Armed police

Fantasyireland you think ? Next time you are at an airport or public transport area that routinely has armed police, just have a look you will see what I mean !

Or they are the ones that have gone through all the selection and training, psychological, weapons, tactics and physical and have passed because they have all the relevant skills.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The split-second decision to shoot someone isn't something I want to ever have to make.

The rules of engagement for making the decision to pull the trigger are incredibly strict, and you have to apply them in a fraction of a second. The target has to be considered about to perform an act which is likely to endanger the life of the officer or others in the vicinity. If you get the decision wrong you open yourself up to prosecution.

If you believe the target is about to perform an action likely to endanger the life of yourself or others in the vicinity, and this is backed up by the evidence of witnesses (other officers), even if it ultimately turns out they weren't armed, you will have done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law.
 
Last edited:
Blueinsa they may be all what ya said and probably are ! They just never look like it !!! It was a tongue in cheek statement made through many many interactions with them on a professional basis .
 
Good for filling privately owned jails

Yup, America's legal and prison system is so far beyond corrupt that it actually baffles me. The privatisation of the jail system and the targetting of low income and minority groups for minor misdemenours in order to fill those jail spaces has created an industry and societal impact that any American should be thoroughly ashamed of.
 
Yup, America's legal and prison system is so far beyond corrupt that it actually baffles me. The privatisation of the jail system and the targetting of low income and minority groups for minor misdemenours in order to fill those jail spaces has created an industry and societal impact that any American should be thoroughly ashamed of.
It really is a disgraceful situation
 
Can i respectfully suggest then that you stop reading papers as they are filling your head with lies.

You call decrimilisation sticking ones head in the sand. The alternative is to continue with the current "war on drugs" approach, an approach that has, over the past 30 years clearly failed as drug abuse has continued to rise. I would suggest that carrying on with a proven failed policy is more akin to sticking one's head in the sand than looking at trying something different. The war on drugs has had three decades and more, how close are they to winning it. Prohibition doesn't work, it only makes using more dangerous.

Decrimilisation does make it safer, that is exactly what it does, it means that people buying drugs can know how much they are taking and take it much more safely. The decrimilisation (and the wider societal appraoch to drug use) has seen dramatic drops in problematic drug use, HIV and hepatitis infection rates, overdose deaths, drug-related crime and incarceration rates. Decrimilisation does make it safer, fact.

You are perhaps correct when you say that increased (illegal) drug abuse and an increase in crime are connected. But the important point is the illegality of it. If an addict can go and seek medical treatment for drug addiction without fear of prosecution then they don't have to rob or steal or get involved in other illegal activity.
War on drugs? I’m not for any “war in drugs,” just an acknowledgment that drug crime is not you or me lighting up at home, but the far more sinister and dangerous aspects of it. I think America’s prisons are FULL of non-violent offenders who committed stupid drug offenses and it is literally an industry unto itself. Jails are for violent criminals who cannot life in society, not Johnny Dime Bag!

My remark about sticking one’s head in the sand is that the behaviors undertaken to get drugs, get money for drugs and the things done while on drugs will remain. Legalization MAY help some people find legal treatment, and stigma MAY be reduced on the fringes, but the problem is scrotes being scrotes, not normal people lighting up in private and enjoying the mellow. So many people smoke weed it’s not funny, but they do it in the privacy and comfort of their homes and enjoy the freedom and release, as opposed to committing crimes and doing stupid drugs that make them crazy.
 
War on drugs? I’m not for any “war in drugs,” just an acknowledgment that drug crime is not you or me lighting up at home, but the far more sinister and dangerous aspects of it. I think America’s prisons are FULL of non-violent offenders who committed stupid drug offenses and it is literally an industry unto itself. Jails are for violent criminals who cannot life in society, not Johnny Dime Bag!

My remark about sticking one’s head in the sand is that the behaviors undertaken to get drugs, get money for drugs and the things done while on drugs will remain. Legalization MAY help some people find legal treatment, and stigma MAY be reduced on the fringes, but the problem is scrotes being scrotes, not normal people lighting up in private and enjoying the mellow. So many people smoke weed it’s not funny, but they do it in the privacy and comfort of their homes and enjoy the freedom and release, as opposed to committing crimes and doing stupid drugs that make them crazy.

Thing is, scrotes are scrotes with or without drugs. The more dangerours elements of drug crime are at least in part a result of the illegality of it all. The fact that criminal gangs control the supply means that they also use other criminal and violent means within their "business" activities. Decrimilisation removes this.

Decriminilisation, DOES help people get more treatment, and DOES reduce related crimes and DOES reduce illnesses related to IV drug use. There is signfiicant evidence of this from the system in Portugal.
 
Decriminilisation, DOES help people get more treatment, and DOES reduce related crimes and DOES reduce illnesses related to IV drug use. There is signfiicant evidence of this from the system in Portugal.

Take a walk through the Tenderloin in San Francisco for a different view of “the evidence.”
 
Whereas in the US, there is total respect for the cops and the world is hunk dory. Give ya head a wobble son
Whataboutism. Bravo!

Does one thing excuse the other? Does it even matter what it is like anywhere else in the world? I’m talking about what it is like in the UK and, because I live in the USA, I have to “give my head a wobble?”

And, you must be a seriously old fuck if I’m your “son.” Patronize much?!

Here you go...

Latest figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that in the year to March 2019, knife crime was at its highest since comparable records began in 2011, and up eight per cent on the previous year.

The true scale of the problem is likely to be even higher as the figures published today (July 18) do not include Greater Manchester Police, one of the UK’s biggest force areas, due to differences in the way it records data.

Robbery offences were up by 11 per cent to 85,736, while the number of homicides in 2018/19 increased slightly to 701 from 693 in the previous 12 months, excluding terrorist attacks.

The total number of violence against the person offences rose by 20 per cent year-on-year to 1.67 million.
******

So, if more and more people are using deadly weapons, and violent crime is increasing at a rate of 20% per annum, policemen should absolutely be able to carry a deadly weapon to defend themselves, when needed.

No policeman should have to endure getting beaten up to avoid a criminal getting shot! No policemen. If you want to attack a police officer, then he should have the ability to defend himself, upto and including the use of deadly force.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.