| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
You already seem to be of the opinion that all 5 of them will tell you that every police officer they've ever met could be trusted with a firearm.Originally Posted by blue matt
You also are clearly of the opinion that every member of the police force is completely trustworthy, which is incredibly naive. Every profession on earth has its bad elements, luckily we don't give them all guns to prove it.
[QUOTE
I naturally trust my own judgement better than yours and having encountered a number of police officers in my years I can say I wouldn't trust 50% of them with spud guns.[/QUOTE]
How can you judge "50%" of 125000 police officers unless you know them all?
I can't. Which is why I said wouldn't trust 50% of the ones I encountered in the very post you quoted, you daft tart.
Besides, just giving ONE bad person a gun would make the whole thing a bad idea.
I've just read a report from an eye witness who claimed the attacker ran past him and went straight at the officer with his knife. Even if he had been armed it's not clear whether he would've had the chance to draw his weapon in time anyway.
Had he had time to anticipate the attack I'd imagine that officers are well trained and experienced in defending themselves against a knife attacker anyway, so I'm not convinced having a gun would've saved him.
That said, given the world we live in, it is perhaps inevitable that at some point the police will be armed.
Jean de Menzies has been forgotten already then.
No shit.
was he shot by " BAD Lowly paid civil servant meathead bobby's with superiority-complex who chose a career in policing in order to assert their authority over others " ( in C.C words )
or
shot by Officers who made mistakes at a time of heightened security worries after the July London bombings and being mistaken for one of the Failed bombers from the day before
I am of the belief it was the 2nd statement
Which of those two scenarios do you think is better?
I think the point is Matt, that had they mistakenly whacked him over the head with a truncheon, he'd have woken up with a headache.
In his case though, it wasnt a mistake that could be rectified by an apology and a couple of aspirin,
The second, but I'm not sure how it helps your argument. If officers who were, presumably, selected to be armed because of their strong abilities can make fatal errors in stressful and difficult situations - doesn't it seem logical that weaker officers would make similar mistakes more often?
He's basically arguing against himself at this point.
He's advocating the training of police officers in the use of firearms by using an example of a time when officers trained in the use of firearms shot an innocent man.
I guess when you make a mistake, you post a picture of a lorry getting stuck under a bridge on a haulage companies FB page, yet these Police officers in the case of Jean de Menzies made a mistake the day after a failed bombing attempt and shot the wrong guy, mistakes were made, the whole procedure has been tightened up, yet we know they will make a mistake again, people do
so thats another bad mark against the " BAD Lowly paid civil servant meathead bobby's with superiority-complex who chose a career in policing in order to assert their authority over others " Eh
the mistakes were made from the top down, not just the guys who took the shots, i am sure you must have read the report
since that fatal day the procedure's for taking the shot have changed ( surprised you have read about it )
you mention weaker officers, the rules of combat could be set fairly easy, a guy is coming towards you with a knife, take the shot, a guy with a knife is stabbing someone, give the warning and then if they do not stop, take the shot
the more technical stuff, as in the case of Jean de Menzies would still be carried out by specialist teams, you appear ( i guess on purpose ) be confusing the two, a specialist FA officers and a armed Police Officer just using his gun for protection and to stop terrorist activities, once again, body cams will tell us the story and the police will learn from that
I think you're missing the point (perhaps on purpose) that arming all police officers is a turning point, there's no going back once it's done. So the gun is just there for protection and to stop terrorists - how many times will an average officer come across a terrorist? None of the police officers I know have ever been in a situation where they have needed a gun for protection.
You talk about someone being stabbed with a knife - I'm sure you remember (perhaps you forgot on purpose) the 'you ain't no muslim bruv' incident. The police successfully tasered him. Didn't need a gun. Otherwise, yesterday's terrorist attacked with a car. Arming officers isn't going to stop that exceedingly rare occurence.
If anything, the fact that the guy resorted to using a car and a knife rather than a bomb and an automatic is a testament to the good work done by our intelligence services. That's our best weapon, prevention, not chasing after them with a gun after the event.
the " you aint no muslim bruv " incident took place in london, where more carry tazers ( due to the training ) if it had been in Bath, Salisbury or Yeovil, they would not have had a tazer
The terrorist is changing, it used to be the IRA and a bomb, it is no some nutter with a knife or machete, as i mentioned in this threat, the bloke next door had to use a tazer at the start of the year ( he is one of the few trained to use it on his shout ) , the guy had a meat cleaver and was coming at Officers, if he hadnt been close, it could well have ended with a officer killed
Why don't police in Bath, Salisbury or Yeovil have tasers?
I am sure you know the answer, as i have mentioned it earlier but i will play along
they do, it is a example, to counter yours of being in london, the trained officers ( normally AR trained officers ) in Bath, Salisbury or Yeovil ( i.e outside bigger cities and espeically london ) could very well be 30 mins away, In London they are not due to the fact that MORE Officers are trained to use them, ( in the days of staff being cut and forces Sharing resources the times can be greater than 30 mins )
I'm sure you realise that my question was why do these police officers not have tasers, not how do they get around it.
Maybe they don't have the resources to train everyone, or the resources to buy units for all, or maybe there's just no need for every officer to have one as the typical type of crime doesn't demand it.
Whatever the reason(s) for them not giving tasers to all officers, you can multiply it by ten for guns.
the point of distribution is important here, it is fine to use examples of what happens in London, but in rural area it is not the same, mainly due to the size of counties / amount of trained officers, it is compounded with the issue of forces sharing resources, in my example, a ARU could be in Yeovil and needed in Gloucester, now thats a rather large distance to travel
it could well be the cost of them ? ? ? we know in real money the Police have for years had budgets cut
👍
There's so much wrong with that and you appear to me to be so clouded that I'm not going to respond to it except to say that I think you're being naive about the realities of giving guns to the police force and I think it's a terrible idea for so many reasons.Not my excuses, they made mistakes, procedures have been changed, they hope that they will stop incidents like Jean de Menzies happening, which was almost 12 years ago, maybe the changes have worked ?? ?
and here we have the issue, the paranoia, Oh the goverment want us to be under a police state, they are spying on us, i dont want my rights taken away etc etc you carry on with that, i will just live my life and see where it goesif they want to know i am going surfing in a few weeks time, fine, if they want to know i am on my holidays again to the US, no drama, hell they can even see the pictures on FB if they want
i do trust the police in the way they attempt to keep me safe, solving crimes and trying to keep the bad people ( you know, the real bad people ) at bay, sure we have corrupt people, but every way of life does, naive ? ? ? maybe
really, you think police guns will be floating around the pubsyea right
I will, it will be tomorrow, i thought we were going for a Coffee today, it wasnt, its tomorrow, but as i said, whatever his reply, you will not believe him, as you already have all the facts about the Police
I posted a link earlier which appears to have been overlooked.
Couple of years ago in New York, a guy with a gun shot and killed his former boss, police responded by shooting him dead and managed to hit NINE innocent bystanders.
Terrorist and other gun related incidents are thankfully very rare in this country, nigh on unheard of in our fair city, and while I'd support the use of armed officers at high profile events e.g. The champions league final, arming all officers as a matter of course seems to be an overreaction borne out of understandable emotion.
I'm sure if you asked "regular" police officers if they wanted guns, many would say no.
HOW CN U B SURE HAVE U AKSED THEM ALL
You paranoiac tart
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote