Is it time to arm the police?

[Corky34]

Banning guns hasn't worked for you, and terrorist atttacks like this are a part of everyday life.

Firstly we (the UK) haven't banned guns, secondly you're 35.2x more likely to be shot dead in the Unites States than in the UK so I'd say having strict gun control laws has defiantly worked.

Look i don't really care if Americans want to go around shooting each other, that's up to them, but please don't pretend that the right to bear arms has made America a safer place to live as that's demonstrably not true, despite what pro gun lobbyists try to tell you.

Maybe they would have. Here's a story from the same day: http://fox17online.com/2017/06/30/pr...rage-shooting/

No they wouldn't have, again you're missing the point, if the person in that article you posted a link to didn't have gun it's highly likely that it would have remained as a physical altercation between two people and not a suspected murder.

[peterb]

Maybe they would have. Here's a story from the same day: http://fox17online.com/2017/06/30/pr...rage-shooting/

So one person dead and another injured because they approached a car with 'apparent hostile intent". A classic case of shoot first and ask questions afterward? Where the victims themselves armed - the report doesn't say so, neither does it give the full story of how the incident developed.

But if hand guns weren't widely available in the US, I would suggest that the automatic assumption that they were would be lessened, and therefore the fear that compelled the shooter to shoot first would have not been there.

And that living in fear from neighbours or any stranger is not a situation I would wish to see in the UK.

[Corky34]

So one person dead and another injured because they approached a car with 'apparent hostile intent". A classic case of shoot first and ask questions afterward? Where the victims themselves armed - the report doesn't say so, neither does it give the full story of how the incident developed.

This article seems to shed more light on how things developed.

[Ttaskmaster]

The race track analogy just makes my point. Why limit magazine capacity because some people are capable of changing magazines speedily? Why rely on someone needing to use skill?

You're right, obviously. Give everyone 50 round magazines. Heck, go hog wild and give them full auto P90s on top. I mean, you have constitutional carry, now, so no need to conceal these weapons - Stalk the high street with a PDW strapped proudly to your chest - No-one is gonna mess with you then, right? You'll be the safest place on the planet!!

Heck, why stop there?
Why have laws at all? It's only the law abiding citizens that obey them anyway, right? Scrap all laws. Make it a wild land... I dunno, The Wild West or something. Take what ya can, kill everyone to get it and woe betide anyone who doesn't kill everyone else before they kill you....
I mean, it worked great in South Africa, right? At their peak, they still only had one Joburg police officer killed per week, on average and I'm sure the US is way behind on that...

If your crime rate is so bad that you need to carry and speed-reload several high capacity magazines, then you are doing something very, very wrong - Even when being sent into full-on military combat environments, I'd only get a pistol and 40 rounds for personal defence.
Do you live in Beirut? Bosnia? Iraq? Do you hear ordnance and small arms fire outside right now? Is America THAT bad?

And as for your comment on someone needing to use skill - How the hell do you expect a "self-defender" to hit the criminal, if all they're going to do is blatt away several magazines worth of ammo in the general direction of a threat? I mean, soldiers of most militaries get serious training in fire control and accuracy, precisely so they do NOT kill the wrong targets, and yet there is still collateral damage... No wonder your kids are dying all the time, if your civvies have that kind of unskilled, untrained, undisciplined crossfire going on!!

The point of self defense is that even the less able have that right.

Pretty useless right if more skilled "self-defenders" are more able and more willing to "self-defend" themselves against the less skilled... I mean, that poor boy having to "self-defend" himself against all those university students from where they'd trapped him in the Texas Uni tower.... Think how much worse his injuries would be if he hadn't been armed, right?

I've thrown no tantrum, merely attempted to educate, when you discover that the statistics don't support your argument.

What, like flipping out and claiming the UK is TEN TIMES more dangerous than the US, complete with rock solid facts that supposedly prove your assertion yet turn out to be utterly wrong?

Banning guns hasn't worked for you, and terrorist atttacks like this are a part of everyday life.

Yes, you're right again - We had a shooting just the other day, right here in Reading... Apparently two "crazy maniac" children shot a bloke in the bum with a plastic BB gun... It made the County news and everything. If only that poor chap had been packing a pair of .50 Desert Eagles, he'd have been able to blow the heads off those children and his life would have been saved.... well, more saved than it already was, anyway.

The particular tantrum I'm picking on was a complaint relating to linking to the NRA, which was particularly silly.

Can't even find the reference you're on about, much less this "tantrum", but hey ho... Given the NRA attitude and that of their supporters, I'm not surprised.

I don't like many things about the UK, which is why I don't live there any more. That doesn't mean I can't encourage positive change.

Arming police would NOT be a positive change, though.
If we wanted to live on a knife edge all the time, we'd re-occupy Northern Ireland but this time on a massive scale.
And as has been proven in this thread, armed police are not able to stop most crimes. They certainly couldn't stop a speeding truck or a hijacked plane...!!

[peterb]

This article seems to shed more light on how things developed.

Indeed - and neither party comes out of it well - but the fact remains that there was one more gun related death. Perhaps if Chipman had not been armed with an offensive weapon he would have just driven on - flight is usually preferably to fight. But giving him some benefit of doubt, he might have assumed that the Dudleys did have firearms and reacted in self defence.

But - trying a thought experiment - assuming that overnight, all privately owned hand guns were confiscated or disappeared - would that be likely to increase or decrease the incidence of accidental gun related death? And would that make the country generally safer or more dangerous for the average citizen?

[Corky34]

If all you have is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail.

[Ttaskmaster]

But - trying a thought experiment - assuming that overnight, all privately owned hand guns were confiscated or disappeared - would that be likely to increase or decrease the incidence of accidental gun related death? And would that make the country generally safer or more dangerous for the average citizen?

Add to that all the intentional gun deaths...

Afterward, consider also the amount of training police and military personnel go through just to be considered competent and reliable in their weapon useage, as well as the Rules of Engagement (RoE) by which they must abide... and then ask yourself if allowing a nigh-on untrained and undisciplined population very free access to similar weapons is in any way a good idea.

[TeePee]

You're right, obviously. Give everyone 50 round magazines. Heck, go hog wild and give them full auto P90s on top. I mean, you have constitutional carry, now, so no need to conceal these weapons - Stalk the high street with a PDW strapped proudly to your chest - No-one is gonna mess with you then, right? You'll be the safest place on the planet!!

Heck, why stop there?
Why have laws at all? It's only the law abiding citizens that obey them anyway, right? Scrap all laws. Make it a wild land... I dunno, The Wild West or something. Take what ya can, kill everyone to get it and woe betide anyone who doesn't kill everyone else before they kill you....
I mean, it worked great in South Africa, right? At their peak, they still only had one Joburg police officer killed per week, on average and I'm sure the US is way behind on that...

If your crime rate is so bad that you need to carry and speed-reload several high capacity magazines, then you are doing something very, very wrong - Even when being sent into full-on military combat environments, I'd only get a pistol and 40 rounds for personal defence.
Do you live in Beirut? Bosnia? Iraq? Do you hear ordnance and small arms fire outside right now? Is America THAT bad?

And as for your comment on someone needing to use skill - How the hell do you expect a "self-defender" to hit the criminal, if all they're going to do is blatt away several magazines worth of ammo in the general direction of a threat? I mean, soldiers of most militaries get serious training in fire control and accuracy, precisely so they do NOT kill the wrong targets, and yet there is still collateral damage... No wonder your kids are dying all the time, if your civvies have that kind of unskilled, untrained, undisciplined crossfire going on!!


Pretty useless right if more skilled "self-defenders" are more able and more willing to "self-defend" themselves against the less skilled... I mean, that poor boy having to "self-defend" himself against all those university students from where they'd trapped him in the Texas Uni tower.... Think how much worse his injuries would be if he hadn't been armed, right?


What, like flipping out and claiming the UK is TEN TIMES more dangerous than the US, complete with rock solid facts that supposedly prove your assertion yet turn out to be utterly wrong?


Yes, you're right again - We had a shooting just the other day, right here in Reading... Apparently two "crazy maniac" children shot a bloke in the bum with a plastic BB gun... It made the County news and everything. If only that poor chap had been packing a pair of .50 Desert Eagles, he'd have been able to blow the heads off those children and his life would have been saved.... well, more saved than it already was, anyway.


Can't even find the reference you're on about, much less this "tantrum", but hey ho... Given the NRA attitude and that of their supporters, I'm not surprised.


Arming police would NOT be a positive change, though.
If we wanted to live on a knife edge all the time, we'd re-occupy Northern Ireland but this time on a massive scale.
And as has been proven in this thread, armed police are not able to stop most crimes. They certainly couldn't stop a speeding truck or a hijacked plane...!!

Do you even read what you write? Because most of that is pretty silly. You certainly haven't been reading what I've written. Where did I claim the UK was ten times more dangerous than the US? You linked to a blog, which attempted to refute a news article which made that claim, based on a story in the Daily Mail, of all places. All I did was point out that the authors best estimate of crime based on his own best comparison of the statistical evidence he chose to use, still left the UK with a higher violent crime rate than the US.

[Ttaskmaster]

Do you even read what you write?

I do, yes, hence the rather minimal quantity of spelling errors.

You certainly haven't been reading what I've written.

There's a difference between not reading and simply disregarding in a mildly condescending fashion...

Where did I claim the UK was ten times more dangerous than the US?

Any claim that the UK is "more dangerous" is a common retort of US gun advocates typically in reference to the likes of Swann and with no actual understanding of how those statistics work.

You linked to a blog, which attempted to refute a news article which made that claim, based on a story in the Daily Mail, of all places. All I did was point out that the authors best estimate of crime based on his own best comparison of the statistical evidence he chose to use, still left the UK with a higher violent crime rate than the US.

While also ignoring the corrections that point in the opposite direction, supporting the argument that the news article was even more wrong than the blogger estimated, no matter how many times he revised those estimates... never mind the substantiary evidence in the second article which you continue to outright ignore in its entirety.

But you seem to think your misunderstanding of the discrepancies and your wilful ignorance of inconvenient facts is somehow a basis for insisting that we put gun-toting cops with large capacity magazines on every street corner, just in case someone tries to scare us with a bomb or a car... supposedly because it works so well in your country, contrary to all the evidence presented.

Tell me again about 'pretty silly'?

[TheAnimus]

I might have to be in Chicago for work for a while, less than happy when you see news like this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40514995

I appreciate that the common reply is that it doesn't effect me as I'm white.

[g8ina]

OK, time out with the name calling. Both of you. Calm down or the thread gets locked.

Many Thanks.

[peterb]

OK guys - one warning about name calling and then almost immediately repeated - so that person has been suspended, and another one was within a nanometer of the same action.

So - final warning - debate/attack/defend the ideas - but keep personalities out of it, or more suspensions will follow. Anyone in any doubt about what we expect should re-read this http://forums.hexus.net/faq.php?faq=...q_hex_attitude

The offending posts have been removed and the thread re-opened.

[g8ina]

Thanks Peter, was intending to do this, but was out at church till just now.

Please take heed guys !

Or we'll set Tig on yer

[Biscuit]

I really wish you had just left it locked. It's basically turned into, "my flawed ideology is better than your flawed ideology".

[Zak33]

/gun owner here

guns in cabinet, hard to access legally,. let alone by force..., and no use in an emergency at all. Last thing I'd think of... my kitchen is full of deadly weapons and I leave them for the burglars to pick up, on the way up our bedrooms at night. Knives on display, 6 inch steel double pronger carving fork, rolling pin, heavy pans...

I'd not survive that

Garage is locked, but nice chainsaw in there.....

Guns don't kill people. Bullets aimed by people do. If it's an accident, it's dire.. sad sad day. But it's rare and gun people know more about safety than most ANDstay out of fights waaay more than most. If I get a visit from the Police for thumping someone in self defense, it's likely I lose my gun license. Tough call that one. I know a man who stepped into a woman being attacked outside a pub. Thumped him, laid him out cold. Gained the eternal thanks of the girl and family, lost his 12 bore license. Silly rule. But one we live by. Don't get in trouble.

Now onto the job of Admin, Mod and being human on a civilized forum where people are allowed to chat/debate and even argue... but with this one rule-

be polite.

don't be snide, offensive and don't slap people down with insults. If you revert to that, 3 things occur.

you get banned.
thread gets locked...

and worse.. you lose the moral high ground.

IF you disagree and the other chap won't agree and you think he's wrong.. but no amount of telling will change their mind.. either your debating skills and arguments are weak (thats me often enough vs many of you)... or the other person is deaf to you. Utterly.

In a pub, you'd walk away or end up hitting them. That woulds result in a Policeman coming your way. And a charge.

the internet is a diff place... we police it and we expect you to behave. Because if you don't we can only block you out.

These mods aren't the Police, they aint paid. If they get bored with the fighting, they resign. We close it down. You go find somewhere else and eventually do the same thing. It closes.etc etc

so instead we just ban a few and let the others talk nicely.

So.... please...

be nice to each other. If it's a losing debate, walk to the next please.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

In Asia multiple countries have had separatist conflicts and the police tend to be armed NORMALLY with pistols and assault rifles with it being not abnormal for the military to be out in cities manning checkpoints.

Yet none of it stopped the attacks,car bombs and suicide bombings that have affected India, Pakistan,Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal over the last 40 years during conflicts which have killed over 100000 people.

When the people doing the attacks have a death wish guns are not going to deter them at all. So many times they actually attack the police stations and take the weapons for use by themselves.

Edit!!

I mean look at how these people have even attacked military installations and high security zones which have loads of military personnel.

Also look back to The Troubles in Northern Ireland - the RUC and British Army still could not stop the attacks and the murders either.