rushmc 18 #151 May 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhy is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Oddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken! Damn, mine must be too.... Seung-Hui Cho' guns must have been too, up until the time he shot the first of his 32 victims. Your point is completely and utterly stupid. And this one is not??"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #152 May 10, 2007 people tell me that almost every day (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #153 May 10, 2007 QuoteGot it in one. I have quite a good relationship with most the crooks in the area I work. We try to keep it a nice old fashioned style where we all know the score and have friendly banter when we cross paths. When we catch them they know its just their bad luck and us doing our job. We are on first name terms. Obviouslly there are the 100% scumbags out there that just dont care too. man, that is so wonderful to hear. Cops and robbers being best of buddies. Is the judge on first name basis with the scumbags too? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #154 May 10, 2007 You don't get intel off people when you're constantly rude and harrassing them. Also when you're dealing with the same people day in day out, theres no point making your job harder by being an arsehole. Respect is a two way thing, I don't demand respect just because I'm in a uniform. I naturally expect some respect but I earn it by being reasonable. If you worked where you patrolled solo and your nearest back up was 20 minutes away you'd adopt a different approach too. Doesn't make us any more lenient just makes us think how we go about doing things and more inclined to use our mouths than resort to getting physical. I've worked in a busy town with swarms of other officers and you can throw people around and get in their faces but there really isn't any point. Its unprofessional for one and you will get a kicking now and again. Also being unnecesarilly aggressive escalates situations. EDIT: In 3 years I've only used pepper spray once and that was in a situation my colleague caused to escalate. I've never used my baton. I guess I'm doing something right... just as well really as now I am community I don't have spray or a baton Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #155 May 10, 2007 That just doesn't translate well. You need to go out immediately and paint "Britain's Finest" on the side of your motor. Read it, absorb it, believe it. We'll soon have you straightened out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #156 May 10, 2007 I think my problem lies in that you arrest them because 1) it's your job and 2) they were unlucky. I thought you arrest people when they commit crime. Thanks to all the JohnRich postings, we see that England suffers from a lot of crime (short of murder), including muggings and property theft. If you know who the culprits are...isn't the next step fairly straightforward? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #157 May 10, 2007 I think you are displaying some ignorance to how things work. One of these people I have a friendly rapport with was arrested 4 times in one week for various offences. Even if offences have occured you need some sort of evidence to suggest a paticular person was involved before you arrest them. Which comes from intel and good investigation. Stuff that cannot be obtained without having respect from the public and other law breakers alike. There is no such thing as honour amongst thieves and they will all snitch on each other to cover their own arse. I am very proactive so to say I only do things because I have to is ridiculous. I used to have the highest arrest rate in my department. Thanks to John Rich's rantings we don't really learn anything other than sensationalist media babble about how people aren't safe to walk the streets anymore which is utter rubbish. Fear of crime is disproportinately high in this country thanks to media. We do our very best 100% of the time. What the courts do with them after we've gathered as much evidence as we can is up to them and normally very frustrating for us. So the game continues... EDIT: Here you can see crime hasn't really changed in the last 3-4 years. Some figures have marginally incresed, others have decreased. Generally pretty stable though: http://www.kent.police.uk/PerformanceStats/cdrp.jsp? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dorbie 0 #158 May 10, 2007 Quote I thought you arrest people when they commit crime. There's still the minor inconvenience of the judicial system and its requirement of evidence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #159 May 10, 2007 Quote here's still the minor inconvenience of the judicial system and its requirement of evidence. Yes, the pesky CPS demanding evidence to charge! Who do they think they are!? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #160 May 10, 2007 QuoteOne of these people I have a friendly rapport with was arrested 4 times in one week for various offences... I think I see a problem here... What the hell is he doing back out on the street if he's committed multiple crimes in such short order? I would think that at least the 2nd time they see him in a week, they would hang onto him for a while as a repeat offender... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #161 May 10, 2007 QuoteI am very proactive so to say I only do things because I have to is ridiculous. I used to have the highest arrest rate in my department. I'm only reacting here to your very own words. "When we catch them they know its just their bad luck and us doing our job." Again, I think it's because they committed crimes and need to be punished. Perhaps the problem is with the punishment part. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #162 May 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteOne of these people I have a friendly rapport with was arrested 4 times in one week for various offences... I think I see a problem here... What the hell is he doing back out on the street if he's committed multiple crimes in such short order? I would think that at least the 2nd time they see him in a week, they would hang onto him for a while as a repeat offender... Well, we don't know what he was arrested for. I presume he probably made bail. Needless to say, an arrest is not a conviction. Preventive detention (i.e., more than just bail, indexed to the risk of flight, to secure appearance at trial) is on legally shakier ground when it's done pre-trial. The most appropriate time to address recidivism is at sentencing, assuming the defendant is convicted. But in most Western legal systems (the UK included), prior to conviction he's entitled to the presumption of innocence and reasonable bail. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #163 May 10, 2007 QuoteOddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Damn, mine must be too.... Damn it, my guns have not killed either!!!! Can I take them back for a refund? Guns are tools. Guns will not kill on their own. Guns will not take a person and turn him into a killer. The people who kill are killers, they just choose a tool that works best. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #164 May 10, 2007 They could kill a lot more people with a bomb... it's more a matter of convenience than what "works best".Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #165 May 10, 2007 QuoteThey could kill a lot more people with a bomb... it's more a matter of convenience than what "works best". The ability to get something is part of what works best. If you can't get it, then it will not work. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #166 May 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteThey could kill a lot more people with a bomb... it's more a matter of convenience than what "works best". The ability to get something is part of what works best. If you can't get it, then it will not work. Agreed - that's why I said it's more a matter of convenience than effectiveness.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #167 May 11, 2007 QuoteQuoteThey could kill a lot more people with a bomb... it's more a matter of convenience than what "works best". The ability to get something is part of what works best. If you can't get it, then it will not work. ah, do a internet search on bomb making. It will scare the hell out of you"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
watchdog2 0 #168 May 11, 2007 Quote http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/6632017.stm and people say gun controls are not needed this policeman would still be alive if that gun hadn't been around OK FINE!! Let's get Congress to pass a law that makes ALL guns ILLEGAL. I'm ALL UP for that!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #169 May 11, 2007 QuotePolice in the UK... Do we all need to be routinely armed... News:Dangers of policing the streets Research carried out by the Police Federation for England and Wales last year found 40,000 officers had been faced with a knife, and 7,000 threatened with a gun, during the previous two years... A survey by Jane's Police Review in March 2006 found 21,845 assaults on officers in 51 forces across the UK in a year. Most forces showed year-on-year increases... Source: BBC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 256 #170 May 12, 2007 From the same source "Before the latest death, Police Memorial Trust figures showed 27 officers were killed in the 1970s, 42 in the 1980s, 21 in the 1990s and 15 since 2000." And "Pc Tonks' concerns over safety are echoed throughout the police service. Crisis management expert Peter Power, a former Metropolitan police officer who specialises in shootings, agreed that it is "incredibly rare" for an officer to be shot. "In other countries it is not quite so rare - we must never lose sight of that," he said. However, Mr Power said it was a "myth" that gun ownership was more common than in the past. " You can read that story both ways - there are other opinions in there as well.Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDMA 0 #171 May 12, 2007 QuoteQuotePolice in the UK... Do we all need to be routinely armed... News:Dangers of policing the streets Research carried out by the Police Federation for England and Wales last year found 40,000 officers had been faced with a knife, and 7,000 threatened with a gun, during the previous two years... A survey by Jane's Police Review in March 2006 found 21,845 assaults on officers in 51 forces across the UK in a year. Most forces showed year-on-year increases... Source: BBC Do you think America has a gun problem? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotalus01 0 #172 May 12, 2007 If you ban guns, only criminals will have and continue to use them against an unarmed civilian populace. If you were to destroy every gun on planet Earth, people would simply turn to the alternative to continue to kill - baseball bats, knives, hammers, cars, explosives etc. It is impossible to ban everything that can be easily and/or succesfully used to kill. Look at the INSANE rules the FAA/NTSB has in place for airlines and what you can/cannot carry on. I work for an airline so we were given a list of the "forbidden" objects - the obvious - guns, rifles, plastic explosives, spearguns, dynamite, pepper spray, tear gas, mines, throwing stars, nunchucks, brass knuckles etc. but please explain the following on that list (I shit you not) - transformer toys, fishing poles, golf clubs (like there is room to swing one in a cockpit), keychain screwdrivers, knitting needles, blunt scissors, nail clippers, pocket knives, nail files and fishing hooks As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotalus01 0 #173 May 12, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Why is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Bullshit. Guns are designed primarily to kill, yes. But that is not their only use. Almost nothing is invented for a single purpose. A gun can be used to shoot out a tire of a fleeing car, shoot a lock off a door, shoot down a tree limb that a cutaway parachute is stuck on (yes I have done that), to intimidate the criminal fuck that just pulled a knife on you in a dark alley (that's right, you don't have to kill him just scare the fucker away). So if we ban guns whats next? ban bows and arrows? crossbows? Hell, if I was going to kill someone I would likely prefer to use a crossbow since noone would ever hear it coming, and they are just as deadly... As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craddock 0 #174 May 12, 2007 QuoteHell, if I was going to kill someone I would likely prefer to use a crossbow since noone would ever hear it coming You have obviously never had anything jump your string or arrow. It happens more than you would think. I have a very modern and fast bow but if I shoot you with it, you will hear it coming That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crotalus01 0 #175 May 12, 2007 I might hear it coming, someone close may hear it coming, but they sure as hell arent going to equate it to a gunshot, and unless they are a bow enthusiast like you obviously are they are not going to have a clue until it is too late. The average Joe American has no clue what a bow or crossbow being fired sounds like. As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
