P
Pattylt
Guest
Sorry to interrupt but what is “printing” and LEO’s?
Thanks.
Thanks.
- Status
P
pnewton
Guest
LEO is law enforcement officer.
P
Pattylt
Guest
Thanks…for the life of me I couldn’t figure it out 
And printing? Anyone?
And printing? Anyone?
E
Elf01
Guest
My guess would be that the gun shape was obvious from the clothes.
P
Pattylt
Guest
It’s what I was suspecting, too but was unsure. Kinda a funny word for it?
D
Dracarys
Guest
It’s not speculation that people have and do both use guns to shoot attackers and also brandish a gun to make attackers leave. You don’t have to believe me. These cases are reported in the media. I have already related the story of a local man in my area who just pointed his gun at a would be carjacker. Lives were saved, and the man kept his car. Do you want to take away his right o continue to do that? Millions of soldiers have died to preserve rights. Once again you can not factor in preservation of rights into your cost/benefit equations.
Of coarse no officer would admit to possessing or acquiring a firearm. They are held secretly, and only to be used if that officer is in deadly fear of his or her life. There is the expression it’s better to be tried by 12 than carried by six.
Your sister’s outrage should be directed at an administration that does not value their officer’s lives. There is a very active knife culture in the UK where people skilled in the arts of Kali, and Silat train to kill people in under two seconds even from 20 ft. Ive seen video of them, and I attended a live demonstration. London in particular is now a melting pot of foreign cultures that consist of people who will not hesitate to kill an officer.
As for guns many criminals have access to black market sources to procure firearms. Maybe your concern should be directed at preserving your sister’s life. Every wife, mother, brother , and sister of a UK cop should be finding ways to get firearms in their hands. Ignore tradition lives are at stake.
Knife crime offences at record level in 2018, police crime data shows
Incidents are continuing to rise amid a spate of assaults involving young people, police data shows.
www.bbc.com
Rise in attacks on police, as officers forced to respond to crimes alone
Attacks on the police is on the rise as a Scotland Yard officer warned officers are being sent to respond to crimes alone.
www.telegraph.co.uk
Since you won’t, I’ll pray for your sister’s safety.
I am also surprised to see that anyone would think a “no firearms allowed” sign is going to stop an active shooter determined to kill people. Do you think these signs have some kind of super power to detect guns and exclude armed people? If I were dumb enough to be unarmed I would appreciate knowing that someone has the courage and willingness to defend me and my family. Would you prefer to have you and your family murdered?
Last edited:
D
Dracarys
Guest
That is laughable. Even police will not be EXACTLY where they need to be most of the time. So what do you think the solution to this problem is? Take your time i’ll wait to let you think…Times up. The armed person goes to where he hears gunshots and screaming. Trust me it will be VERY loud in the killing area. Now wasn’t that easy? Of course since a teacher or other school administrator would already be in the building he is going to get there way faster than the police who are still 10 minutes out.
I Know your going to whine that I am insulting you, but this is why I say you have no idea what you are talking about. A person shooting a semi automatic rifle is capable of putting hundreds of rounds down range in mere seconds. So yes even in the best scenario you may loose an entire classroom of kids, but when the designated teacher or other school administrator does arrive it is entirely possible he will put a stop on the active shooter BEFORE he gets down the hall to the next class. The truth is that most of these psycho shooters don’t spend a lot of time at the range. They depend on firing many rounds at large clusters of people. The trained defender will concentrate on round placement, and he won’t take a shot unless he has one. Let me know if you don’t understand this difference as I will be glad to expand.
Of coarse the above applies to active shooters in malls, theaters, entertainment venues, and any other soft targets an active shooter chooses. Notice how these evil lunatics never choose to shoot up areas where the populace is armed.
I LOVE to see this:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Its a beautiful thing!!!
Last edited:
D
Dracarys
Guest
Uh… I think that is what I and others have been saying all along. Have you finally wised up? Most schools will not be able to afford full time security. Some inner city high crime schools do have security using metal detectors to screen students. I love the idea of having armed teachers or other school officials on hand who, yes, have had specific active shooter training just like police officers get. Many schools have personnel who have had military experience who would be prime candidates. See the pictures of signs I posted above.
R
_Ruby
Guest
The part of your quote i have bolded is still just complete and utter rubbish that you have pulled out of thin air. Would you like some magic beans, because I have some to sell you!
They cannot only be ‘used when that officer is in deadly fear of his life’ as though the Met will just turn a blind eye to an officer within its force illegally buying and carrying a firearm and using it in public.
I have lived in a London Borough for 30 years, I have to travel and work across London 5 days a week. The Metropolitan police are my local police force, a member of my immediate family is actively engaged in police duties within the Met. You trying to school me on knife culture in the UK from the US with your super secret, wink wink, nudge nudge ‘information’ from a Scotland Yard detective is just not based in any kind of objective reality.
Again, the police force did an open survey into the arming of police officers in 2017 and ASKED them if they wanted to be armed as part of the policy review. If so many of them are carrying these super secret guns that only you and that one other, totally real, guy know about, why did so few say they wanted to be armed? They are on the front line doing the police work, they were asked if they wanted to be given guns and 75% of them said ‘no’. What possible reason would they have for saying ‘no’ when they are going to all this trouble to buy secret, illegal guns and hiding them in their underpants whilst on the job?
I don’t need you to send me new articles you googled in 30 seconds - my preference is always for the actual statistics (Office of National Statistics Crime in England and Wales: year ending December 2018). No one disputes knife crime has gone up, but lets look at real life and not your fantasy:
There were 167 crimes involving a knife per 100,000 people in London for 2018. Nationally, out of the 11 million crimes recorded that year, 44,443 involved a knife, 33% of which were in London. That accounts for 0.4% of the total crimes committed in 2018.
Last edited:
R
_Ruby
Guest
(continued)
The number of offences involving a firearm nationally was 6,525. That is a grand total of 0.06% of all crimes committed.
By way of comparison, there were 976,000 computer misuse offences, 3.6 million fraud offences and 3.8 million theft offences.
Are you honestly trying to say that the police are secretly arming themselves illegally because they are so so scared of the 0.4% chance they might get hurt with a knife and the 0.06% chance they might get shot? You think those odds stack up and make complete sense?
Last year, the met released stats on how many of its officers had been hurt whilst on duty in the period spanning 2012 - 2017. In 5 years a grand total 9 police offers suffered a gunshot wound and 34 suffered a stab wound. There were 26,919 injures in total for that same time period. Of those injuries, one stab wound resulted in death, and that was in the Westminster terror attack. No officers in the Met died from their gunshot wounds.
That leaves us with a grand total of 0.03% of injuries being due to a gun and 0.1% due to a knife.
Please, tell us all again how those odds make it completely believable that London police officers are risking their careers and freedom by all arming themselves with secret, illegal guns to save them from the 0.13% chance they might get injured by guns or knives.
There were 117 ‘foreign body in eye’ injuries in that same 5 year period. Maybe you should be praying for them to have googles.
The number of offences involving a firearm nationally was 6,525. That is a grand total of 0.06% of all crimes committed.
By way of comparison, there were 976,000 computer misuse offences, 3.6 million fraud offences and 3.8 million theft offences.
Are you honestly trying to say that the police are secretly arming themselves illegally because they are so so scared of the 0.4% chance they might get hurt with a knife and the 0.06% chance they might get shot? You think those odds stack up and make complete sense?
Last year, the met released stats on how many of its officers had been hurt whilst on duty in the period spanning 2012 - 2017. In 5 years a grand total 9 police offers suffered a gunshot wound and 34 suffered a stab wound. There were 26,919 injures in total for that same time period. Of those injuries, one stab wound resulted in death, and that was in the Westminster terror attack. No officers in the Met died from their gunshot wounds.
That leaves us with a grand total of 0.03% of injuries being due to a gun and 0.1% due to a knife.
Please, tell us all again how those odds make it completely believable that London police officers are risking their careers and freedom by all arming themselves with secret, illegal guns to save them from the 0.13% chance they might get injured by guns or knives.
There were 117 ‘foreign body in eye’ injuries in that same 5 year period. Maybe you should be praying for them to have googles.
D
Dracarys
Guest
You are not a cop, so you have no idea of what you are talking about. Police don’t sit in their cars calculating the statistical chances of being shot or stuck with a knife. They talk to each other and they know the danger. Crime stats are easily manipulated by administrators who want to show they have decreased crime. What they say to polls or their supervisors can be severely filtered. So no, I don’t believe the poll you sited accurately reflects what police in the UK actually want. I have never been to the UK, but I did speak to the gentleman from Scotland Yard who told me many UK officers are secretly arming themselves. You can choose to believe him or not. The two articles I cited all contain accurate data and they are from British sources. I don’t know why you choose to error on the side of any of the anti gun data instead of what I have provided. If it were my sister I would be doing all I could to insure her safety. But that is just me. You obviously prefer to make anti gun comments than take any measures to insure the safety of your sister or any other cops on the beat.
Since some of the police in the UK are armed my first question as an on the line officer would be why are some of us deemed 'special" enough to be armed while those of us on the line are not. Are we in any less danger? In America almost every gang member is armed, and the police are in constant danger. You may want to live in the past, but the articles I posted show that dangerous crime and therefore danger to police is headed your way. The entire demographic makeup of London is drastically different.
As I said above, my only source is the comment made by one who is employed at Scotland Yard. His only agenda was officer safety. Your agenda is apparently drastically different. I choose to believe him. That is all I can say about this. Your continued swearing, and provocations will do nothing to enhance your position.
Last edited:
R
runningdude
Guest
He might. Jesus helped catch fish; there’s no reason he wouldn’t go hunt deer.
P
pnewton
Guest
Of course not. Whatever put such an idea in your head. This sort of thing is why I do not rely on others who are too busy with their own ideas to be objective. Numbers are objective. Stories and anecdotes are not.
Again, it is against the law. You should not be encouraging people to violate the law.
No one here has called you “dumb.” Your propensity to insult all who do not think like you is inappropriate. You really do not have to put down others to be more confident.
What I would prefer is that no one carry a gun who sees their own rights as the only ones that should be protected while devaluing others, and breaking the law when it is seen as inconvenient or contradicting their personal opinion. While I do not think gun owners should legally be required to be saintly to own a gun, it would always be my desire that humility accompany the weapons. Arrogance gets innocence killed.
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
I do not know if it is rubbish as much as rash judgment. I am floored that your personal experience is being countermanded as some conspiracy theory of lies by someone who may not even live in the UK. I apologize for the arrogance of Americans toward your country.
P
pnewton
Guest
This article supports the need for Tasers and spit guards, not guns, if you read the whole thing.
R
_Ruby
Guest
You’re right, they don’t sit around crunching numbers in the car, they are out there living those numbers. The numbers which I just demonstrated to you in proportion to other crimes, are extremely small. Again, do you think they are cowering in fear over 0.4% chance of encountering a knife on the job or the 0.03% chance of coming across a gun?
The ‘crime stats’ you reference are from the Office of National Statistics. The ONS are independent of the government and report on all metrics in the UK, not just crime. Considering that they are reporting that crime has gone up and knife crime has gone up, these ‘administrators’ with hidden agendas don’t seem to be doing a great job of keeping it all covered up. Those articles you cited - know where they get their stats when reporting? THE SAME OFFICE OF NATIONAL STATISTICS.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...still-rising-while-firearms-offences-decrease
The ‘poll’ you chose not to believe was lead by the Police Federation’s Firearms lead. Do you think he is anti gun? Do you think the 120 thousand officers asked for their (name removed by moderator)ut just forgot to take part? Here is a direct quote from him regarding the engagement:
“The question of routinely arming police officers is a challenging one and one that regularly crops up, but, given the current climate, we feel it’s time to seek the views of our members again.
Policing has changed significantly over recent years, not just around the types of crime we are dealing with and greater use of technology, but also the threat, harm and risk to the public and to officers themselves.
“This survey seeks to determine our members’ views to inform our position on the issue of routine arming. Over the last few years a handful of forces have been surveyed individually on this issue, but we are keen to establish a fresh national view."
Anti gun statements? I have said zero on anything to do with my thoughts on gun control. I HAVE posted stats on what is actually happening in the UK, because facts matter. Especially when engaging with someone who openly states they have never been to the UK, but is somehow intimately acquainted with how our police force works and knows all the secret ins and outs of how it ‘really is’
R
_Ruby
Guest
(Continued)
Again, they were asked their feelings on guns and gave their reply. You choose to ignore it because it does not match up with your thoughts. They have even struggled to recruit officers for the firearms wing of the police because the baseline interest is not there.
Your ‘source’ is non existent. Just like your claim of my ‘continued swearing’. Do you routinely have problems with truth and evidence?
R
_Ruby
Guest
Ah don’t worry about it, we’d be here all day if we had to apologise for other people’s crazy!_Ruby:
I do not know if it is rubbish as much as rash judgment. I am floored that your personal experience is being countermanded as some conspiracy theory of lies by someone who may not even live in the UK. I apologize for the arrogance of Americans toward your country.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I have held this position all along.LeafByNiggle:
Uh… I think that is what I and others have been saying all along. Have you finally wised up?
That is quite a bit different from liberalizing concealed carry so that any random citizen can carry a gun on school ground. If strict training and qualification standards are followed for armed school personnel, I am not opposed. Never have been.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
It is clear from my quote and your quote that we are not talking about the same thing. I was referring to random armed citizens with CC permits just happening to be on site. You are talking about specially trained school personnel who are guaranteed to be on site because that is where they work. As I said, I oppose the former and accept the later.LeafByNiggle:
That is laughable. Even police will not be EXACTLY where they need to be most of the time. So what do you think the solution to this problem is? Take your time i’ll wait to let you think…Times up. The armed person goes to where he hears gunshots and screaming. Trust me it will be VERY loud in the killing area. Now wasn’t that easy? Of course since a teacher or other school administrator would already be in the building he is going to get there way faster than the police who are still 10 minutes out.
- Status