Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Meanwhile In England


royal white

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Traf said:

It's not something I'd like to see personally and I believe it would lead to more criminals arming themselves.

I don't think I'd trust our police with guns.
 

Absolutely. Look at the US. We do not want to end up like them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
2 hours ago, royal white said:

No, there’s a few videos knocking about of the poor sod just lying there whilst police are trying to reason with the attacker. 

 

100% surely it’s time to arm all of our police 

Who films shit like that and posts it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

Absolutely. Look at the US. We do not want to end up like them.

Why use the US as an example, a country fucked with its gun laws. How about looking closer to home, Germany, Austria, Denmark…..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, deeane Koontz said:

Some of the met couldn't be trusted with a Tizer

I worry about your state of mind, as that answer was my first response too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
Just now, royal white said:

Then they should be behind a desk. 

Exactly. The cops we want roaming our streets should all be heavily-armed meatheads with a penchant for violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Exactly. The cops we want roaming our streets should all be heavily-armed meatheads with a penchant for violence.

Got to be up there with the most moronic thing you have said on here. Which is some kind of achievement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
20 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Exactly. The cops we want roaming our streets should all be heavily-armed meatheads with a penchant for violence.

I know someone who works as an armed officer in London and patrols the Embassies mainly near the Israel one, even before it all kicked off 

To say they are a heavily armed meathead with a penchant for violence couldn't be further from the truth 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, royal white said:

Why use the US as an example, a country fucked with its gun laws. How about looking closer to home, Germany, Austria, Denmark…..

And France, Italy, Spain, Czech Republic, Greece, Japan, Canada……. In fact only 19 countries don’t arm their police according to this article. The guy with a knife in Bondi Junction would have undoubtedly killed more if he hadn’t been shot by the Police Woman. As for Tazers, it took two to bring the guy in London down.

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/19/world/us-gun-crime-police-shooting-statistics/index.html

Edited by BobyBrno
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
17 minutes ago, royal white said:

Got to be up there with the most moronic thing you have said on here. Which is some kind of achievement. 

I was agreeing with you... Stick the wetwipes who are scared of Tazers on the desks, get the meatheads on the streets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
1 minute ago, royal white said:

Why would you only want meatheads on the streets with weapons?

Meathead Police Officers, who aren't scared of Tazers. Police Officers who are scared of Tazers should be behind a desk. The ones who aren't scared of Tazers should have guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Meathead Police Officers, who aren't scared of Tazers. Police Officers who are scared of Tazers should be behind a desk. The ones who aren't scared of Tazers should have guns.

Why only meatheads? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
2 hours ago, royal white said:

Then they should be behind a desk. 

Not necessarily. 

I dont think you're seeing the full picture. 

Whilst there may be some old school types for whom it's a bit anathema, the issue is similar to that with firearms. 

There are very strict controls over the use of tasers, and the potential for investigation by the ipcc and even worse.

You can understand if someone doesn't fancy being put in that situation.

If officers were to become routinely armed with them, then there would have to be a different set of rules to offer then more protection.

I saw an interview with an ex-firearms officer, who was charged with murder some 10 years after shooting a criminal dead.

The prosecution subsequently offered no evidence. Twats.

He told of another officer who shot someone and finished up in court, where his actions in the end were praised by the [judge]. Yet the police themselves/IPCC were looking at doing him for gross misconduct. 

The upshot now is that instead of the usual 250 or so officers that put themselves forward for firearms certification annually, the latest cohort consisted of 6 applicants. 

On top of the latest murder charge, you can see why plenty may be reticent to go down this road, without sufficient protection from an overbearing compliance body, seemingly with an agenda.

No doubt if rules are changed to protect officers, one will do something that attracts a lot of publicity and the usual accusations of racism/brutality etc will be chucked about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Not necessarily. 

I dont think you're seeing the full picture. 

Whilst there may be some old school types for whom it's a bit anathema, the issue is similar to that with firearms. 

There are very strict controls over the use of tasers, and the potential for investigation by the ipcc and even worse.

You can understand if someone doesn't fancy being put in that situation.

If officers were to become routinely armed with them, then there would have to be a different set of rules to offer then more protection.

I saw an interview with an ex-firearms officer, who was charged with murder some 10 years after shooting a criminal dead.

The prosecution subsequently offered no evidence. Twats.

He told of another officer who shot someone and finished up in court, where his actions in the end were praised by the [judge]. Yet the police themselves/IPCC were looking at doing him for gross misconduct. 

The upshot now is that instead of the usual 250 or so officers that put themselves forward for firearms certification annually, the latest cohort consisted of 6 applicants. 

On top of the latest murder charge, you can see why plenty may be reticent to go down this road, without sufficient protection from an overbearing compliance body, seemingly with an agenda.

No doubt if rules are changed to protect officers, one will do something that attracts a lot of publicity and the usual accusations of racism/brutality etc will be chucked about.

I am seeing the full picture. The police are there to provide a service to the public. If you have raving lunatics running around with Samurais, machetes, meat cleavers etc, which let’s face it is becoming more common, then what’s the point oh having an officer on the front line with a baton and pepper spray. A taser should be the absolute minimum they have, not just for their own safety but the public’s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
56 minutes ago, royal white said:

I am seeing the full picture. The police are there to provide a service to the public. If you have raving lunatics running around with Samurais, machetes, meat cleavers etc, which let’s face it is becoming more common, then what’s the point oh having an officer on the front line with a baton and pepper spray. A taser should be the absolute minimum they have, not just for their own safety but the public’s.

That's not the point I made whatsoever, so I have to ask did you understand what I was saying?

If so, then why not address the point.

These are the concerns of current serving officers, and difficulties in recruitment now.

It should be the minimum and I'm sure most would welcome them, but if officers are going to be examined to the nth degree at every discharge, then they're going to have doubts.

Either introduce better protections or risk having more officers leave the service and fewer joining up because they're not prepared to have a career ruined or potentially a spell locked up just for doing their job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

That's not the point I made whatsoever, so I have to ask did you understand what I was saying?

If so, then why not address the point.

These are the concerns of current serving officers, and difficulties in recruitment now.

It should be the minimum and I'm sure most would welcome them, but if officers are going to be examined to the nth degree at every discharge, then they're going to have doubts.

Either introduce better protections or risk having more officers leave the service and fewer joining up because they're not prepared to have a career ruined or potentially a spell locked up just for doing their job.

If they do their job properly they will have no issues. Jobs like the police and  military have rules of engagement, if they stand by them they should be fine. If you’re going to do a job that is to protect the public then refuse to use the tools issued to you because of fear of investigation from the IPCC then you shouldn’t be in that job as far as I’m concerned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
4 minutes ago, royal white said:

If they do their job properly they will have no issues. Jobs like the police and  military have rules of engagement, if they stand by them they should be fine. If you’re going to do a job that is to protect the public then refuse to use the tools issued to you because of fear of investigation from the IPCC then you shouldn’t be in that job as far as I’m concerned. 

Exactly. Give guns to the ones who won't think before they shoot, and send the rest to the desks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.