Turn on thread page Beta

How to deal with police that carry guns watch

    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Yeah they stopped a guy, shot him and discarded the weapon. They are well trained, at knowing how to be above the law
    please take your new evidence to the relevant authorities. if only you had presented your evidence to the inquest we would know what really happened.
    thank goodness that at last there is light at the end of the tunnel.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    please take your new evidence to the relevant authorities. if only you had presented your evidence to the inquest we would know what really happened.
    thank goodness that at last there is light at the end of the tunnel.
    That was the evidence presented to the authorities lol. How do you think I found out about it? The same way everybody did, via the BBC news. Of course we all know BBC just made it all up. It's just a fiction, right? Cmon!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Newspaper heading:
    Police in Scotland will no longer carry guns on routine patrols after massive U-turn by Chief Constable Stephen House
    Note the word U-turn. That means that was the way it was before. This must be an old story though because 1 year later the media discovered that secretly the U-turn never happened. Hence my thread.



    Notice how the tranquil public are dangerously threatening these armed cops on the public streets. Better shoot them first and call it a pre-emptive strike:facepalm:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Newspaper heading:
    Police in Scotland will no longer carry guns on routine patrols after massive U-turn by Chief Constable Stephen House
    Note the word U-turn. That means that was the way it was before. This must be an old story though because 1 year later the media discovered that secretly the U-turn never happened. Hence my thread.



    Notice how the tranquil public are dangerously threatening these armed cops on the public streets. Better shoot them first and call it a pre-emptive strike:facepalm:
    notice how the cops show absolutely no threat towards the public. They hardly look like they are about to shoot anyone
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    armed police are not permitted to leave pistols in a parked car for obvious reasons.
    The H&K live in a gun safe in the boot.

    My local pub landlord was arrested by 'armed" police as nobody else was available to do so, but at no point was any weapon drawn or used as a threat, it was just a sidearm carried inconspicuously under a long rainproof jacket as worn by all the officers. it makes sense to use the officers if not deployed on the actual task due to staff shortages.

    ARV's can be spotted due to markings on the roof. Diplomatic protection are red. MOD are ( I think) always armed but are normally inside the wire. AFAIk they are permitted to leave the site should the need arise.
    Thames Valley police ( i think) have other makings as well. I've never really researched it.

    But to say that there is some sort of police death squad roaming the streets is overstating the issue
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    That was the evidence presented to the authorities lol. How do you think I found out about it? The same way everybody did, via the BBC news. Of course we all know BBC just made it all up. It's just a fiction, right? Cmon!
    Find the evidence presented at the inquest that points towards a gun being planted and then I'll believe you. Until then, we only have your unreliable word that this happened.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tim_123)
    notice how the cops show absolutely no threat towards the public. They hardly look like they are about to shoot anyone
    Thats not the point and you know it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by napkinsquirrel)
    Find the evidence presented at the inquest that points towards a gun being planted and then I'll believe you. Until then, we only have your unreliable word that this happened.
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Turn on your TV. I am not your evidence ***** lol. What planet have you been living on? Its there right in front of your face if you would but just open your eyes:facepalm:
    Don't like repeating myself especially when people dont listen. I'm at work at the moment. When I get home I will respond in full. Feel free to throw more insults and ignore the evidence while I'm gone.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Don't like repeating myself especially when people dont listen. I'm at work at the moment. When I get home I will respond in full. Feel free to throw more insults and ignore the evidence while I'm gone.
    No, you'd rather waste my time by making me research spurious "facts" just to prove you wrong, rather than doing your own research and decisively proving others wrong with evidence. Why do even make these threads if you can't argue facts? Why do you hide behind bullsh*t stories; things that you've heard from random people or news articles despite the fact the you remain unable to cite anything or anyone? I honestly don't know why you even bother; you are by far the biggest oxygen thieving pleb on TSR as of now, but the worst part is that you're also the most vocal bullsh*t artist. Judging by how many followers you have I'd say that you've either managed to convince a lot of gullible people of your unsubstantiated untruths or alternatively they're people who follow you so just they can watch your threads and laugh in the same way they watch and laugh at an autistic baboon scratching his nuts in a zoo enclosure.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Police in Scotland will no longer carry guns on routine patrols after massive U-turn by Chief Constable Stephen House
    There is a semantic difference that you are missing. I'm unsure whether you're missing it deliberately to try and string this thread along further, or due to ignorance.

    They are/were using the tiny proportion of armed police on some routine patrols as a show of force/public reassurance/etc.

    They are not routinely arming normal police. They simply wouldn't be able to as it would cost millions.


    I suspect you know and understand that perfectly well but are trying - badly - to make some moronic point. You've failed.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I haven't seen police with guns anywhere other than Buckingham Palace, Parliament & Downing Street.
    • Study Helper
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    The irony is if the police are armed then the criminals have no choice to bare arms at least as lethal. Violence only begets violence.
    Not really. The criminals don't have to become criminals in the first place. Surely any remotely intelligent person would think "Oh, might die if I do that....Let's not bother"
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Explain. I don't see it - honestly.



    In December 2012, Police Scotland announced that (when they came into existence the next year), they would set up armed response units all across Scotland. The reasoning seemed sound; serious questions were asked when taxi driver Derrick Bird killed 12 people in a massacre in Cumbria. The slow police response was blamed on the lack of armed police outside of major population centres despite the fact you’re far more likely to own a gun if you stay on a farm than in a tenement. There are a tiny number of armed incidents in Scotland, so the reasoning goes that, if lightning were to strike, it wouldn’t necessarily be outside the Buchanan Galleries or right in the middle of Princes Street.
    And so, almost unnoticed, we now have 400 armed police officers across Scotland. There were no calls for an increase in the number of armed police nor any clear need for them, given that violent and armed crime have been in steady decline for years, without lots of packing Polis.


    Note: before anyone hijacks the spelling above, Polis is not a misspelling but a reflection of the way Scots say the word. Please try not to be racist about it thx.
    Say there is 400 across scotland with ARV training, how many do you think there would be available at one moment? Not many.

    Firearms incidents are more likely in the countryside, as there are a higher number of guns in civilian hands. Those police in the city centre are probably not there to protect against that kind of crime, instead they are probably there to give a visible presence near potential target.

    Firearms aren't solely deployed to firearms incidents. Knife crime is still high in scotland. How do you expect regular officers to deal with this? A stick and some spray?

    You're making a fuss out of nothing. For the most part, armed officers stay in their cars. Occasionally there is a scandal when one steps out for food.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Ok, I could spend the rest of the day proving you all wrong. Was going to search every statement made by police as excuses and show the crime they committed, who to, when it happened and what the outcome was. Then it just hit me - this is just a waste of time.

    Go back to the statement from the Labour MSP and answer this one question.

    1) Do you obey the law?

    If you don't understand the question I can repeat it till you do.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Ok, I could spend the rest of the day proving you all wrong. Was going to search every statement made by police as excuses and show the crime they committed, who to, when it happened and what the outcome was. Then it just hit me - this is just a waste of time.

    Go back to the statement from the Labour MSP and answer this one question.

    1) Do you obey the law?

    If you don't understand the question I can repeat it till you do.
    Okay, let's make it simple; list 3 including the Mark Duggan incident you alluded to earlier. Surely that would prove your point somewhat? I take it as read that your point blank refusal to provide any circumstantial evidence is basically a silent way of backing out of an argument as opposed to just admitting that you were wrong and bowing out with dignity. It's all rather sad and desperate really.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Ok, I could spend the rest of the day proving you all wrong.
    No, you couldn't, since the position you're claiming is subjective.

    As this thread has proven, it's only you who feels that a tiny portion of police being armed is a breach of the peace. Nobody agrees with you.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Go back to the statement from the Labour MSP and answer this one question.

    1) Do you obey the law?

    If you don't understand the question I can repeat it till you do.
    Simple question really. Yes or no?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    Simple question really. Yes or no?
    Yes I do, so why would I object to better police capability? You still haven't proven anything and your letter to the Labour MSP clearly stated that you were afraid of "routine arming of police" which according to the actual figures is incorrect anyway. You haven't got much of a leg to stand on right now mate.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aaronlowe)
    A breach of the peace is when two or more people complain to the police about an incident that has disturbed them.

    So, if you and a friend are disturbed by seeing police walking into sandwich shops etc toting weapons to kill people, then just report them. By law they have to be charged.

    If enough complaints are made then they'll have to reverse the decision to allow police to carry arms for everyday policing.
    You don't understand the law.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by napkinsquirrel)
    Yes I do
    Ok then, if a group of people went to court and proved that their peace had been breached and the judge deemed it illegal then it would be illegal.

    Our opinions on the matter are irrelevant. If you read my OP you can see I never sought an opinion but gave a way forward to avoid armed forces on the streets. If you don't agree with that then simply don't do it.

    There is no discussion here.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.