Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
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 Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know" Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple! 
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings ! "why would my post make you think the officers think they are better and superior? And no its not a job for wimps. The ones I spoke to felt that in the current climate of media and political witch hunts, coupled with a growing tide of ambulance chasing lawyers, they would never feel safe to actually fire weapons. Seems like a valid concern to me, I would not say these officers are unfit to be police. I would be interested to hear the views of other police officers which is why I asked if there has been any poll done. Are you a police officer? I think not going by your comments. What do you do to keep the country safe? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire." Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And as for this attack proving police short-comings, the police were there and took out 3 terrorists within 8 minutes. How is that not seen as anything other than a good response? If you mean the police should have know about the attack in advance and stopped it, well I would argue that is the job of MI5 and counter-terrorism units, not your average copper on the street" Well, read my previous post ! But please ! Stop saying its a good response ! Its pathetic ! And most comments on all international news channels say as much ! Or the say something politically correct like ! considering British police are not armed.....bla bla bla ! Her is the problem : A Romanian Chef apparently did more then the police ! The first two brave policemen to try and stop them only had batons ! And as far as I know , one is still in serious condition ! Had they been armed like its normal in the rest of Europe .... the response time would have been ... 0 minutes and most or all of the stabbing would not have happened ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed ! "Snipped the post to keep it neat... in France all police are armed, it took them much more than 8 minutes when terrorists attacked... Budgets don't change much, so if all officers are armed the same amount of budget and much less time per officer would go into the training. How the hell will that improve things? As for the number of bullets fired, have you ever seen battle stats of munitions v casualties? Frequently it comes to thousands of rounds per casualty and that's for soldiers who train day after day, and don't have to deal with a day job as well. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"we could randomly arm pensioners over the age of 80 .... would be more of a lottery then"  like that train of thought  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !
Snipped the post to keep it neat... in France all police are armed, it took them much more than 8 minutes when terrorists attacked...
Budgets don't change much, so if all officers are armed the same amount of budget and much less time per officer would go into the training. How the hell will that improve things?
As for the number of bullets fired, have you ever seen battle stats of munitions v casualties? Frequently it comes to thousands of rounds per casualty and that's for soldiers who train day after day, and don't have to deal with a day job as well."Ok ! lets clarify ! Battle field fire fight are not the same as police ones ! No comparison ! In a police situation you want to fire as little number of rounds as possible ! Why ? Because the idea is to stop and incapacitate the assailant as soon as possible in order to reduce risk to the policeman himself , but specially to reduce the risk of hitting innocent by standers ! Bear in mind that these shootings happen mainly in urban environments where peolple circulate and also the risk of ricochet is enormous considering all the walls and paved surfaces ! Then there is bullet type and over penetration ! On a battle scenario more rounds are fired for many reasons ! One example is suppressive fire ! Also and "generally" there is less risk of hitting non combatants ! And believe me , soldiers do train a lot , but you would be surprised of how few live rounds they actually fire outside combat situations ! Reason.... too expensive ! Ammo is expensive ! The only military forces that train shooting and marksmanship are some special forces ! But bear in mind there are fewer in numbers ! Here is a fact ! Just because you got some training have a gun and uniform , it doesn't mean you are a good shot or capable and competent with firearms ! Then there is the psychological and mental preparation as well ! Very few peolple are natural good shots ! any one can be taught to fire and handle a gun , and achieve minimum proficiency ! (in fact most are marginally adequate at best ) The best shooters I know are competition shooters! Some are cops , some are military ... but most are civilians ! Some will shoot more rounds in a weekend training session (practical shooting) then most police will shoot in ten years or more of police training ! As a rule police that like guns and shooting are hands down more proficient then their colleagues that don like guns ,and only carry them because its the tool of the trade , be they military , or police ! Sorry for the long reply , but I find its important to clarify rather then rely on Hollywood and the media misconceptions and biased BS ! Hope this helps !
OOps almost forgot you France comment !
Which attack are you referring to ?
In all as far as I remember, cops were there , and in some they shot at them directly with Ak 47 ...and the cops shot back !
Can you imagine what will happen when , or if that happens in the UK ?
How can you shoot back if you don't have a gun ?
ps. yes budgets would have to be
doubled or more initially , and it would take time ! By my estimate Britain would need to purchase at least 100 000 pistols ! while the pistols will remain serviceable for decades The big expence is the ammo ! But then all European countries long ago made such investments, and bear that cost ! the UK has not thus far ...so time to step up ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"we could randomly arm pensioners over the age of 80 .... would be more of a lottery then" You are joking ..lol... But I would not be surprised if some of those 80 year old would not be quite capable handling a firearm ! National service back then perhaps? And shooting was a more common sport ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The police are just people too if all officers had guns and the ones who could be bribed or corrupted 'accidently misplaced' or had their arms taken off them by someone malicious, what then? " So all human frailties are justification for the inevitable ! Or again ...the implication is British police are inferior ! Besides you must be joking to think the bad guys rely on guns taken from cops ! 
Do you realise how ridiculous those arguments are to anyone outside the UK ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Good reply OP, but as you have rightly or wrongly criticised the skill of the armed police, and you are advocating a 10 or 20 x increase in the number of armed police with only a 2 x increase in training budget. I am sure you can understand my reluctance to agree with you on arming all police and letting them loose on us the public. I like this country as it is, don't feel the need to change things for a few terrorists." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10581584 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Good reply OP, but as you have rightly or wrongly criticised the skill of the armed police, and you are advocating a 10 or 20 x increase in the number of armed police with only a 2 x increase in training budget. I am sure you can understand my reluctance to agree with you on arming all police and letting them loose on us the public. I like this country as it is, don't feel the need to change things for a few terrorists." I can see your point ! But that is a risk worth taking! All other countries have taken it , and all have had accidental shootings or uncalled for shootings ! But statistically those are almost negligible ! In factI Did a informal study some years back for uni study and realised that in Europe most police deaths were caused by..... police !!
One was cops with ptsd committing suicide , and the other bad gun handling in the station or locker room or patrol car!
Very few in fact died in the line of duty crime fighting !
But in the end the fact remains that its too attacks now where unarmed police have failed to protect the public and were severely wounded or killed because the were unarmed ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Sky news poll the majority of the public now support all police routinely carrying firearms ! -72% support -20% oppose -5% neither -3% don't know It seems the penny has finally dropped ! And the Uk is waking up to a reality its been ignoring ! It is a pity that it takes the blood of innocents for some to wake up ! But I doubt the "Wise leaders" in Government and police top ranks will wake up ! Or.... how many more attacks will it take until old habits and "tradition" is replaced by reality ? "How big was the poll? What form was the question asked in? Who carried out the survey? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Good reply OP, but as you have rightly or wrongly criticised the skill of the armed police, and you are advocating a 10 or 20 x increase in the number of armed police with only a 2 x increase in training budget. I am sure you can understand my reluctance to agree with you on arming all police and letting them loose on us the public. I like this country as it is, don't feel the need to change things for a few terrorists. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10581584" Yes ! So what human nature is what it is ! If that was a valid reason then no European countries would have any armed police as a standard ! I live in Portugal , and in the last 20 years there have been two similar situations ! In fact they were the biggest case of gun trafficking on record ! Did anybody call for police to be disarmed ? NO ! The outcry was rightly about government always making gun ownership more difficult , and police crack down on us law abiding gun owners , when the biggest problem was coming from the police ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Sky news poll the majority of the public now support all police routinely carrying firearms ! -72% support -20% oppose -5% neither -3% don't know It seems the penny has finally dropped ! And the Uk is waking up to a reality its been ignoring ! It is a pity that it takes the blood of innocents for some to wake up ! But I doubt the "Wise leaders" in Government and police top ranks will wake up ! Or.... how many more attacks will it take until old habits and "tradition" is replaced by reality ?
How big was the poll? What form was the question asked in? Who carried out the survey?"From what they reported ,it was a Sky poll, with a 1500 sample ! Sample is within specs....but... Not too sure about the question ! But will What peaked my attention were the figures involved ! I don't recall ever seeing such big figures in support! Now ... having said that I am the first to admit that as part of the lame stream media Sky is not exactly what I would call a reliable outlet.... and the polls are not to be trusted either ...but be that as it may , 72% is a very big figure! too big to fake and get away with ! But...... As you say "what was the question " ... That is where "the rubber huts the road !" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Sky news poll the majority of the public now support all police routinely carrying firearms ! -72% support -20% oppose -5% neither -3% don't know It seems the penny has finally dropped ! And the Uk is waking up to a reality its been ignoring ! It is a pity that it takes the blood of innocents for some to wake up ! But I doubt the "Wise leaders" in Government and police top ranks will wake up ! Or.... how many more attacks will it take until old habits and "tradition" is replaced by reality ? "What a surprise that... 1) Resident right wing troll and gun nut starts this thread 2) A poll taken directly after two events like this illustrates that knee-jerk reactions are all that most of the population are capable of doing. The big news really is that Theresa May is going to be annihilated in the coming days because of her dismantling of neighbourhood policing. Intelligence is what makes good Policing, shooting dead people is the consequence of failed intelligence. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The big news really is that Theresa May is going to be annihilated in the coming days because of her dismantling of neighbourhood policing. " REALLY!!!!
Funny that but the latest poll on the Wiki page puts the Tories 11% in front and the average since the Manchester bombing is 7% in front.
That's the strangest annihilation I've ever seen. 
And all that was before Dianne Abbott's latest TV car crash.   | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I hope the OP doesn't fire his gun with the same wild abandon he uses with exclamation marks."  Hes shooting blanks in the thread!!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The big news really is that Theresa May is going to be annihilated in the coming days because of her dismantling of neighbourhood policing. REALLY!!!!
Funny that but the latest poll on the Wiki page puts the Tories 11% in front and the average since the Manchester bombing is 7% in front.
That's the strangest annihilation I've ever seen.
And all that was before Dianne Abbott's latest TV car crash. "Youll be heading back to UK once mrs May gets in then.No longer a Ex pat moaning from the sidelines . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I hope the OP doesn't fire his gun with the same wild abandon he uses with exclamation marks. Hes shooting blanks in the thread!!!"I'm just glad I don't live in his fantasy world in which armed police have a '0 minute' response time to terrorist attacks. I'd rather not have an armed police officer, with their finger on the trigger, shadowing everyone in the country. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings ! "Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so.. They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do.. By definition calling them wimps is disgusting .. What are the details of the poll? Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The big news really is that Theresa May is going to be annihilated in the coming days because of her dismantling of neighbourhood policing. REALLY!!!!
Funny that but the latest poll on the Wiki page puts the Tories 11% in front and the average since the Manchester bombing is 7% in front.
That's the strangest annihilation I've ever seen.
And all that was before Dianne Abbott's latest TV car crash. "This woman's ideology led her to believe that there would be no consequences to the dismantling of neighbourhood policing and that reactive policing was the way forwards. She was warned that neighbourhood policing was the most effective way of generating intelligence and monitoring suspicious activities and she said it was fear mongering. If the British public are prepared to brush over such calamitous actions, then they deserve everything that is coming to them. What we are seeing now is a reaction by the general public to a failure of intelligence. I put it out there that 20,000 neighbourhood police officers would have gone a long way to monitoring 3,000 potential Jihadi's on a watch list. Each one of those police officers would have had their own little team of local informers and contacts and so each one of those 20,000 had their own web of intelligence gathering resources. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
"Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ? If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature. You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps ! Lol... a gun fetish? Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ? Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ? Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue." Force ? How do you know they don't one ? If a confidential poll was carried out amongst the police force ,what would the results be ? All British police I have spoken to to this day ,have said that they would want to carry a gun when on street duty! But they also told me that they would never go on the record an publicly say so, for fear of consequences.
So are you saying that British police are less capable or responsible then all their European colleagues ,as well as the rest of the world ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue. Force ? How do you know they don't one ? If a confidential poll was carried out amongst the police force ,what would the results be ? All British police I have spoken to to this day ,have said that they would want to carry a gun when on street duty! But they also told me that they would never go on the record an publicly say so, for fear of consequences.
So are you saying that British police are less capable or responsible then all their European colleagues ,as well as the rest of the world ? "Yes force, you want them to carry a gun or lose their job. So you are trying to force them to carry a gun. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue." No, no, no that is complete garbage. What do they know if they are wimps anyway? Our man in Portugal has all the answers | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue. No, no, no that is complete garbage. What do they know if they are wimps anyway? Our man in Portugal has all the answers "Obviously, Tony is well pissed off with Tory police cuts of 20,000. He wants them cut by another 120,000! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ? "You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills.. I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.. So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance? You complete silly man.. As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers.. What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue. Force ? How do you know they don't one ? If a confidential poll was carried out amongst the police force ,what would the results be ? All British police I have spoken to to this day ,have said that they would want to carry a gun when on street duty! But they also told me that they would never go on the record an publicly say so, for fear of consequences.
So are you saying that British police are less capable or responsible then all their European colleagues ,as well as the rest of the world ? "smells like bull m8.. There are no consequences for a serving officer who wants to carry. They only have to apply .. Not all do. The fed have asked them and the answer is they do not all want to be armed.. Maybe the fed should have just asked you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Sky news poll the majority of the public now support all police routinely carrying firearms ! -72% support -20% oppose -5% neither -3% don't know It seems the penny has finally dropped ! And the Uk is waking up to a reality its been ignoring ! It is a pity that it takes the blood of innocents for some to wake up ! But I doubt the "Wise leaders" in Government and police top ranks will wake up ! Or.... how many more attacks will it take until old habits and "tradition" is replaced by reality ?
What a surprise that...
1) Resident right wing troll and gun nut starts this thread
2) A poll taken directly after two events like this illustrates that knee-jerk reactions are all that most of the population are capable of doing.
The big news really is that Theresa May is going to be annihilated in the coming days because of her dismantling of neighbourhood policing. Intelligence is what makes good Policing, shooting dead people is the consequence of failed intelligence."Is that all you can contribute ?
Do you have nothing positive to add ?
It seems so , as you resort to labelling me a right wing gun nut troll !
Yes, I am centre right ,and proud of it!
A gun owner , yes and proud of that too.
The nut must be what's missing in your tiny brain...that leads to calling troll to someone that doesn't agree with you!
But .... I know why you are so pissed off .....
We had this discussion on another thread some months back when the first policeman was killed, and I said back then it would happen again, and continue to happen as long current unarmed police exists !
But you, and others, refuted that and buried your head in the sand , where it still is ! 
But you don't care or respect those that are out there on the street putting their life at risk to protect nimbys and wimps like you !
You cant pretend to respect a police man/woman , then expect them to respond to criminals or terrorists armed with vans , knives, grenades ,or Ak 47´s , with...... a baton and pepper spray
So, shame on you ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue. Force ? How do you know they don't one ? If a confidential poll was carried out amongst the police force ,what would the results be ? All British police I have spoken to to this day ,have said that they would want to carry a gun when on street duty! But they also told me that they would never go on the record an publicly say so, for fear of consequences.
So are you saying that British police are less capable or responsible then all their European colleagues ,as well as the rest of the world ?
smells like bull m8..
There are no consequences for a serving officer who wants to carry. They only have to apply ..
Not all do. The fed have asked them and the answer is they do not all want to be armed..
Maybe the fed should have just asked you? "If you believe what institutions linked to the state or powerful interests tell you officially then it means you believe in what politicians tell you too , don't you ?
Besides.... in your own words :
"Not all do. The fed have asked them and the answer is they do not all want to be armed.."
Question is.... what percentage ?
Also will the ones that do, actually be able to opt ?
Or... are there enough weapons and ammo for issue and training ?
I think not ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tony, so lets get this straight: - You love guns - You love armed police - You are right wing - You are a climate change denier (the little you understand) - You love Trump and he can do no wrong - You think Alex Jones make sense I know a *perfect* country for you, they'd love you! Do you like Nascar and country and western by any chance? -Matt" Happy to clarify all of those, but... Are you asking or saying ?
Cause if you are saying it , its your notion and its BS ....
So... are you asking or saying ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's never a good idea to force a gun into the hands of someone who doesn't want one. The police are not calling for them all to be armed, I trust their judgement on this issue. No, no, no that is complete garbage. What do they know if they are wimps anyway? Our man in Portugal has all the answers "No ! But unlike you I don't have my head buried in the sand
So stop pretending, and ignoring reality .... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tony, so lets get this straight: - You love guns - You love armed police - You are right wing - You are a climate change denier (the little you understand) - You love Trump and he can do no wrong - You think Alex Jones make sense I know a *perfect* country for you, they'd love you! Do you like Nascar and country and western by any chance? -Matt Happy to clarify all of those, but... Are you asking or saying ?
Cause if you are saying it , its your notion and its BS ....
So... are you asking or saying ?"The bullet points were all observations from your posts previous. The Nascar and country and western bit was a question. As far as I know you've not brought them up in threads yet. Feel free to clarify if you want... I couldn't give a fuck to be honest. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tony, so lets get this straight: - You love guns - You love armed police - You are right wing - You are a climate change denier (the little you understand) - You love Trump and he can do no wrong - You think Alex Jones make sense I know a *perfect* country for you, they'd love you! Do you like Nascar and country and western by any chance? -Matt Happy to clarify all of those, but... Are you asking or saying ?
Cause if you are saying it , its your notion and its BS ....
So... are you asking or saying ?
The bullet points were all observations from your posts previous. The Nascar and country and western bit was a question. As far as I know you've not brought them up in threads yet.
Feel free to clarify if you want... I couldn't give a fuck to be honest.
-Matt"You forgot "flat earther" on there Matt! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tony, so lets get this straight: - You love guns - You love armed police - You are right wing - You are a climate change denier (the little you understand) - You love Trump and he can do no wrong - You think Alex Jones make sense I know a *perfect* country for you, they'd love you! Do you like Nascar and country and western by any chance? -Matt Happy to clarify all of those, but... Are you asking or saying ?
Cause if you are saying it , its your notion and its BS ....
So... are you asking or saying ?
The bullet points were all observations from your posts previous. The Nascar and country and western bit was a question. As far as I know you've not brought them up in threads yet.
Feel free to clarify if you want... I couldn't give a fuck to be honest.
-Matt
You forgot "flat earther" on there Matt!"To be fair, I don't think he actually confirmed or denied that one, and it was mainly you winding him up. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
"Ever been a police officer Tony? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
"I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see : Not going to discuss what my qualifications are. But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views. "I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.." Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work ! But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry . In most police forces this does exist! If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work . But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same. it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office! As such they should be paid less. There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement. So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice. In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty . This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less . Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation... So... on a positive note, what you say on that ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tony, so lets get this straight: - You love guns - You love armed police - You are right wing - You are a climate change denier (the little you understand) - You love Trump and he can do no wrong - You think Alex Jones make sense I know a *perfect* country for you, they'd love you! Do you like Nascar and country and western by any chance? -Matt Happy to clarify all of those, but... Are you asking or saying ?
Cause if you are saying it , its your notion and its BS ....
So... are you asking or saying ?
The bullet points were all observations from your posts previous. The Nascar and country and western bit was a question. As far as I know you've not brought them up in threads yet.
Feel free to clarify if you want... I couldn't give a fuck to be honest.
-Matt"Ok ! So its pure troll BS !
It seems you have nothing to contribute , then you should just crawl back under your rock...
But we have had this discussion before, on another thread after the last attack, and you had the same head up your arse attitude back then !
I said it would happen again and continue to happen ....
Unfortunately reality "trumps"...lol.. your delusion , and you , like others on here hate to be wrong .
The problem is ... your pride and prejudice costs lives .... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tony, so lets get this straight: - You love guns - You love armed police - You are right wing - You are a climate change denier (the little you understand) - You love Trump and he can do no wrong - You think Alex Jones make sense I know a *perfect* country for you, they'd love you! Do you like Nascar and country and western by any chance? -Matt Happy to clarify all of those, but... Are you asking or saying ?
Cause if you are saying it , its your notion and its BS ....
So... are you asking or saying ?
The bullet points were all observations from your posts previous. The Nascar and country and western bit was a question. As far as I know you've not brought them up in threads yet.
Feel free to clarify if you want... I couldn't give a fuck to be honest.
-Matt
You forgot "flat earther" on there Matt!
To be fair, I don't think he actually confirmed or denied that one, and it was mainly you winding him up.
-Matt"
Yes ... that was CLCC ´s intention ....
not surprising when one has no valid contribution , or counter argument .
But then its not surprising when some don't have the intellectual capacity , they resort to that tactic... they provoke ....ignorant trolling at its best !
Good to see you support kindred spirits
Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn fully supported a 10% cut in the police budget. Burnham was quoted as saying "I would be happy with a 10% cut in police numbers" McDonnell was reported as saying (he later tried to deny it although he sat on the same platform as the authors) that he would abolish all armed police and MI5. Corby's links to the IRA Hezbollah Hamas among others is well known, and he has voted against EVERY piece of anti terrorist legislation since he first walked through the doors of parliament. I'll take no lectures on security or anti terrorism from any of them or their supporters. You see I didn't even mention Dianne Abbott so you can't play the race card. "Yes, Corbyn's links to the IRA, Hezbollah and Hamas are well known to be bullshit scare stories by the media and certain politicians and have been debunked and explained in context many times e.g.: https://www.opendemocracy.net/luke-davies/re-examining-corbyns-dangerous-friendships And yes he has voted against many of the bits of terror legislation (not all), and May has also voted against a number of them herself: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40111329 But hey, who needs privacy or civil liberties? Just go about your day citizen! And congratulations on your restraint on not saying racist things about Dianne Abbott. Have a medal. Regardless of her race, she is a political abomination. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?"Stay off the funny tobacco? What the fuck are you waffling on about.. What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk? You are talking bollocks ..again.. M8 are you a 'Walt'? You should know that at least.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Corbyn fully supported a 10% cut in the police budget. Burnham was quoted as saying "I would be happy with a 10% cut in police numbers" McDonnell was reported as saying (he later tried to deny it although he sat on the same platform as the authors) that he would abolish all armed police and MI5. Corby's links to the IRA Hezbollah Hamas among others is well known, and he has voted against EVERY piece of anti terrorist legislation since he first walked through the doors of parliament. I'll take no lectures on security or anti terrorism from any of them or their supporters. You see I didn't even mention Dianne Abbott so you can't play the race card.
Yes, Corbyn's links to the IRA, Hezbollah and Hamas are well known to be bullshit scare stories by the media and certain politicians and have been debunked and explained in context many times e.g.:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/luke-davies/re-examining-corbyns-dangerous-friendships
And yes he has voted against many of the bits of terror legislation (not all), and May has also voted against a number of them herself:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40111329
But hey, who needs privacy or civil liberties? Just go about your day citizen!
And congratulations on your restraint on not saying racist things about Dianne Abbott. Have a medal. Regardless of her race, she is a political abomination.
-Matt"Yes she is but you seem to be quite relaxed about having her as Home Secretary.
As for comrade Jezza (the terrorists friend) and his links to pretty much every terrorist organisation that wants to destroy us.
The camera never lies.
Oh and his voting record is 100% against EVERY piece of anti terrorist legislation since his first day in parliament.
Without reading every page of Hansard I can't quote a link, but Teresa May and many others have said it in public many times and he has never denied it.
If it is wrong he will sue...... Hmmmm thought not. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
"Wow ! Unbelievable ! This is a serious subject... but... It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote ! Was it too much for you level of comprehension ? "What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?" lol.... where did that notion even come from ? Well ... conclusion ; You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution. You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one? "Yep your a Walt.. Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty.. Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on? What? Google?
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not even a Walt, he's a wannabe Walt! "Shh he can't talk about his 'qualifications' Nudge nudge say no more.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
"Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person" Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk ! It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you ! So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand .... So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ... "Because she is a woman? Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. Ironic that.. You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability.. She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door.. She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.. It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.. So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.. You never asked me that question.. But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future.. It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way.. At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time.. That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are.. But surely Tony you must know that? You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..? Unless.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not even a Walt, he's a wannabe Walt!
Shh he can't talk about his 'qualifications'
Nudge nudge say no more..
"Do you think those black goggles are standard issue in Hereford?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"He's not even a Walt, he's a wannabe Walt!
Shh he can't talk about his 'qualifications'
Nudge nudge say no more..
Do you think those black goggles are standard issue in Hereford? "No.. But the sketch from 'not the 9 o'clock news'? about policing is strangely brought to mind when I read such as he writes.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt" the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. " "French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. " Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. " But surely if they were trained by him to his high standards it would be all good? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns?" The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. " They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns?" so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns?" Is there anything that uou don't blame on the EU or Eastern Europeans? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? " No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that?" I lived in Spain from 1986 until the mid 1990's aside from a spell in Scandinavia and I didn't see an Eastern European, let alone fall victim to crime at the hands of one. Your knowledge appears to be limited to the distance that your eyes can see. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that?" whoa there, i was asking a question based on your linking the two together .. why you think you may be someone that someone else may want to 'score points' from probably says more about your ego or some paranoia.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that? I lived in Spain from 1986 until the mid 1990's aside from a spell in Scandinavia and I didn't see an Eastern European, let alone fall victim to crime at the hands of one. Your knowledge appears to be limited to the distance that your eyes can see. " When did they open the doors to eastern bloc countries?
You are the one wearing blinkers. Oh and refusing to answer the original question | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that? whoa there, i was asking a question based on your linking the two together .. why you think you may be someone that someone else may want to 'score points' from probably says more about your ego or some paranoia.. " But I wasn't linking the two together particularly and if you weren't trying to 'point score' what was the point of your post? Oh and I notice that you haven't answered the question I posed about guns either | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that? whoa there, i was asking a question based on your linking the two together .. why you think you may be someone that someone else may want to 'score points' from probably says more about your ego or some paranoia.. But I wasn't linking the two together particularly and if you weren't trying to 'point score' what was the point of your post? Oh and I notice that you haven't answered the question I posed about guns either" you mentioned the bars on the windows and Eastern European criminals in the same post which looks like you were linking the 2, you never mentioned Spanish criminals or crime in general except for Eastern European.. maybe that's why i came to that conclusion, accept you may not have meant it.. Guns..? you never asked me about guns? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that? whoa there, i was asking a question based on your linking the two together .. why you think you may be someone that someone else may want to 'score points' from probably says more about your ego or some paranoia.. But I wasn't linking the two together particularly and if you weren't trying to 'point score' what was the point of your post? Oh and I notice that you haven't answered the question I posed about guns either" Do the Spanish guns deter the eastern European criminals? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. "French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt" lol...just back from work , and see the usual suspects have been hard at work.... But as usual a little patience yields good results , ineptitude shows, and you end up shooting yourself in the foot ....
Thank you for proving my point Matt !
Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ?
This is why ;
"The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot."
Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has anyone pointed out yet that 72% of Sky News watchers wanting armed police does not mean that 72% of all people want armed police. Its like those mascara ads. Asking 10 people what they think is not definitive result."
A fair point to consider
Its good to see someone actually thinking | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. " Showing your "wisdom" as usual ... And this right after evidence to the contrary courtesy of you friend Matt. ""French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt Lol.... seems you have been watching Muthbusters !
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns? The way that the Police dress, how they are armed and who they are answerable to, has a great deal to do with historical legacy. I would not necessarily agree that Spain is safer than the UK. I don't know many places in the UK where downstairs windows have anti-intruder bars built in as standard but the vast majority of Spanish villa's and houses have barred and shuttered windows. I have lived in Lanzarote, Gran Canaria, Denia and Estepona and have experienced crime against me or my property in all of these places despite living there for relatively short periods of time. They mainly have barred and shuttered windows in the areas you've been to because for much of the year a lot of the properties are empty. The EU's open borders have seen an influx of Eastern European criminals though who have no respect for property. Maybe it's you that attracts crime, I've never experienced any and lived there for years and I know in which country I would feel safer when walking home late at night. But the question was, what problems have been caused there by the police carrying guns? so are you saying that the practise of having bars on ground floor windows is only since Spain joined the EU or after with Schengen? No. Where did I say that? Stop jumping to stupid conclusions in some vain attempt at point scoring. I said they are barred because they are often left empty. Crime there has risen though because of the influx of eastern European criminals who have no respect for property. Do you want to try and deny that? I lived in Spain from 1986 until the mid 1990's aside from a spell in Scandinavia and I didn't see an Eastern European, let alone fall victim to crime at the hands of one. Your knowledge appears to be limited to the distance that your eyes can see. When did they open the doors to eastern bloc countries?
You are the one wearing blinkers. Oh and refusing to answer the original question"You mean this question ? "I don't care either way but in Spain the local police, national police and Guardia Civil all carry guns and I may be wrong ( doubt it) but Spain is a lot safer and less violent place to live. Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns?" No.... they don't want to answer that question , this is why they deflected and started to deviate attention from it with all sorts of BS ! "Maybe someone can explain the problems that have been caused there because of the police carrying guns?" I agree, and we can extend that question to the rest of Europe´s Police. They refuse to give a simple clear reply. They always avoid and deflect ! The conclusion I thus draw , absent reply, is that the posters on here who oppose Arming police in the UK consider them inferior and less capable then their European colleagues !  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless.."mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. Showing your "wisdom" as usual ... And this right after evidence to the contrary courtesy of you friend Matt. ""French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt Lol.... seems you have been watching Muthbusters !
"The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless..
mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense "Yep your a Walt.. One with a fetish for guns.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"According to Sky news poll the majority of the public now support all police routinely carrying firearms ! -72% support -20% oppose -5% neither -3% don't know It seems the penny has finally dropped ! And the Uk is waking up to a reality its been ignoring ! It is a pity that it takes the blood of innocents for some to wake up ! But I doubt the "Wise leaders" in Government and police top ranks will wake up ! Or.... how many more attacks will it take until old habits and "tradition" is replaced by reality ? "you haven't thought about the financial implications every officer will need to have fire arms training which cost money and with the government making cuts highly unlikely I would say | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Most of the Police Officers who responded with a "No" when asked about being armed on a daily basis cited their refusal was as a result of being worried about the possibility of being "criminally investigated" for using the weapon. There has been some discussion about toning down, or altering the way in which this happens, with input from the Police Federation. Personally, I would rather that the Police wern't armed as a matter of course, but I think unfortunately that's the way the world has now turned. Forget all this "Ah, but that's what the terrorists want, to change our way of life"... hello... wake up! Our way of life HAS changed, and we need to change with it. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless..
mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense
Yep your a Walt..
One with a fetish for guns..
"By your "wise" reply , I conclude you are out of valid coherent points ! Absent those you resort to deflect and repeat yourself ... Do you have a Walt fetish ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. Showing your "wisdom" as usual ... And this right after evidence to the contrary courtesy of you friend Matt. ""French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt Lol.... seems you have been watching Muthbusters !
The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony?"Hello... ! anybody home ?
It didn't take long for you to prove your ignorance , and shoot yourself in the foot AGAIN !!!
Its starting to get ridiculous and boring to see you fall over your self ....
"The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony? "
Of course not you dummy !
If you had the wits to read other posts of mine in response to what your friend Matt , you would have gotten the clue ! That is if you can understand what you read .... I doubt it by your posts .
But as usual I have to spell it out , so here it is :
"Thank you for proving my point Matt !
Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ?
This is why ;
"The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot."
Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him ! "
Now CLCC did you get that dummy ?
Do you now understand why cops patrol in pairs ?
His patrol partner shot him !
Actually there were 3 policeman.. all armed !
The point is that in Britain with unharmed police that attacker would caused a lot more damage before being stopped .....
So now daft, go wash that egg of your face
And ask yourself why someone on here refers to your nick as CLCC standing for Couple Lacking Cognitive Capacity | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless..
mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense
Yep your a Walt..
One with a fetish for guns..
By your "wise" reply , I conclude you are out of valid coherent points !
Absent those you resort to deflect and repeat yourself ...
Do you have a Walt fetish ? "Walts are not something to be fetishised over, pitied maybe.. 'bullets and bloodshed'..
maybe do some more reading and brush up on terminology eh..
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face. "No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony. As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution. I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage? -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt"How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?"I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. Showing your "wisdom" as usual ... And this right after evidence to the contrary courtesy of you friend Matt. ""French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt Lol.... seems you have been watching Muthbusters !
The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony?
Hello... ! anybody home ?
It didn't take long for you to prove your ignorance , and shoot yourself in the foot AGAIN !!!
Its starting to get ridiculous and boring to see you fall over your self ....
"The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony? "
Of course not you dummy !
If you had the wits to read other posts of mine in response to what your friend Matt , you would have gotten the clue ! That is if you can understand what you read .... I doubt it by your posts .
But as usual I have to spell it out , so here it is :
"Thank you for proving my point Matt !
Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ?
This is why ;
"The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot."
Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him ! "
Now CLCC did you get that dummy ?
Do you now understand why cops patrol in pairs ?
His patrol partner shot him !
Actually there were 3 policeman.. all armed !
The point is that in Britain with unharmed police that attacker would caused a lot more damage before being stopped .....
So now daft, go wash that egg of your face
And ask yourself why someone on here refers to your nick as CLCC standing for Couple Lacking Cognitive Capacity "Attacking my wife yet again on another thread. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt"And yet you've dropped him off there so I'm assuming you must think its safe to do so, so maybe that station wasn't really needed then eh | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
And yet you've dropped him off there so I'm assuming you must think its safe to do so, so maybe that station wasn't really needed then eh"Yes, I dropped him off there because I think he is safe. Why do I think he is safe? Because I'm not a rabid tabloid reader or gun nut thinking that terrorists are around every fucking corner. Because I'm a rational person that knows he is hundreds of times more likely to be killed crossing the road or ch oke on his pint than from a terrorist attack. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Youll be heading back to UK once mrs May gets in then.No longer a Ex pat moaning from the sidelines . "So many "patriotic" tossers who don't actually live in the country they profess to love. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
And yet you've dropped him off there so I'm assuming you must think its safe to do so, so maybe that station wasn't really needed then eh
Yes, I dropped him off there because I think he is safe. Why do I think he is safe? Because I'm not a rabid tabloid reader or gun nut thinking that terrorists are around every fucking corner. Because I'm a rational person that knows he is hundreds of times more likely to be killed crossing the road or ch oke on his pint than from a terrorist attack.
-Matt"So what the fuck are you moaning about? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
And yet you've dropped him off there so I'm assuming you must think its safe to do so, so maybe that station wasn't really needed then eh
Yes, I dropped him off there because I think he is safe. Why do I think he is safe? Because I'm not a rabid tabloid reader or gun nut thinking that terrorists are around every fucking corner. Because I'm a rational person that knows he is hundreds of times more likely to be killed crossing the road or ch oke on his pint than from a terrorist attack.
-Matt
So what the fuck are you moaning about?"You're really not good at keeping up with an argument,are you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
And yet you've dropped him off there so I'm assuming you must think its safe to do so, so maybe that station wasn't really needed then eh
Yes, I dropped him off there because I think he is safe. Why do I think he is safe? Because I'm not a rabid tabloid reader or gun nut thinking that terrorists are around every fucking corner. Because I'm a rational person that knows he is hundreds of times more likely to be killed crossing the road or ch oke on his pint than from a terrorist attack.
-Matt
So what the fuck are you moaning about?
You're really not good at keeping up with an argument,are you?" pmsl | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
And yet you've dropped him off there so I'm assuming you must think its safe to do so, so maybe that station wasn't really needed then eh
Yes, I dropped him off there because I think he is safe. Why do I think he is safe? Because I'm not a rabid tabloid reader or gun nut thinking that terrorists are around every fucking corner. Because I'm a rational person that knows he is hundreds of times more likely to be killed crossing the road or ch oke on his pint than from a terrorist attack.
-Matt
So what the fuck are you moaning about?
You're really not good at keeping up with an argument,are you?"lol... indeed, it seems not. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire. Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed ! "You sound like an hysterical reactionary gun nut. French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire. Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !
You sound like an hysterical reactionary gun nut.
French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples.
""hysterical reactionary" Are you projecting ? At least try and put together a coherent argument without the need to offend others! ..... that is after you take you head out of the sand....
But how could you ? you have an opinion... but no clue about what you are saying ...lol
Your own example is flawed, in fact you "shot" yourself in the foot ...lol...
"French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
mmmm.... How was the Nice truck attacker stopped ?
Three guesses :
-Truck run out of diesel
- He took a wrong turn and drove into the sea.
-Police shot the truck driver
"Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
Really?
So....which was it ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Still no post from Tony saying how the Parisian armed police did better today at Notre Dame? He's slacking. Then again, if a terrorist decides to lunge at a police officer with a hammer, then I guess the response time is going to be pretty immediate. Shame our terrorists aren't quite as obliging. -Matt the recent attacks in France on a police officer and a member of the armed forces on patrol only serve to highlight the flaws in people like Tony's arguments .. Any nut can put a knife into the neck of a police officer in an instant and yes they will hopefully be dealt with but it won't prevent an attack if they are armed or not if they are caught unawares .. Coming next from Tony land, a robo cop on every corner.. Tony should be aware that in a fight between a person armed with a knife vs a person armed with a gun, within 21 feet, the knife wins every time. Showing your "wisdom" as usual ... And this right after evidence to the contrary courtesy of you friend Matt. ""French officials have not confirmed initial reports, but were quoted unoffically as saying the attacker might have hoped to strike down the gendarme and seize his weapon. The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." -Matt Lol.... seems you have been watching Muthbusters !
The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony?
Hello... ! anybody home ?
It didn't take long for you to prove your ignorance , and shoot yourself in the foot AGAIN !!!
Its starting to get ridiculous and boring to see you fall over your self ....
"The person who was attacked didn't shoot him! How daft do you want to make yourself look tony? "
Of course not you dummy !
If you had the wits to read other posts of mine in response to what your friend Matt , you would have gotten the clue ! That is if you can understand what you read .... I doubt it by your posts .
But as usual I have to spell it out , so here it is :
"Thank you for proving my point Matt !
Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ?
This is why ;
"The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot."
Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him ! "
Now CLCC did you get that dummy ?
Do you now understand why cops patrol in pairs ?
His patrol partner shot him !
Actually there were 3 policeman.. all armed !
The point is that in Britain with unharmed police that attacker would caused a lot more damage before being stopped .....
So now daft, go wash that egg of your face
And ask yourself why someone on here refers to your nick as CLCC standing for Couple Lacking Cognitive Capacity
Attacking my wife yet again on another thread."What ? If you think so, then please explain how ! Or stop playing victim ! Show me on your post any indication that its the husband or wife actually posting! But you cant , can you ? Besides... I believe in gender equality , and that applies to stupidity as well ! But this in a new trick from you, and it proves you have ran out of troll steam ..... lol Man up ..... mmmm.... assuming I am responding to the GUY/idiot who alleges I am attacking his wife !
lol.... its the first time you suggest I am clairvoyant !
ps. I suggest on future posts you end with "him" or "her", so that we know who is posting .....mmm.... that raises the question ... Is there a male or female form for Troll... or ignorant...or daft...
It would actually be interesting to know which of the two is worse....Him ...or her ..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless..
mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense
Yep your a Walt..
One with a fetish for guns..
By your "wise" reply , I conclude you are out of valid coherent points !
Absent those you resort to deflect and repeat yourself ...
Do you have a Walt fetish ?
Walts are not something to be fetishised over, pitied maybe..
'bullets and bloodshed'..
maybe do some more reading and brush up on terminology eh..
"Still deflecting and running ..are we ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt"
Thank you for that Matt!
You have made a good point for ownership of firearms for self defence by ordinary citizens ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt"Lol.... "As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise." Not true ! But.... you have been watching Mythbusters too I suppose ! You referring to CLCC ? they mentioned it ! wow !!
CLCC ! What an authority..... curious you admire and support such "wise" posters | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
Thank you for that Matt!
You have made a good point for ownership of firearms for self defence by ordinary citizens ! "Aaaaaaand, we've come full circle. Is now the time I ask how many terrorists have been stopped by armed citizens in the US? Or point out there gun mortality rate? I mean, it is one thing to call for Police to be armed, but to want to arm normal citizens? You really are a gun nut. You want CLCC who you accuse of having lack of cognitive capabilities wandering around tooled up? (No offence intended CLCC, just trying to get him to follow his own logic). -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless..
mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense
Yep your a Walt..
One with a fetish for guns..
By your "wise" reply , I conclude you are out of valid coherent points !
Absent those you resort to deflect and repeat yourself ...
Do you have a Walt fetish ?
Walts are not something to be fetishised over, pitied maybe..
'bullets and bloodshed'..
maybe do some more reading and brush up on terminology eh..
Still deflecting and running ..are we ? "Still living a fantasy eh Walt.. Tell me a bit more about your machete, bullet's and bloodshed.. Has the makings of a great story.. Was it in 'Nam? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire. Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !
You sound like an hysterical reactionary gun nut.
French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples.
"hysterical reactionary"
Are you projecting ?
At least try and put together a coherent argument without the need to offend others! ..... that is after you take you head out of the sand....
But how could you ? you have an opinion... but no clue about what you are saying ...lol
Your own example is flawed, in fact you "shot" yourself in the foot ...lol...
"French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
mmmm.... How was the Nice truck attacker stopped ?
Three guesses :
-Truck run out of diesel
- He took a wrong turn and drove into the sea.
-Police shot the truck driver
"Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
Really?
So....which was it ? "Let me make it simple, I believe you're struggling a bit. Nice 86 people died Paris 130 died Charlie Hebdo 12 deaths That's 228 lives that terrorists managed to take, despite French police being armed. London police, not routinely armed; 13 deaths combined London this year 22 Manchester (where guns would have made zero affect on outcome) The obvious conclusion is that where police officers are armed terrorism results in higher numbers of deaths. I suppose had you been in NYC on 9/11 you'd have shot dead the attackers through plane windows and prevented it? (Your distance for police marksmen obvious) So on your incredible fatuous point the French police did kill the Nice attacker with guns - but after he killed 86 - I think our lot managed rather better don't you, in terms of numbers of lives lost. Armed police make a great difference in Iraq turkey and Afghanistan as they never lose a life to terrorism? Mods you can close the thread, the original argument had just been rendered invalid, and it just remains for OP to humbly concede the point and apologise for his insane moment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire. Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !
You sound like an hysterical reactionary gun nut.
French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples.
"hysterical reactionary"
Are you projecting ?
At least try and put together a coherent argument without the need to offend others! ..... that is after you take you head out of the sand....
But how could you ? you have an opinion... but no clue about what you are saying ...lol
Your own example is flawed, in fact you "shot" yourself in the foot ...lol...
"French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
mmmm.... How was the Nice truck attacker stopped ?
Three guesses :
-Truck run out of diesel
- He took a wrong turn and drove into the sea.
-Police shot the truck driver
"Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
Really?
So....which was it ?
Let me make it simple, I believe you're struggling a bit.
Nice 86 people died
Paris 130 died
Charlie Hebdo 12 deaths
That's 228 lives that terrorists managed to take, despite French police being armed.
London police, not routinely armed;
13 deaths combined London this year
22 Manchester (where guns would have made zero affect on outcome)
The obvious conclusion is that where police officers are armed terrorism results in higher numbers of deaths.
I suppose had you been in NYC on 9/11 you'd have shot dead the attackers through plane windows and prevented it? (Your distance for police marksmen obvious)
So on your incredible fatuous point the French police did kill the Nice attacker with guns - but after he killed 86 - I think our lot managed rather better don't you, in terms of numbers of lives lost.
Armed police make a great difference in Iraq turkey and Afghanistan as they never lose a life to terrorism?
Mods you can close the thread, the original argument had just been rendered invalid, and it just remains for OP to humbly concede the point and apologise for his insane moment. "Lol.... I am struggling ? Seems you are !
You cited examples that proved you wrong , and with egg on your face , you resort to silly figures to deflect from that fact !
I never said anywhere that being armed is always the solution . I know better then that !
What I said , and say is that the axiom " bettter to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" !
Recent attacks have proved that point , but you prefer to keep your head buried in the sand .....!
So Stating facts, now apparently merits apologies?
So, you defeat your own argument with your own ill thought example , but worse.... Absent valid argument and to evade further embarrassment , you even "hint" the closure of the thread by mods ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey?" Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thank you for proving my point Matt ! Ever wonder why police patrol in pairs ? This is why ; "The BBC reported the attacker inflicted two blows to the officer’s head before being shot." Did you get that ? His patrol partner shot him !
Now.... Imagine that this would happen with police in the UK !
Oh... wait a minute ...it did !
"Masood, wearing black clothes, got out of the car and ran around the corner into Parliament Square and through the open Carriage Gates where he fatally stabbed an unarmed police officer, PC Keith Palmer. An armed police officer, believed to have been the Metropolitan Police close protection officer for Michael Fallon,[17] the Secretary of State for Defence, witnessed the stabbing, ran towards the scene and shot Masood dead.[17][18][19] The entire attack, from start to finish, lasted 82 seconds."
Nuff said !
Thankyou for helping make my point Matt !
Now go wash that egg of your face.
No, I haven't proven your point at all Tony.
As been mentioned on here before at close quarters a knife will beat a gun. Especially with the element of surprise. And regardless, in both cases there were armed officers nearby that took the shot. Unless you want those armed officers in every single public place 24/7 then you are just deluding yourself that it is the solution.
I just drove past a large group of about 40 people exercising on the Downs together. What if someone decided to run them down and jump out and start stabbing them? Are you suggesting that they should have hard an armed police escort with them? What about the pub I just dropped my Dad off at for the evening at the top of town? Should that have had an armed police officer stationed inside, in case some nutter goes on the rampage?
-Matt
How long would it take for any copper to get to that pub now and how long for a copper with a gun?
I would guess it would take either long enough that multiple people would have been killed in that time. Given the nearest police station was a few streets away, but has been closed.
-Matt
Thank you for that Matt!
You have made a good point for ownership of firearms for self defence by ordinary citizens !
Aaaaaaand, we've come full circle. Is now the time I ask how many terrorists have been stopped by armed citizens in the US? Or point out there gun mortality rate?
I mean, it is one thing to call for Police to be armed, but to want to arm normal citizens? You really are a gun nut.
You want CLCC who you accuse of having lack of cognitive capabilities wandering around tooled up? (No offence intended CLCC, just trying to get him to follow his own logic).
-Matt"I wonder why you are so surprised !
Or you are posturing ...faking surprise
As you know well where I stand on civilian gun ownership !
Unless you have forgotten the various previous threads where we discussed it !
By your the "logic" of your post its preferable that all those people in the pub you mention would be reduced to do like the Romanian Chef that reacted by throwing crates and chairs at the attackers !
But of course if they were all Brits they would be fine...
All they have to do is RUN HIDE TELL !
Seems that Romanian Chef didnt get that ... or though it was what it is ...BS , and by ignoring that he actually might have saved lives !
But it seems these days Wimp culture rules..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Has there been any poll done of serving officers, how do they feel? I have spoken to a few that have said they wouldn't want the responsibility of carrying firearms. I don't know if this is a majority feeling just opinions of a few I know Any police officer that is not capable of the responsibility of carrying a firearm, does not deserve to be a Police officer ! Simple!
It is not a job for wimps !
And besides what makes police men/woman any better in the Uk then the vast majority of the worlds police ?
Or have they been brainwashed to think they are better and superior to all ?
If anything this latest attack proved British police shortcomings !
Some of the officers who tackled the scum in London will have had the opportunity to apply for fire arms training and have chosen not to do so..
They and others have acted to a level of bravery that many of us will never be called upon to do..
By definition calling them wimps is disgusting ..
What are the details of the poll?
Hysterical title threads because your have a gun fetish..
Interesting....Do you think those officers after this ordeal , if given the chance to carry firearms will not do so ?
If so , it only proves you have never personally been in arms way ,and know nothing about human nature.
You must also have reading issues ,as I don't see anybody calling the wounded policemen wimps !
Lol... a gun fetish?
Does an avid golfer have a golf fetish ?
Does a person that enjoys cars and motor sport have a car fetish ?
Then why is liking guns and gun sports a fetish ?
You are living in a fantasy world of being an expert Tony, maybe you should contact the Met and see if the can utilise your skills..
I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory..
So I have to have been in harms way or faced risk in order that in your logic my view has relevance?
You complete silly man..
As it happens I spent 36 plus years in the military and blue light front line in the capital, but that does not entitle me to assume I know all the answers..
What makes you the expert? Have you ever policed? Done their job?
I see you have deflected the issue.... but lets see :
Not going to discuss what my qualifications are.
But my purpose for this thread is to stimulate thought on the subject , but all seem to be missing the point, taking extremist views.
"I have family in the Met and even after facing down a knife wielding person her view was and still is she would not want it mandatory.."
Ok... this woman probably has a desk job and doesn't do actual street patrol work !
But lets say there would be the option to carry or not to carry .
In most police forces this does exist!
If for no other reason , policemen do get punished and this can mean a desk job , thus not doing street patrol work .
But with this also comes a salary cut , as the risk level is not the same.
it stands to reason that someone on the street is at greater risk then someone doing paper work in a cosy office!
As such they should be paid less.
There are also other possible benefits involved like earlier retirement.
So all the solutions are there ... if you want to institute a policy of choice.
In reality , most countries are experiencing budget constraints ,and bigger need for more cops on the street , so a lot of the bureaucratic station work is being done by civilian clerks and older policemen , or ones that are unfit for street duty .
This of course lowers costs , because they get paid less .
Now, I understand that the higher hierarchy in the police services don't want to institute this , their careers would be affected , but that is just another part of the equation...
So... on a positive note, what you say on that ?
Stay off the funny tobacco?
What the fuck are you waffling on about..
What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?
You are talking bollocks ..again..
M8 are you a 'Walt'?
You should know that at least..
Wow ! Unbelievable !
This is a serious subject... but...
It seems you didn't even understand what I wrote !
Was it too much for you level of comprehension ?
"What's so beyond you that someone on duty faced down a person with a knife would do so from behind a cosy desk?"
lol.... where did that notion even come from ?
Well ... conclusion ;
You have no clue of what you're on about, and thus, no valid contribution.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but as we know opinions are like arse holes , everybody has one !
But do you have to act like one?
Yep your a Walt..
Go back and read what you wrote where you mentioned behind a desk in relation to what I quoted about someone dealing with a knife whilst on duty..
Your waffling again Tony but your just ducking the salient point that your own opinion is based on?
What?
Google?
Lol.... I did ! And seriously, I don't believe she ever really faced down a "knife yielding person"
Hence my response about my suspicion that she rides a desk !
It defies a lot of responses and issues related to fight/flight and aggression response mechanism of the human psyche that is no use explaining to you !
So if any ducking is happening ... its by you ...worse .... head still buried in the sand ....
So question remains...
How many unarmed police will have to die facing armed perpetrators , before you are even capable of a coherent discussion of the subject ?
I know its an inconvenient question ... that you run from ...
Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI..
Ironic that..
You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now..
It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need..
So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty..
You never asked me that question..
But as you have in your narrow little world view that we can prevent violent crime and or terrorism by having all the police armed then no it will not prevent other attack's in the future..
It's beyond stupid or from someone with no idea or experience in an urban policing and terrorism scenario to think that way..
At the height of the troubles in an armed police state we still could only be reactive part of the time..
That's cos terrorism and nut jobs don't tend to say what their plans are..
But surely Tony you must know that?
You must do with your level of expertise know that's not how it works..?
Unless..
mmm... so much Bs... where to start ?
" Because she is a woman?
Didn't hurt her career cos she's now a DI.. "
Where did I question ,or even refer to that ? mmm... nowhere !
"You do know there are other ways of talking down a situation than just shooting someone or is that beyond your ability..
She had a colleague who wanted to use taser so her decision was partially with that in mind and she knew an armed response unit was in the lobby outside the door..
She also knew the persons history which given the cuts by the Tories is maybe not so likely now.."
Seems I was right after all , if all she did was "talk down" someone she knew to avoid more forceful intervention .
Dont get me wrong , what she did is laudable, but also very normal procedure in similar situations.
But reading your post one gets the idea this was a serious confrontation with a knife wielding thug , which by your own account was not !
There was no stabbing attempt on her was there ? Or... she didn't have to physically fend him off .. did she ?
So my point stands .....
"It's not that uncommon in day to day policing that similar incidents take place without some gun admiring fetishist like yourself killing someone when there is no need.."
I agree, and so does any proper trained police officer anywhere in Europe that carries a gun!
But again .... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have one "
Can you grasp the utter simplicity of that time proven axiom ?
"So Mr expert have you ever been a police officer or actually dealt with situations involving risk on duty.."
Yes !
And without going into details I can say there was no "talking down" as an option .
And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
But you are not interested in valid serious points of discussion are you ?
I made some ... to no avail ! You just ignored them , and deflected by ranting nonsense
Yep your a Walt..
One with a fetish for guns..
By your "wise" reply , I conclude you are out of valid coherent points !
Absent those you resort to deflect and repeat yourself ...
Do you have a Walt fetish ?
Walts are not something to be fetishised over, pitied maybe..
'bullets and bloodshed'..
maybe do some more reading and brush up on terminology eh..
Still deflecting and running ..are we ?
Still living a fantasy eh Walt..
Tell me a bit more about your machete, bullet's and bloodshed..
Has the makings of a great story..
Was it in 'Nam?
"I see you are still deflecting from the fact you have ran out of valid responses, so you resort to repeating the same BS .... It seems that condition by a certain poster is spreading.... could it be contagious , I wonder ?
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey? Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there ! "Went back through the tread could not find a single link posted by you... Maybe you would like to post one now that contradicts the METROPOLITAN POLICE FEDERATION link that I have already posted that is in direct conflict with everything you say about routinely arming police officers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey? Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there !
Went back through the tread could not find a single link posted by you...
Maybe you would like to post one now that contradicts the METROPOLITAN POLICE FEDERATION link that I have already posted that is in direct conflict with everything you say about routinely arming police officers. "Oh!... I thought you were referring to the Sky poll you had asked me about ! Sorry ! Havnt looked at the link you posted , will do so later , when I have time ! I am not surprised if it contradicts what I say . That in its self means nothing in terms of the reality we live today . Just because the majority of British police say they dont want to armed , ( a world oddity as you know well) does not change the reality that there has been a steady growth in armed police , which is a trend that will continue ! Will Britain get into step with the rest of the world in that regard ? I dont know , but would you bet your life on it ?
I wouldn't !
Problem is.... its already costing lives of civilians and police alike ... that is an irrefutable fact ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This new wave of terrorism is based, not on small cells with finance, direction and weapons, but internet-inspired self-starters who use what is available - vehicles and knives. As access to guns will increase the body count, it seems obvious to me that the would-be terrorist will attempt to ambush a policeman/woman who is routinely armed, in order to take possession of the gun. Knee jerk reactions produce bad policy, so let's move on and forget this silly proposal. You can always rely on the press to peddle shite. Just ignore." And in case anyone wants to be picky, I would include Sky News as part of the gutter press, albeit with a different delivery medium. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey? Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there !
Went back through the tread could not find a single link posted by you...
Maybe you would like to post one now that contradicts the METROPOLITAN POLICE FEDERATION link that I have already posted that is in direct conflict with everything you say about routinely arming police officers.
Oh!... I thought you were referring to the Sky poll you had asked me about ! Sorry !
Havnt looked at the link you posted , will do so later , when I have time !
I am not surprised if it contradicts what I say . That in its self means nothing in terms of the reality we live today .
Just because the majority of British police say they dont want to armed , ( a world oddity as you know well) does not change the reality that there has been a steady growth in armed police , which is a trend that will continue !
Will Britain get into step with the rest of the world in that regard ? I dont know , but would you bet your life on it ?
I wouldn't !
Problem is.... its already costing lives of civilians and police alike ... that is an irrefutable fact ! "There hasn't been a steady rise in armed police, there are less armed police today than there were in 2010. Fail. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This new wave of terrorism is based, not on small cells with finance, direction and weapons, but internet-inspired self-starters who use what is available - vehicles and knives. As access to guns will increase the body count, it seems obvious to me that the would-be terrorist will attempt to ambush a policeman/woman who is routinely armed, in order to take possession of the gun. Knee jerk reactions produce bad policy, so let's move on and forget this silly proposal. You can always rely on the press to peddle shite. Just ignore." So... should we ban or eradicate vans and knifes , hammers... Perhaps you could explain why British police are so incompetent when compared to the rest of their European counterparts , and thus incapable or unwilling to carry guns ? Knee jerk reactions....mmm... after two instances where a normal armed policeman could have prevented further casualties ! Please clarify how many more have to happen until you stop calling it knee jerk reactions ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey? Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there !
Went back through the tread could not find a single link posted by you...
Maybe you would like to post one now that contradicts the METROPOLITAN POLICE FEDERATION link that I have already posted that is in direct conflict with everything you say about routinely arming police officers.
Oh!... I thought you were referring to the Sky poll you had asked me about ! Sorry !
Havnt looked at the link you posted , will do so later , when I have time !
I am not surprised if it contradicts what I say . That in its self means nothing in terms of the reality we live today .
Just because the majority of British police say they dont want to armed , ( a world oddity as you know well) does not change the reality that there has been a steady growth in armed police , which is a trend that will continue !
Will Britain get into step with the rest of the world in that regard ? I dont know , but would you bet your life on it ?
I wouldn't !
Problem is.... its already costing lives of civilians and police alike ... that is an irrefutable fact !
There hasn't been a steady rise in armed police, there are less armed police today than there were in 2010. Fail."If that is correct ... then I rest my case !
Oh ! I am still waiting for that apology ! mmm.... and who is posting ? He ...or she ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey? Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there !
Went back through the tread could not find a single link posted by you...
Maybe you would like to post one now that contradicts the METROPOLITAN POLICE FEDERATION link that I have already posted that is in direct conflict with everything you say about routinely arming police officers.
Oh!... I thought you were referring to the Sky poll you had asked me about ! Sorry !
Havnt looked at the link you posted , will do so later , when I have time !
I am not surprised if it contradicts what I say . That in its self means nothing in terms of the reality we live today .
Just because the majority of British police say they dont want to armed , ( a world oddity as you know well) does not change the reality that there has been a steady growth in armed police , which is a trend that will continue !
Will Britain get into step with the rest of the world in that regard ? I dont know , but would you bet your life on it ?
I wouldn't !
Problem is.... its already costing lives of civilians and police alike ... that is an irrefutable fact !
There hasn't been a steady rise in armed police, there are less armed police today than there were in 2010. Fail.
If that is correct ... then I rest my case !
Oh ! I am still waiting for that apology ! mmm.... and who is posting ? He ...or she ? "You cowardly attack my wife and then want me to apologise? No, you are not getting an apology from me. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire. Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !
You sound like an hysterical reactionary gun nut.
French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples.
"hysterical reactionary"
Are you projecting ?
At least try and put together a coherent argument without the need to offend others! ..... that is after you take you head out of the sand....
But how could you ? you have an opinion... but no clue about what you are saying ...lol
Your own example is flawed, in fact you "shot" yourself in the foot ...lol...
"French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
mmmm.... How was the Nice truck attacker stopped ?
Three guesses :
-Truck run out of diesel
- He took a wrong turn and drove into the sea.
-Police shot the truck driver
"Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
Really?
So....which was it ?
Let me make it simple, I believe you're struggling a bit.
Nice 86 people died
Paris 130 died
Charlie Hebdo 12 deaths
That's 228 lives that terrorists managed to take, despite French police being armed.
London police, not routinely armed;
13 deaths combined London this year
22 Manchester (where guns would have made zero affect on outcome)
The obvious conclusion is that where police officers are armed terrorism results in higher numbers of deaths.
I suppose had you been in NYC on 9/11 you'd have shot dead the attackers through plane windows and prevented it? (Your distance for police marksmen obvious)
So on your incredible fatuous point the French police did kill the Nice attacker with guns - but after he killed 86 - I think our lot managed rather better don't you, in terms of numbers of lives lost.
Armed police make a great difference in Iraq turkey and Afghanistan as they never lose a life to terrorism?
Mods you can close the thread, the original argument had just been rendered invalid, and it just remains for OP to humbly concede the point and apologise for his insane moment.
Lol.... I am struggling ?
Seems you are !
You cited examples that proved you wrong , and with egg on your face , you resort to silly figures to deflect from that fact !
I never said anywhere that being armed is always the solution . I know better then that !
What I said , and say is that the axiom " bettter to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" !
Recent attacks have proved that point , but you prefer to keep your head buried in the sand .....!
So Stating facts, now apparently merits apologies?
So, you defeat your own argument with your own ill thought example , but worse.... Absent valid argument and to evade further embarrassment , you even "hint" the closure of the thread by mods ! "It's simple. In countries where police are armed, not only are there not less terror victims, there are in fact more. Despite what your dreams of being Rambo, and violent hate filled revenge fantasies, would have you believe, having guns around doesn't stop bad things happening. The very opposite is true. Did USA having armed police stop columbine, sandy hook, Orlando night club? No. Nothing, not one shred of any evidence, exists in the real world to support your arguments. What keeps Britain uniquely safe is a distinct lack of firearms. Just because you keep trolling with the same inane drivel, doesn't mean anyone thinks your a genius. You have not one compelling argument. Nothing you have said has made me think, 'he has a point there'. I can support my arguments, you appear to have nothing, just self satisfied comebacks. It's like arguing with a four year old. Granted if a crack anti terrorist unit were stationed on the bridge then maybe the attackers wouldn't get so far, but guess what, terrorists don't attack armed forces or police, they look for soft targets where these are not present. Well that's not strictly true, a number of armed French police have been murdered before getting off a round in random street attacks by sneaky jihadists, so that proves standing around with a gun on display doesn't necessarily help does it. Just your assailant will stealth up with a knife and shout 'Ali baba' AFTER he's plunged said knife into your neck! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
"Aw Walt please tell more about your exploits, just make shit up if your worried about someone giving you a pull.. oops you have made shit up.. if only that was all you were allowed to say.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
Aw Walt please tell more about your exploits, just make shit up if your worried about someone giving you a pull..
oops you have made shit up..
if only that was all you were allowed to say.. "He can't tell us about the time he was on the embassy balcony | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh!... I thought you were referring to the Sky poll you had asked me about ! Sorry ! Havnt looked at the link you posted , will do so later , when I have time ! I am not surprised if it contradicts what I say . That in its self means nothing in terms of the reality we live today . Just because the majority of British police say they dont want to armed , ( a world oddity as you know well) does not change the reality that there has been a steady growth in armed police , which is a trend that will continue ! Will Britain get into step with the rest of the world in that regard ? I dont know , but would you bet your life on it ?
I wouldn't !
Problem is.... its already costing lives of civilians and police alike ... that is an irrefutable fact ! "Really! Are you joking? Your not surprised with what the POLICE FEDERATION say SKY is so much more a credible source that you don't have the time to check the veracity of my citation but you do have time to post a reply that questions it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If everyone had a right to carry arms here the terrorists too would have them, think about the implications of that!" Im sorry this kind of thinking really annoys me. The last time I checked these terrorists were armed with a vehicle and knives, do you not consider these weapons? They killed enough people after all. If it wasnt for unarmed citizens fighting back before the police arrived many more could have died. I fail to see how using the strict licensing procedures we already have as well as compulsory training in shooting under duress and correct target acquisition would help terrorists gain higher levels of access to firearms, most of the terrorists involved in these recent attacks have been well known to authorities for extremist preaching, protesting for sharia law ect... therefore these people would never be considered for any kind of fac, sgc in the first place. I was raised to believe that I am responsible for my own actions, I am responsible for own safety and the safety of my kids. Where have these values gone? When did people decide it was ok to hide behind the police and the government and hope that if we are ever in danger they will spring forth like superman to save us all. Its no wonder why we are made targets not just by terrorists but by criminals in general, we are a nation of victims and apparently most people are happy with this state of affairs. The fact that we have a police force that for the most part dont even carry guns is deplorable, they become a target themselves as has been proven many times. Its a daily occurrence at least where I live to see officers ridiculed by people including children, they receive very little respect for the dangerous job they do and are seen as the enemy by many people in a lot of communities. The police are supposed to have authority, make people think twice before committing a crime. What they are in reality is a laughing stock, the victims of bored 12 year olds that have nothing better to do than call them names and shout at them in the streets. Give them guns, train them properly how to use them effectively and refuse to sue or prosecute them for having to shoot in the line of duty, hell they may even gain some respect and appreciation in process. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If everyone had a right to carry arms here the terrorists too would have them, think about the implications of that! Im sorry this kind of thinking really annoys me. The last time I checked these terrorists were armed with a vehicle and knives, do you not consider these weapons? They killed enough people after all. If it wasnt for unarmed citizens fighting back before the police arrived many more could have died. I fail to see how using the strict licensing procedures we already have as well as compulsory training in shooting under duress and correct target acquisition would help terrorists gain higher levels of access to firearms, most of the terrorists involved in these recent attacks have been well known to authorities for extremist preaching, protesting for sharia law ect... therefore these people would never be considered for any kind of fac, sgc in the first place. I was raised to believe that I am responsible for my own actions, I am responsible for own safety and the safety of my kids. Where have these values gone? When did people decide it was ok to hide behind the police and the government and hope that if we are ever in danger they will spring forth like superman to save us all. Its no wonder why we are made targets not just by terrorists but by criminals in general, we are a nation of victims and apparently most people are happy with this state of affairs. The fact that we have a police force that for the most part dont even carry guns is deplorable, they become a target themselves as has been proven many times. Its a daily occurrence at least where I live to see officers ridiculed by people including children, they receive very little respect for the dangerous job they do and are seen as the enemy by many people in a lot of communities. The police are supposed to have authority, make people think twice before committing a crime. What they are in reality is a laughing stock, the victims of bored 12 year olds that have nothing better to do than call them names and shout at them in the streets. Give them guns, train them properly how to use them effectively and refuse to sue or prosecute them for having to shoot in the line of duty, hell they may even gain some respect and appreciation in process. " Yup. Give them guns. Because that will clearly stop 12 year olds laughing at them. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society"" Hardly hotbeds of Terror | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And knifes? were .... machetes, and bullets flying....and blood shed !
And that's all I am permitted to say on the subject !
Aw Walt please tell more about your exploits, just make shit up if your worried about someone giving you a pull..
oops you have made shit up..
if only that was all you were allowed to say..
He can't tell us about the time he was on the embassy balcony "That job is pure wanking heaven for lie average wannabe dreaming Walt.. Now you've mentioned it he'll be getting extra tissues ready.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" Hardly hotbeds of Terror" Ignorant comment. Breivik, IRA...? You might not know, but Iceland is one of the heaviest armed societies in the world, per capita. New Zealand, true farming is riskier than policing, but who wouldn't like their standard of living? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" Hardly hotbeds of Terror Ignorant comment. Breivik, IRA...? Ireland guns Norway 1 incident ? Iceland few volcanoes New Zealand ? You might not know, but Iceland is one of the heaviest armed societies in the world, per capita. New Zealand, true farming is riskier than policing, but who wouldn't like their standard of living? " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" Hardly hotbeds of Terror Ignorant comment. Breivik, IRA...? You might not know, but Iceland is one of the heaviest armed societies in the world, per capita. New Zealand, true farming is riskier than policing, but who wouldn't like their standard of living? " BTW the IRA have been more of a criminal organisation for years it may be terrifying but not terror organisation | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's getting boring now. Armed police has done nothing to stop heavier losses to terrorism overseas, so there's no compelling case. It's better to have a gun is NOT an age old axiom, as an axiom is s statement that's taken to be generally true I.e. 'The sun rises in the East and sets in the west.' Spouting bollocks about guns does not make it axiomatic. If it was there'd be no one disagreeing with your right wing rhetoric. France has armed police, and in the GIGN one of the finest anti-terrorist forces in the world. They have suffered far heavier terrorism losses than us in the UK. Having guns has not acted as a deterrent or reduced losses compared to the UK. The US has armed police and also suffers far heavier crime and terrorist losses. Why, if police with guns works so well, is there nowhere in earth that this is reflected in real life. Quote stories and fairytales all you like, the meta data is clear. Guns cause far more problems than they solve. We do have them available, they respond quickly and effectively. I repeat the losses in France with routinely armed police far outstrip those in the UK without. Every copper in the UK could carry a gun, retarded looking bomber Salman Albedi would still have blown himself up in the Manchester arena ticket office. Here's an axiom for you. A society without guns is a polite society, a safer society, a better place to bring up our children. " A society where only criminals have guns is not a polite society. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" Hardly hotbeds of Terror Ignorant comment. Breivik, IRA...? You might not know, but Iceland is one of the heaviest armed societies in the world, per capita. New Zealand, true farming is riskier than policing, but who wouldn't like their standard of living? BTW the IRA have been more of a criminal organisation for years it may be terrifying but not terror organisation" All terrorism is linked to criminal networks | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" Hardly hotbeds of Terror Ignorant comment. Breivik, IRA...? You might not know, but Iceland is one of the heaviest armed societies in the world, per capita. New Zealand, true farming is riskier than policing, but who wouldn't like their standard of living? BTW the IRA have been more of a criminal organisation for years it may be terrifying but not terror organisation All terrorism is linked to criminal networks " I would say that is a fair iah comment But often the criminality out ways ideals | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A society without guns is a polite society" Now there I have to disagree... I am quite willing to tell anyone who is unarmed to go fuck themselves... However am always polite and say yes sir (mam) and no sir (mam) if they are carrying firearms... A black eye heals in days, a bullet hole is quite often fatal!
Firearms produce extremely polite and violent societies! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A society without guns is a polite society Now there I have to disagree... I am quite willing to tell anyone who is unarmed to go fuck themselves... However am always polite and say yes sir (mam) and no sir (mam) if they are carrying firearms... A black eye heals in days, a bullet hole is quite often fatal!
Firearms produce extremely polite and violent societies!" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A society without guns is a polite society Now there I have to disagree... I am quite willing to tell anyone who is unarmed to go fuck themselves... However am always polite and say yes sir (mam) and no sir (mam) if they are carrying firearms... A black eye heals in days, a bullet hole is quite often fatal!
Firearms produce extremely polite and violent societies!"Statistically a single knife wound to center of mass is more likely to kill than a single gun shot wound to the same area. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society"" All police in ireland carry guns and it is the only place in the uk that you have a hand on an fac instead of having to apply (and be denied) a section 5 amendment. Icelandic police dont carry but are all trained in the use of firearms so that they can all be armed if necessary. Norwegian police dont carry but have m4 carbines and handguns in every patrol car at all times. By my reckoning the only one you have been correct about is nee zealand. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Statistically a single knife wound to center of mass is more likely to kill than a single gun shot wound to the same area." Sorry to say this, but BULLSHIT! The majority of knife wounds are to the centre mass but they are slashing wounds and slashing wounds are rarely fatal. Stabbing wounds to the centre mass are more often fatal than gunshot wounds not because of the severity of the wound but because in most cases stabbing wounds are not noticed until the victim collapses due to the injury where as usually gunshot wounds are immediately obvious due to the loud bang when the firearm is discharged. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" All police in ireland carry guns and it is the only place in the uk that you have a hand on an fac instead of having to apply (and be denied) a section 5 amendment. Icelandic police dont carry but are all trained in the use of firearms so that they can all be armed if necessary. Norwegian police dont carry but have m4 carbines and handguns in every patrol car at all times. By my reckoning the only one you have been correct about is nee zealand. " By your reckoning? I really don't think much of your poor grasp on reality. Where you getting your information on gardai being routinely armed? Mail online? Police in Irish republic, the gardai, are not routinely armed. Norwegian police do not patrol armed, as you admit, and unlocking weapons and arming those secured in vehicles needs authorisation from the Chief of Police. You yourself admit, 'Icelandic police don't carry' so how was that wrong? In fact I was 100% correct and in using fallacious arguments to try support your claim, are showing you don't have a valid point to make. By my reckoning you need to come off Wikipedia, cancel your mail/sun paper subscription, and stop throwing fake truths around (training Icelandic officers so they CAN be armed does not make them armed - my dad taught me to fish but I don't carry a rifle around with me.) So Irish police do not patrol routinely armed Norwegian police ditto Icelandic police ditto And as you've been unable to challenge, NZ unarmed. You're welcome to root around on google for some alternative 'facts' to present. By my reckoning you have wasted an hour of your life grasping round for some utter rubbish to present as an argument. Congratulations on that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" All police in ireland carry guns and it is the only place in the uk that you have a hand on an fac instead of having to apply (and be denied) a section 5 amendment. Icelandic police dont carry but are all trained in the use of firearms so that they can all be armed if necessary. Norwegian police dont carry but have m4 carbines and handguns in every patrol car at all times. By my reckoning the only one you have been correct about is nee zealand. By your reckoning? I really don't think much of your poor grasp on reality. Where you getting your information on gardai being routinely armed? Mail online? Police in Irish republic, the gardai, are not routinely armed. Norwegian police do not patrol armed, as you admit, and unlocking weapons and arming those secured in vehicles needs authorisation from the Chief of Police. You yourself admit, 'Icelandic police don't carry' so how was that wrong? In fact I was 100% correct and in using fallacious arguments to try support your claim, are showing you don't have a valid point to make. By my reckoning you need to come off Wikipedia, cancel your mail/sun paper subscription, and stop throwing fake truths around (training Icelandic officers so they CAN be armed does not make them armed - my dad taught me to fish but I don't carry a rifle around with me.) So Irish police do not patrol routinely armed Norwegian police ditto Icelandic police ditto And as you've been unable to challenge, NZ unarmed. You're welcome to root around on google for some alternative 'facts' to present. By my reckoning you have wasted an hour of your life grasping round for some utter rubbish to present as an argument. Congratulations on that. " These are not facts pulled from the internet I am very proactive in trying to promote the carry of non lethal weapons by citizens to deter violent crime, Police in ireland do patrol with firearms routinely this is a fact and has been for decades. The fact that icelandic police have access to weapons at all times when authorised is not the same as being completely unarmed, And Norwegian police have the training to carry and therefore can be armed at any given time that it is deemed reasonable to do so, these protocols are in direct opposition to the policies in the uk and serve to provide a medium between all police between armed all the time and a police force that for the most part are unarmed and due to lack of training and fear and a fear of repercussions from doing there job are unlikely to be armed any time soon. I am not saying that these are armed police more that the uk could stand to learn a thing or two. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hey Tony still waiting for a reply... but fully understand why you ignored my post... By the way, according to the Met Police Federation when they last polled their members (just under 11,000 responded) only 26% wanted to be routinely armed, only 57% said they would carry a gun if ordered to by both the Met Commissioner and the Home Secretary and 12% said under no circumstances would they carry a gun while on duty and 8.2% said they would resign... http://metfed.org.uk/news?id=7185 Now I ask you again where is your authority for your claim? Who carried out the survey you quote And how big was the survey? Seems you missed my reply Will . Scroll up , its there !
Went back through the tread could not find a single link posted by you...
Maybe you would like to post one now that contradicts the METROPOLITAN POLICE FEDERATION link that I have already posted that is in direct conflict with everything you say about routinely arming police officers.
Oh!... I thought you were referring to the Sky poll you had asked me about ! Sorry !
Havnt looked at the link you posted , will do so later , when I have time !
I am not surprised if it contradicts what I say . That in its self means nothing in terms of the reality we live today .
Just because the majority of British police say they dont want to armed , ( a world oddity as you know well) does not change the reality that there has been a steady growth in armed police , which is a trend that will continue !
Will Britain get into step with the rest of the world in that regard ? I dont know , but would you bet your life on it ?
I wouldn't !
Problem is.... its already costing lives of civilians and police alike ... that is an irrefutable fact !
There hasn't been a steady rise in armed police, there are less armed police today than there were in 2010. Fail.
If that is correct ... then I rest my case !
Oh ! I am still waiting for that apology ! mmm.... and who is posting ? He ...or she ?
You cowardly attack my wife and then want me to apologise? No, you are not getting an apology from me."You keep saying that !but please prove it !!
Or apologise !
So.. I am the coward , but its you hiding behind a non existent attack on your wife? can it get more cowardly then that ?
Is that mental issue kicking in again?
It seems so , as you keep accusing me of something I didn't do ! Evidence of that is you repeat it , but don't show all on here where , and how I did it !
That is a trick you normaly use when you lack a valid response or argument , but inventing something that didn't exist by victimising your wife .... is a whole new level of sick..and low .
Is it asking too much for you to grow a pair and man up ?
Simple.... show us all here on the forums where I attacked your wife !
Or....Apologise | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Statistically a single knife wound to center of mass is more likely to kill than a single gun shot wound to the same area. Sorry to say this, but BULLSHIT! The majority of knife wounds are to the centre mass but they are slashing wounds and slashing wounds are rarely fatal. Stabbing wounds to the centre mass are more often fatal than gunshot wounds not because of the severity of the wound but because in most cases stabbing wounds are not noticed until the victim collapses due to the injury where as usually gunshot wounds are immediately obvious due to the loud bang when the firearm is discharged." It was stabbings that I was referring to, and I think it has more to do with the permanent wound cavity being larger than with a gunshot from a relatively small calibre handgun such as a 9mm, add to that if the blade is serrated its a hell of a lot more soft tissue damage. The chance of an infection is also higher with stabbings. It has nothing to do with not knowing you have been stabbed. Have you ever been stabbed? I have in the arm not center of mass but I assure you I immediately knew that I had been. The point to the original post however I that, you dont need a license to own a knife, police dont carry knives and they are easily available to anyone who has the inclination to commit crime. If you want someone dead there are a million ways to achieve this, police carrying guns, or licensed civilians for that matter does not increase the likelihood of crime it does however give the police/ innocent people more options when they come under attack from criminals or terrorists. One of the main problems we have in this country is that as a civilian we have no right to use any tool for the purposes of self defence unless it just happens to be laying around for another reason. Merely having something in your home to defend yourself and admitting that to the police apparently proves forethought and premeditation as if you are just hoping to hurt someone. In the mean time if someone breaks into your home for example and hurts themselves on something you have inside you can be sued for health and safety violations. This country is ass backwards. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The more armed police there are the more people will be shot, both by police and by criminals. We are not unique in only having specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns. And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire. Are you serious !
"specialist armed police, it means proper training is given to those with guns."
You must be joking !
50 or more rounds fired ! That is about 17 rounds per terrorist! And still an innocent by stander was hit !
This is after a response time of 8 minutes ! The laughing stock of the world !
"And the majority can go to work enforcing the law of the land, a task that seldom requires gunfire."
Yes... that is normal ... but ... "its better to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" Ol wise saying !
To make a sexual comparison : why would you go around with a condom in your wallet or pocket ? same saying applies !
I realise people in the UK have been educated (brainwashed) with this gun less police BS .... but the results in today´s world are obvious!
Oh... an by the way as a firearms owner instructor and ballistics researcher , I can say i have seen some of these "specialist armed police handling and shooting at the range , and I was not impressed !
You sound like an hysterical reactionary gun nut.
French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples.
"hysterical reactionary"
Are you projecting ?
At least try and put together a coherent argument without the need to offend others! ..... that is after you take you head out of the sand....
But how could you ? you have an opinion... but no clue about what you are saying ...lol
Your own example is flawed, in fact you "shot" yourself in the foot ...lol...
"French police are armed and they could do fuck all to stop Nice, Paris, Charlie Hebdo. Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
mmmm.... How was the Nice truck attacker stopped ?
Three guesses :
-Truck run out of diesel
- He took a wrong turn and drove into the sea.
-Police shot the truck driver
"Your argument is proved invalid by real world examples."
Really?
So....which was it ?
Let me make it simple, I believe you're struggling a bit.
Nice 86 people died
Paris 130 died
Charlie Hebdo 12 deaths
That's 228 lives that terrorists managed to take, despite French police being armed.
London police, not routinely armed;
13 deaths combined London this year
22 Manchester (where guns would have made zero affect on outcome)
The obvious conclusion is that where police officers are armed terrorism results in higher numbers of deaths.
I suppose had you been in NYC on 9/11 you'd have shot dead the attackers through plane windows and prevented it? (Your distance for police marksmen obvious)
So on your incredible fatuous point the French police did kill the Nice attacker with guns - but after he killed 86 - I think our lot managed rather better don't you, in terms of numbers of lives lost.
Armed police make a great difference in Iraq turkey and Afghanistan as they never lose a life to terrorism?
Mods you can close the thread, the original argument had just been rendered invalid, and it just remains for OP to humbly concede the point and apologise for his insane moment.
Lol.... I am struggling ?
Seems you are !
You cited examples that proved you wrong , and with egg on your face , you resort to silly figures to deflect from that fact !
I never said anywhere that being armed is always the solution . I know better then that !
What I said , and say is that the axiom " bettter to have a gun and not need it , then to need it and not have it" !
Recent attacks have proved that point , but you prefer to keep your head buried in the sand .....!
So Stating facts, now apparently merits apologies?
So, you defeat your own argument with your own ill thought example , but worse.... Absent valid argument and to evade further embarrassment , you even "hint" the closure of the thread by mods !
It's simple. In countries where police are armed, not only are there not less terror victims, there are in fact more.
Despite what your dreams of being Rambo, and violent hate filled revenge fantasies, would have you believe, having guns around doesn't stop bad things happening. The very opposite is true.
Did USA having armed police stop columbine, sandy hook, Orlando night club? No.
Nothing, not one shred of any evidence, exists in the real world to support your arguments.
What keeps Britain uniquely safe is a distinct lack of firearms.
Just because you keep trolling with the same inane drivel, doesn't mean anyone thinks your a genius. You have not one compelling argument. Nothing you have said has made me think, 'he has a point there'. I can support my arguments, you appear to have nothing, just self satisfied comebacks. It's like arguing with a four year old.
Granted if a crack anti terrorist unit were stationed on the bridge then maybe the attackers wouldn't get so far, but guess what, terrorists don't attack armed forces or police, they look for soft targets where these are not present.
Well that's not strictly true, a number of armed French police have been murdered before getting off a round in random street attacks by sneaky jihadists, so that proves standing around with a gun on display doesn't necessarily help does it. Just your assailant will stealth up with a knife and shout 'Ali baba' AFTER he's plunged said knife into your neck!
"Your expertise is astounding ! Thank you for proving how clueless you are ! You keep conveniently ignoring my utter rebuttal and destruction of your points.... It seem a waste of time trying to help get you head out of the sand...and open your eyes, but lets try again!
You love shooting yourself in the foot don't you ?
Once more you cite examples that contradict your point :
"having guns around doesn't stop bad things happening. The very opposite is true."
BS ! I owe my life to having a gun , or rather my family and friends having guns
,and grenades and more....
The other side had machetes and ak 47 ´s
You have touched on the one subject that really brings back some bad memories !
It angers me that someone like you living a cosy life ,are happy having others give their lives and spiling their blood to keep you safe!
I am not going to tell you my life story, but I will tell you this ;
A the 8 years old , I learned a simple lesson ... have a gun and the will to survive ..... you live ! If you dont have a gun you die!
Simple ......
That is if you don't want to end up with your body parts hacked off by some
"unfriendly" "people"
Have you ever had to shoot you way to safety escape across a border and find your self in a refugee camp queuing up for a bowl of soup ?
Ever heard of civil war , and ethnic cleansing in places like Angola, Rwanda, Mozambique, or Rhodesia/Zimbabwe ?
So if you had lived that I am sure, you opinion would be somewhat different.
I DID !!! And it offends me when people make jokes insinuating BS movie fantasies ! Human suffering and loss of life is not a joke!
"Did USA having armed police stop columbine, sandy hook, Orlando night club? No. "
Really ? Again you cherry pick badly !
All those places have one thing in common ... They were mandatory "gun free zones"
Thus making life easy for the shooters !
But what about the lives that were saved by armed civilians while waiting for police ?
What about school shootings prevented by armed teachers and /or students
Ever heard of those ? Do they count ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghrRp0TF0m0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvUiMnHc51Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F_KuFzjOGA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59R6CSBdTq0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uvbTU4ht3E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9gL_03fhRM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CfBgTL1hxQ
"What keeps Britain uniquely safe is a distinct lack of firearms."
Really ! Wake up !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMneInuDC-Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zurH1xYEFs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENuxT_7SvAE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pksB5y-jj4U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-KEfk65t_A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUwWUfhlOLc
mmm....
" I can support my arguments, you appear to have nothing, just self satisfied comebacks. It's like arguing with a four year old."
Curious Freudian lapse ... youare obviously referring to yourself !
Oh and to adress your next post...
Ireland .... folowing The pathetic English tradition ...sad !
Iceland police are trained to but dont usually carry !
One wonders where the real need would arise ? An Island in the middle of the Atlantic ....with a population a tad over 300 000 !
But ....30 % or more Icelanders own firearms mmmmm... so dangerous !
The same condition , with different figures in terms of geographic situation, population and civilian gun ownership applies to New Zealand .
Norway all officers are trained but carry is optional and conditional to duty ! The majority of population owns and shoots all manner of firearms .
So thanks ! Great examples !
There are actually more countries when only some police carry , but those are mostly 3rd world dictatorships or non democratic regimes who are afraid of arming most of the police...never mind citizens...so Britain is in good company ..I suppose !
"An armed society is a polite society " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A society without guns is a polite society Now there I have to disagree... I am quite willing to tell anyone who is unarmed to go fuck themselves... However am always polite and say yes sir (mam) and no sir (mam) if they are carrying firearms... A black eye heals in days, a bullet hole is quite often fatal!
Firearms produce extremely polite and violent societies!"
Sometimes..... the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun , is one or more good guys with a gun !
Unfortunate...but true !
"An armed society is a polite society" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ireland, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand. None of those countries routinely arm the police and guess what, it works well for them to. Even after 2011 Norwegian police stuck with tradition. "An unarmed society is a polite society" All police in ireland carry guns and it is the only place in the uk that you have a hand on an fac instead of having to apply (and be denied) a section 5 amendment. Icelandic police dont carry but are all trained in the use of firearms so that they can all be armed if necessary. Norwegian police dont carry but have m4 carbines and handguns in every patrol car at all times. By my reckoning the only one you have been correct about is nee zealand. By your reckoning? I really don't think much of your poor grasp on reality. Where you getting your information on gardai being routinely armed? Mail online? Police in Irish republic, the gardai, are not routinely armed. Norwegian police do not patrol armed, as you admit, and unlocking weapons and arming those secured in vehicles needs authorisation from the Chief of Police. You yourself admit, 'Icelandic police don't carry' so how was that wrong? In fact I was 100% correct and in using fallacious arguments to try support your claim, are showing you don't have a valid point to make. By my reckoning you need to come off Wikipedia, cancel your mail/sun paper subscription, and stop throwing fake truths around (training Icelandic officers so they CAN be armed does not make them armed - my dad taught me to fish but I don't carry a rifle around with me.) So Irish police do not patrol routinely armed Norwegian police ditto Icelandic police ditto And as you've been unable to challenge, NZ unarmed. You're welcome to root around on google for some alternative 'facts' to present. By my reckoning you have wasted an hour of your life grasping round for some utter rubbish to present as an argument. Congratulations on that. " LOl....BS meter of the charts ...
New Zealand
Ever heard of the NSA ?
Around 250 000 licensed firearms of all types .... Population around 4,5 million ...not a bad ratio ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Statistically a single knife wound to center of mass is more likely to kill than a single gun shot wound to the same area. Sorry to say this, but BULLSHIT! The majority of knife wounds are to the centre mass but they are slashing wounds and slashing wounds are rarely fatal. Stabbing wounds to the centre mass are more often fatal than gunshot wounds not because of the severity of the wound but because in most cases stabbing wounds are not noticed until the victim collapses due to the injury where as usually gunshot wounds are immediately obvious due to the loud bang when the firearm is discharged. It was stabbings that I was referring to, and I think it has more to do with the permanent wound cavity being larger than with a gunshot from a relatively small calibre handgun such as a 9mm, add to that if the blade is serrated its a hell of a lot more soft tissue damage. The chance of an infection is also higher with stabbings. It has nothing to do with not knowing you have been stabbed. Have you ever been stabbed? I have in the arm not center of mass but I assure you I immediately knew that I had been. The point to the original post however I that, you dont need a license to own a knife, police dont carry knives and they are easily available to anyone who has the inclination to commit crime. If you want someone dead there are a million ways to achieve this, police carrying guns, or licensed civilians for that matter does not increase the likelihood of crime it does however give the police/ innocent people more options when they come under attack from criminals or terrorists. One of the main problems we have in this country is that as a civilian we have no right to use any tool for the purposes of self defence unless it just happens to be laying around for another reason. Merely having something in your home to defend yourself and admitting that to the police apparently proves forethought and premeditation as if you are just hoping to hurt someone. In the mean time if someone breaks into your home for example and hurts themselves on something you have inside you can be sued for health and safety violations. This country is ass backwards. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
