacks on the victims and their families will be identical. I will put money on (because everyone I have spoken too said the same) the victims NOT wanting death for the perpetrators, punishment yes, but there is an understanding, hard learned, from the troubles, that violence begets violence.

The intention of ISIS and similar wahhabist terrorism (as distinct from Republican or loyalist terrorism) is to force the victim governments to _educe the civil liberties of the inhabitants of those nations. The introduction of a shoot to kill policy is just the sort of adjustment that ISIS want us to make. Those in favour are arguing ISIS's case for them.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford


"Most of us have lived through years of tv gunfights where no one gets killed and if they do get shot there is a gentle swoon to the ground. The wound is a tiny hole with a little trickle of blood.

Those of us who have been in action or around weapons or explosives know it to be very far from that scenario.

We've also grown up with situations on tv, films and even reality where the terrorists took hostages and had demands. The hero(s) always saved the day as in Entebbe, Iranian Embassy thing ,Bruce Willis etc.

These days terrorists don't want anything material or even anything we can understand, they just want to destroy life and property.

Like in the film 'Independence Day' when the Pres, Bill Pullman, asks the alien "What do you want us to do?" "Die" is the answer.

So, Corbyn and people like him saying we shouldn't have shoot to kill policies?

Maybe they are right because when you kill martyrs it plays into their misguided ideology and just encourages more of them to self sacrifice."

But he actually didn't say we shouldn't have shoot to kill policies did he?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The bloke is a cock attached to a penis to be honest

Just seen him on the news he doesn't answer questions just bluffs over them. He was directly asked if he would have agreed to the bomb That killed jahid Jon he said if it was in the rules of war! The guy asked again and he said probably not.

Yet it's ok for jihad Jon to break rules of war and behead.

What a cock!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *anchestercubMan
over a year ago

manchester & NI


"Remember Jean Charles de menezes?

"

If they ain't white it doesn't seem to matter.

That'll be somewhere in the UKIP manifesto.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable "

A recent poll in Scotland showed Labour under the leadership of Corbyn is now more unpopular than it was under Ed Miliband. The upcoming Scottish elections will be interesting to watch, it's looking like it could be another landslide for the SNP up there.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Remember Jean Charles de menezes?

If they ain't white it doesn't seem to matter.

That'll be somewhere in the UKIP manifesto. "

Oh so you think it's racist???

There is no colour in terrorism and everyone's blood is _ed!!!!.

A terrorists skin can be of any colour as can a victims of a terror attack.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock


"The bloke is a cock attached to a penis to be honest

"

You've got me wondering which part of his body he inserted into Diane Abbott now?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You mean you prefer shoot to kill,like the guy on the tube after 7/7.

The guy who pulled the trigger thought that that man was going to detonate a bomb and kill tens of people.

If you are sending people at to take down terrorists, you have to give them the means to stop a terrorist.

They managed to kill one totally innocent bloke, because he was running and looked "foreign".

How many more will be killed accidentally when the police are armed en masse?

Do you really believe that the ONLY reason why he was shot because he was running and foreign? Do you not know that his building was under surveillance, and then a breakdown in communications and misunderstandings unfortunately lead to the shooting. There were lots of people involved, it wasn't just some bobby on the beat pulling his gun out and getting his rocks off by shooting someone."

Lots of people...and it still happened, so why should even more armed people make it less likely to happen?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are plenty of ways to incapacitate a person without use of lethal force.

I'm kind of hoping if such an incident took place it wouldn't be a local bobby in charge of the situation anyway.

This is nothing more than propaganda.

So how would you incapacitate a small group (lets say 3-4 people) armed with automatic rifles and suicide vests?

Most suicide vests employ a dead man's switch. Shooting them is really not a good idea.

Where did you get that idea?

Hoe do you expect a man to hold, fire and reload a rifle with one hand holding a button or trigger switch constantly?"

All depends on what he plans to do, if he just wants to blow up a suicide vest in a crowded place, he's not going to be carrying an assault rifle.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The bloke is a cock attached to a penis to be honest

You've got me wondering which part of his body he inserted into Diane Abbott now? "

Actually made me throw up in my mouth

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable

A recent poll in Scotland showed Labour under the leadership of Corbyn is now more unpopular than it was under Ed Miliband. The upcoming Scottish elections will be interesting to watch, it's looking like it could be another landslide for the SNP up there. "
It matters not ...the SNP are a 56 seat party or thereabouts ,will never have real power,last time labour got in they did not need the Scottish seats as they were c_edible under Blair

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable

Is it really so inconceivable people would vote Lib Dem instead!?"
Up here yes...no one likes a wasted vote and no one likes parties that embrace socialism then climb into bed with the tories

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

As Nigel Farage said at the UKIP party conference "Corbyn is the gift that just keeps on giving to Labours opponents". Corbyn has the ability to even turn the north east into conservative arseholes....the man is unelectable

Is it really so inconceivable people would vote Lib Dem instead!?Up here yes...no one likes a wasted vote and no one likes parties that embrace socialism then climb into bed with the tories "

Fair enough but that just seems to make 2 parties that can't decide if they are socialist or not!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It's his own words, not establishment spin."

if they really are his own words then I don't see anything wrong; - who would be 'happy' with it?

As far as I can see this guy is the straightest main party leader that Britain has had in many decades, - yet the usual whingers are out in force, I see!

It's a shame he wasn't in power early on in the last decade, then maybe we could have stood by the rest of the world bar one & not invaded Iraq, - & now maybe we'd have a far weaker ISIS, If an ISIS at all, - & less need for guns on the streets as a bi product!

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Extreme? Perhaps you missed what happened in Paris just a few days ago? We are talking in light of that situation. So how would you deal with it? "

Almost all French police are armed, it didn't help. Sad fact is without intelligence there can never be a response that can stop such an attack.

He actually said it's down to the officer at the time to decide if firing his weapon would be an act of defence either self or public. Sounds like a sensible answer to the question asked realy.

I personally prefer guns to be with specialist armed response officers who can also be wearing defensive armour. far better than arming all officers like the pair who taza_ed the deaf blind man as they thought his walking stick may be a sword.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ask yourself a question you and you loved ones eating to board a tube or plane going to watch a movie, u see a guy acting suspiciously and police/ sas what ever around him. They try to talk to him but he doesn't listen he presses the trigger, he kills a member of your family your friends all the people that were stood anywhere near him including the police/sas.

All you see are bodies around you and devistation.

Can some of you even contemplate what that must feel like??!! I couldn't.

And yet you say there shouldn't be a shoot to kill policy.

Get real one person being shot is worth risking hund_eds being killed or seriously inju_ed.

And before the usual suspects say well

If it was your family member they killed blah blah if anyone is acting that suspiciously it draws such attention then they really are doing no good.

Jean Claude De Menezes family might think otherwise

Yes they might do indeed however in this day and age and in the worlds current climate why risk another 353 more funerals over one!!"

Let's hope the one person accidentally gunned down is no relation eh? We don't need to worry about a bit of collateral damage now and again

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ask yourself a question you and you loved ones eating to board a tube or plane going to watch a movie, u see a guy acting suspiciously and police/ sas what ever around him. They try to talk to him but he doesn't listen he presses the trigger, he kills a member of your family your friends all the people that were stood anywhere near him including the police/sas.

All you see are bodies around you and devistation.

Can some of you even contemplate what that must feel like??!! I couldn't.

And yet you say there shouldn't be a shoot to kill policy.

Get real one person being shot is worth risking hund_eds being killed or seriously inju_ed.

And before the usual suspects say well

If it was your family member they killed blah blah if anyone is acting that suspiciously it draws such attention then they really are doing no good.

Jean Claude De Menezes family might think otherwise

Yes they might do indeed however in this day and age and in the worlds current climate why risk another 353 more funerals over one!!

Let's hope the one person accidentally gunned down is no relation eh? We don't need to worry about a bit of collateral damage now and again "

Would you like to be the one responsible for not pulling the trigger if the suspicious, sweaty person who fitted the description of a suspected terrorist. Went on to kill a couple of hund_ed people?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Would you like to be the one responsible for not pulling the trigger if the suspicious, sweaty person who fitted the description of a suspected terrorist. Went on to kill a couple of hund_ed people?

And would you like to be one of those incompetent idiots who killed that poor innocent Brazilian guy?

Ifs buts ............

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Jeremy Corbyn has said that he is not happy for military or the police to shoot to kill on British streets.

Can you imagine a Paris or Mumbai like attack, but the police and military not being able to shoot to kill? What if they shot to wound but then the person died anyway?

i agree. i dont like shoot to kill principle. look a that poor dude on the tube who got shot 7-8times... and he was innocent!

shoot to wound... i agree with that... fuck... shoot them in the balls !"

Shooting to wound is impractical, dangerous and also damn near impossible.

There is also no 'shoot to kill' policy. Officers are trained to aim for centre mass (torso) as this is the largest area and there's less chance of missing and injuring an innocent bystander.

Trying to shoot the arms or legs of a moving target under extreme stress is nigh on impossible and they can be equally fatal or debilitating.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *LCC OP   Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge


"Its good to see senior Labour MPs like Keith Vaz coming out against Corbyn on this ridiculous position.

It's funny how Corbyn spent his time on the back benches rebelling against everything, but now expects everyone to follow his whip and party line. You cant have it both ways! "

Hilary Benn also coming out against Corbyn, other Labour MPs calling Corbyn a disgrace.

Jeremy Corbyn's shoot-to-kill _iew rejected by Hilary Benn - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34840708

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago

North West

Cameron got it right when he said that you can't pretend that you live in the world that that you want, you have to live in the world that exists.

On a completely separate but related issue, my mate who was a Met cop tells me that a concerted attack in multiple locations in London would result in far more casualties than Paris because there is insufficient manpower and heavy weapons to take on AK47 bearing terrorists in multiple locations.

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Does anyone really believe that it is even possible (in the kind of situation being discussed) to shoot to wound? The arm or the leg,particularly on a moving target,presents a very small target surface area.Firing a weapon in a public area and missing could be disastrous,a marksman has to aim for the largest part of the body which,obviously,is the center mass,containing vital organs.This,means that shooting at all is shooting to kill.

It may be possible,in a movie,to shoot a gun out of someones hand but life is not a movie.

If we have armed police,we have to accept that they have the capability to kill,otherwise,what would be the point of arming them at all?

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 

By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago

Titz Towers, North Notts

Pops in before the thread gets too big

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Does anyone really believe that it is even possible (in the kind of situation being discussed) to shoot to wound? The arm or the leg,particularly on a moving target,presents a very small target surface area.Firing a weapon in a public area and missing could be disastrous,a marksman has to aim for the largest part of the body which,obviously,is the center mass,containing vital organs.This,means that shooting at all is shooting to kill.

It may be possible,in a movie,to shoot a gun out of someones hand but life is not a movie.

If we have armed police,we have to accept that they have the capability to kill,otherwise,what would be the point of arming them at all?"

I'm glad someone else understands...

 (closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately
back to top