Prosecuting our police

mkpdavies · 02-11-2004, 02:27 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3973261.stm

What a mess, how did we get to a point where the whole of London is now at the mercy of armed gangs, due to this case of a guy being shot for carying a wooden leg.

With the technology we have today, I don't really understand why guns are needed on our streets. Taser guns can take a man down no problem, and while they are not 100% safe, at least if a mistake like this is made it isn't going to be fatal most of the time.

I am against arming the normal bobby with guns full stop. I still think we need armed response units, just in case a situation gets totaly out of hand. However I do think they should be looking to use non leathal force unless they come up against some real firepower. If they had taken the man down with taser, this problem wouldn't exist. If he did have a gun then the taser would still have taken him out!

There are all sorts of other non-lethal weapons available now too, why do we still have our police relying on guns?

Carl Faulkner · 02-11-2004, 07:46 PM

As an advocate of capital punishment it never fails to amaze me how many of the anti-capital punishment brigade advocate the police carrying guns...effectively putting them in the position of judge, jury and executioner.

C_steam · 02-11-2004, 08:01 PM

NEVER forget it is not the carrying of the gun that is the point, it is the rules of engagement under which it is permissable to open fire.

There will be others beside me on this forum who understand the concept of the 'Green card' and the NI equivalent. I believe that a soldier carrying a weapon under green card or NI equivalent rules would be up for manslaughter in this case without doubt.

In short (and if memory serves) you can only open fire should you be fired upon or in order to prevent someone, with certainty, discharging a firearm or other explosive device (and then you would have to argue the judgement used in the latter case - we always joked it was better to wait till they shot at you before returning fire). NI rules were more stringent. (it was a few years ago so I'm prepared to be corrected onthe above)

Why are police not disciplined to a similar system?

02-11-2004, 02:27 PM	#1 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,150 Party: Libertarian Party	Prosecuting our police http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3973261.stm What a mess, how did we get to a point where the whole of London is now at the mercy of armed gangs, due to this case of a guy being shot for carying a wooden leg. With the technology we have today, I don't really understand why guns are needed on our streets. Taser guns can take a man down no problem, and while they are not 100% safe, at least if a mistake like this is made it isn't going to be fatal most of the time. I am against arming the normal bobby with guns full stop. I still think we need armed response units, just in case a situation gets totaly out of hand. However I do think they should be looking to use non leathal force unless they come up against some real firepower. If they had taken the man down with taser, this problem wouldn't exist. If he did have a gun then the taser would still have taken him out! There are all sorts of other non-lethal weapons available now too, why do we still have our police relying on guns? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-11-2004, 07:46 PM	#2 (permalink)
Carl Faulkner Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 352	As an advocate of capital punishment it never fails to amaze me how many of the anti-capital punishment brigade advocate the police carrying guns...effectively putting them in the position of judge, jury and executioner.

02-11-2004, 08:01 PM	#3 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,797	NEVER forget it is not the carrying of the gun that is the point, it is the rules of engagement under which it is permissable to open fire. There will be others beside me on this forum who understand the concept of the 'Green card' and the NI equivalent. I believe that a soldier carrying a weapon under green card or NI equivalent rules would be up for manslaughter in this case without doubt. In short (and if memory serves) you can only open fire should you be fired upon or in order to prevent someone, with certainty, discharging a firearm or other explosive device (and then you would have to argue the judgement used in the latter case - we always joked it was better to wait till they shot at you before returning fire). NI rules were more stringent. (it was a few years ago so I'm prepared to be corrected onthe above) Why are police not disciplined to a similar system?