should the police in britain all be armed?

Second:

Howard: everyone should have guns

Howard: citizens delivering their own justice is wrong.

Which is it?

Second:

Howard: everyone should have guns

Howard: citizens delivering their own justice is wrong.

Which is it?

Just because everyone has guns does not mean that people would use them to dish out justice, though.

Just because everyone has guns does not mean that people would use them to dish out justice, though.

Oh no!!!! Not Bing Crosby...............................?

Oh no!!!! Not Bing Crosby...............................?

Just because everyone has guns does not mean that people would use them to dish out justice, though.

Just because everyone has guns does not mean that people would use them to dish out justice, though.

"Don't forget that organised militias (aka the armed forces) make the second amendment, and laws like it, somewhat redundant."

In the US, organised militias does not necessarily equal "the armed forces". You can legally form an armed militia, such as a neighboorhood watch group. As long as you follow the letter of the law.

"Howard: everyone should have guns

Howard: citizens delivering their own justice is wrong."

Yes, citizens should not deliver thier own justice.

They CAN however, do a citizens arrest, and use a handgun. (using the existing state and federal laws) A few people do this when it comes to arresting DUI suspects. They simply proclaim citizens arrest, and hold the people at gunpoint, while calling the cops.

I really don't know whether the UK cops should carry guns. As long as they can call in for armed backup, I don't see why it matters.

"Don't forget that organised militias (aka the armed forces) make the second amendment, and laws like it, somewhat redundant."

In the US, organised militias does not necessarily equal "the armed forces". You can legally form an armed militia, such as a neighboorhood watch group. As long as you follow the letter of the law.

"Howard: everyone should have guns

Howard: citizens delivering their own justice is wrong."

Yes, citizens should not deliver thier own justice.

They CAN however, do a citizens arrest, and use a handgun. (using the existing state and federal laws) A few people do this when it comes to arresting DUI suspects. They simply proclaim citizens arrest, and hold the people at gunpoint, while calling the cops.

I really don't know whether the UK cops should carry guns. As long as they can call in for armed backup, I don't see why it matters.

First of all, the British police have traditionally never been armed, and look how many gun deaths there are a year - a few.

In America, hundreds of people die by gun shots, and the police are armed over there.

So having no armed police patrolling around in streets brings calmness to the communities of Britain, I think.

First of all, the British police have traditionally never been armed, and look how many gun deaths there are a year - a few.

In America, hundreds of people die by gun shots, and the police are armed over there.

So having no armed police patrolling around in streets brings calmness to the communities of Britain, I think.

So what about everyone above who would SHOOT somebody to protect their interests. Is that not some form of martial justice?

So what about everyone above who would SHOOT somebody to protect their interests. Is that not some form of martial justice?

It's a highly uncommon occurence. Obviously if someone has demonstrated a lack of mental stability, they shouldn't be permitted to own a firearm, but something like 99% of legal gun owners never use their firearm in a crime (which would include martial justice). The Swiss don't seem to have a problem with it.

It's a highly uncommon occurence. Obviously if someone has demonstrated a lack of mental stability, they shouldn't be permitted to own a firearm, but something like 99% of legal gun owners never use their firearm in a crime (which would include martial justice). The Swiss don't seem to have a problem with it.

And if said drug deal does not co-operate? Would you shoot him; thus rendering instant justice, or let him go; rendering holding a gun unnecessary in the first?

why would they need a gun if the chances are they'd never use it?

And if said drug deal does not co-operate? Would you shoot him; thus rendering instant justice, or let him go; rendering holding a gun unnecessary in the first?

why would they need a gun if the chances are they'd never use it?