ReBirth 0 #76 November 23, 2005 I know...but he's the one that got all rid of all the muts and encouraged all the hotties to get together and make babies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #77 November 23, 2005 QuoteOur Polizei is well trained, taller than 175 cm, blue eyed, blond and and.. yes, and fully armed! Yeah! Fully armed! I never ever saw a fat one, really They are athletic. That's it. This paragraph creeped me out too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #78 November 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteOur Polizei is well trained, taller than 175 cm, blue eyed, blond and and.. yes, and fully armed! Yeah! Fully armed! I never ever saw a fat one, really They are athletic. That's it. This paragraph creeped me out too. It was meant to be like that, dear! dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #79 November 23, 2005 QuoteHey, ReBirthy, my little one, Hitler was an Austrian.... So... You keep all your police tall, blonde, blue-eyed & athletic purely in order to keep out the short, dark-haired Austrians with an air of destiny? Personally I like those German Cops who obviously know their way around a beer barrel (and indeed look like they've swallowed one)! Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #80 November 23, 2005 QuoteQuoteHey, ReBirthy, my little one, Hitler was an Austrian.... So... You keep all your police tall, blonde, blue-eyed & athletic purely in order to keep out the short, dark-haired Austrians with an air of destiny? Personally I like those German Cops who obviously know their way around a beer barrel (and indeed look like they've swallowed one)! Austrians are looking like Germans. Except their accent, that is a horror to theGerman ears. (Sorry, my lovely Austrian friends. I love all of you ) German cops: That's only superficial. They take their job so serious. And if the old green uniform looks like beeing a little bit too small... This officer just was parking at a Bratwurst-station too often! No, believe me. If they do not sleep in their cars, they are very busy. All of them. The tall, blonde, blue-eyed ones and all of the others------- Let me tell you a secret: Many of us citizens do not really appreciate our cops to be armed. We have our special forces, that's OK. But the normal GI Joe in the street? No, not a must to be armed. Their normal job could be done w/o any weapon. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vpozzoli 0 #81 November 24, 2005 QuoteQuoteIf you are a police officer you are therefore more than 7 times as likely to get shot in the US where you do have a gun as opposed to the UK, where you don't. The problem that you, kallend, and others seem to be having is that you attribute this difference to the guns alone. That's false. Correlation does not automatically equal causation. The British also have bad teeth compared to Americans - is that due to unarmed cops? Should we take this to mean that a hypothetical increase in violent crimes in the UK would not automatically have a cause/effect reletionship with Britain's more restrictive gun policies? This works both ways you know. Vale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #82 November 24, 2005 I would say yes. The Bobby's need a gun..at least temporarily while skinnyshrek is there....My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #83 November 24, 2005 John has already confirmed that is indeed his exact belief. See here for example: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1177162#1177162 It is a point upon which he and I fully agree. Pretty much our only point of disagreement is in relation to what perceived problem Parliament was attempting to solve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #84 November 25, 2005 QuoteLet me tell you a secret: Many of us citizens do not really appreciate our cops to be armed. Yes. I did wonder just how usefuf something like a Walther PPK or similar REALLY is in either day-to-day policing OR a shooting incident. Mike. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #85 November 25, 2005 QuoteQuoteLet me tell you a secret: Many of us citizens do not really appreciate our cops to be armed. Yes. I did wonder just how usefuf something like a Walther PPK or similar REALLY is in either day-to-day policing OR a shooting incident. Mike. Actually, this old tool should have been outsourced since a while. Our Bundeswehr is using P8. That would be a good one for our police, too. Christel dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #86 November 25, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe problem that you, kallend, and others seem to be having is that you attribute this difference to the guns alone. That's false. Correlation does not automatically equal causation. The British also have bad teeth compared to Americans - is that due to unarmed cops? Should we take this to mean that a hypothetical increase in violent crimes in the UK would not automatically have a cause/effect reletionship with Britain's more restrictive gun policies? This works both ways you know. That is indeed my belief. Criminal violence is not caused by the presence of guns. It's caused by social conditions. Here is an excellent new article on this issue: Mythology Instead of Criminology The hot new video game for the kiddies this xmas in the U.S. has a TV advertisement that starts out like this; "What's mine is mine. What's yours is mine." Then the "hero" is seen snapping the arm of another at the elbow, and pulls out a gun and starts shooting opponents. And the liberals want to blame guns when the kids grow up with violent anti-social ideas... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #87 November 25, 2005 Quote The hot new video game for the kiddies this xmas in the U.S. has a TV advertisement that starts out like this; "What's mine is mine. What's yours is mine." Then the "hero" is seen snapping the arm of another at the elbow, and pulls out a gun and starts shooting opponents. I think I've got that game. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #88 November 25, 2005 QuoteQuoteLet me tell you a secret: Many of us citizens do not really appreciate our cops to be armed. Yes. I did wonder just how usefuf something like a Walther PPK or similar REALLY is in either day-to-day policing OR a shooting incident. Even in America, I believe most cops never have to draw their firearm in the course of their duties. But that doesn't mean that guns are useless. They're like a reserve parachute: it's better to have one and not need it, than to need one and not have it. When it all goes to hell, a reserve parachute or a gun can be the tool that saves your life. You only have to use it once, to make all those years of carrying it worthwhile. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #89 November 25, 2005 QuoteQuoteDo you mean to suggest that being unarmed reduces your chances of being shot? Actually, yes! (Within the native British culture) an armed perpetrator facing unarmed opposition would tend at first to threaten with his firearm to gain compliance rather than use the firearm. Faced with armed opposition then the percieved danger increases and pre-emptive use of a firearm would be far more likely. Well, that's the theory that the anti-gun folks like to promote. But the problem is, it isn't true. It's one of the many arguments used in the U.S. to try and stop states from passing concealed handgun laws allowing their citizens to carry guns. It's a theory that has been proven false, as shown in this study, for one: "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-To-Carry Concealed Handguns" by John Lott, School of Law, University of Chicago Abstract: Using cross-sectional time-series data for U.S. counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes and it appears to produce no increase in accidental deaths. If those states which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravated assaults would have been avoided yearly. On the other hand, consistent with the notion of criminals responding to incentives, we find criminals substituting into property crimes involving stealth and where the probabilities of contact between the criminal and the victim are minimal...* * *Criminals fear getting shot just as much as anyone else. Rather than challenge armed police and risk being shot, they prefer to play it safe and go pick on others who can't shoot them. Thus, the substitution into property crimes rather than people crimes. If British police were armed, the criminals wouldn't go around shooting them, they would run away, and avoid contact with the police. As it is now, they don't fear the police - the police must fear them. And that's not the way things should be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #90 November 25, 2005 QuoteNot only are unarmed UK police shot at a lower rate than armed US police, but also I am NOT "crying" that any comparisons are invalid. I have in the past quoted the USDoJ, the FBI, the UK Home Office and the Australian Govt. in saying that comparisons for crimes OTHER THAN HOMICIDE are invalid. I have made this statement on many times in response to your diatribes, and you can search for them at your leisure. If you disagree, go whine to the FBI. Wow! Kallend wrote more than one sentence! I hope that didn't cramp your fingers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CornishChris 5 #91 November 25, 2005 QuoteWhen it all goes to hell, a reserve parachute or a gun can be the tool that saves your life. You only have to use it once, to make all those years of carrying it worthwhile. I can't imagine that many kids have ever got hold of their parent's reserve canopies and killed someone though. Therein lies the difference. I still balk from the 'they would have killed them with a hammer/rock/badger/turnip/' response. How many people would the DC sniper have killed if he had had to jump people with a hammer? Edited to add:What am I doing on here - I should be out enjoying our new licensing laws! CJP Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #92 November 25, 2005 QuoteI personally would just rather have a gun just in case, but if they don't want...well different strokes for different folks I suppose. News story on this issue: As always, the Prime Minister found precisely the right words to reflect the sense of anger felt by the whole country towards those armed robbers who shot dead the mother-of-three... ...given how firearm offences have more than doubled since Labour came to power with its much-vaunted crime-cutting agenda... ...in examining what further steps can be taken, short of arming all officers or reintroducing the death penalty for police killers, the Government must ask itself why the measures taken thus far have had no discernible impact on the number, and seriousness, of firearm offences committed. There are several reasons for this, not least the Government's lenient approach towards sentencing matters. For, while those convicted of possessing an illegal firearm, now face a five year prison term, as Mr Blair stated, the reality is that most offenders will be set free after 30 months. ...more than 11,000 police officers are assaulted every year – the equivalent of one such incident every 45 minutes. This is a damning statistic caused by the inability of the Government, and the courts, to effectively punish the criminal minority who persist in failing to treat the police with the respect that they deserve. Source: http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=104&ArticleID=1264797 Revolving door justice, and unarmed police. What a grand combination! So 11,000 cops per year pay the price for England's paranoia against guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #93 November 25, 2005 QuoteQuoteWhen it all goes to hell, a reserve parachute or a gun can be the tool that saves your life. You only have to use it once, to make all those years of carrying it worthwhile. I can't imagine that many kids have ever got hold of their parent's reserve canopies and killed someone though. Therein lies the difference. I still balk from the 'they would have killed them with a hammer/rock/badger/turnip/' response. How many people would the DC sniper have killed if he had had to jump people with a hammer? Ah yes, this is the old "it makes killing so easy" argument. Cars make it very easy to drive drunk and kill innocent people. Is the solution to that problem to ban cars? If not, why is that different from what you've implied above for guns? As for crime guns, the genie is out of the bottle and you can't put her back. No gun law has ever prevented a criminal from getting a gun. If a sniper wants to shoot people, he'll get what he wants. Or else he'll just use some other means to accomplish his carnage, such as fire or bombs. The solution is not to curtail the liberties of everyone, in a vain attempt to keep maniacs from having them. Just like it would be folly to ban all cars, because of their misuse by drunks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #94 November 26, 2005 Quote So 11,000 cops per year pay the price for England's paranoia against guns. But apprently 80% of cops don't want guns. Maybe they like the odds against them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #95 November 26, 2005 QuoteSo 11,000 cops per year pay the price for England's paranoia against guns. QuoteThe problem that you, kallend, and others seem to be having is that you attribute this difference to the guns alone. That's false. Correlation does not automatically equal causation. Pot.... kettle.... How many cops assaulted in the US per year?Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #96 November 26, 2005 Incidentally John, FWIW, i totally agree with you guys having guns as it is a right that you currently enjoy, and what i really do NOT believe in is that the government of any country knows better than the majority of its citizens. They are called civil servants for a reason, however in both the US and the UK that tends not to be how they act most of the time. You obviously do not understand british culture, and thats fine, you don't live here. I don't really understand American culture despite having lived there. What we have in common is that we don't believe some twat in an office should necessarily have the right to take away our freedoms because he or she has a very high horse. Now i must go to bed because i'm rambling and pssed. Couple nice bottles of red, good company and crap TV will do that to you! night all!Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
artistcalledian 0 #97 November 26, 2005 my girlfriend is in the Scotish CID and she says that most british police don't want to be armed, they joined an unarmed force and don't want to carry a gun... she says she would rather let a crimianl escape than to have to draw a gun on them fuck guns, leave them to the fools who want them________________________________________ drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
artistcalledian 0 #98 November 26, 2005 why assume the british police WANT to carry guns anyway? most don't... are you suggesting sacking most of the police and recruiting ones who want to carry guns? this in Britain we're talking about, not gun toting America and all the problems they have________________________________________ drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #99 November 26, 2005 dude - i agree with u!Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #100 November 26, 2005 QuoteNot in the country that I call home and I'm sure that I'm not alone in that belief. We do NOT need guns, thank you. Uh, these two could have used one. Also since they were killed by a gun...Makes me think you already have them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
