Arming The Police

[Blackbriar 8,569]

 

The London attacker gained entry to the Parliamentary estate, where he was shot by a member of the Defence Secretary's close protection detail - after he had been held up, by an unarmed police officer, long enough for support to arrive.

As far as I know, there were no armed police involved.....

 

Pretty sure his close protection are assigned from the branch of the Met Police.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_and_Diplomatic_Protection

They are, mate. When I said "armed police", I meant regular police officers. I would imagine that close protection details have been highly trained to deal with 'contact' situations.......

 

I don't believe that the presence of a larger number of armed police will prevent further attacks. Parliament was targeted because it's a target, if that makes sense ! The presence of armed police makes no difference to fanatics whose plan usually involves their own death !

 

Changing tack slightly, most police officers say they don't want to be armed - which doesn't surprise me, when you bear in mind the witch hunts they have to endure if and when armed officers actually do what they're trained and paid to do.

[Born Hunter 17,832]

 

 

The London attacker gained entry to the Parliamentary estate, where he was shot by a member of the Defence Secretary's close protection detail - after he had been held up, by an unarmed police officer, long enough for support to arrive.

As far as I know, there were no armed police involved.....

Pretty sure his close protection are assigned from the branch of the Met Police.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_and_Diplomatic_Protection

They are, mate. When I said "armed police", I meant regular police officers. I would imagine that close protection details have been highly trained to deal with 'contact' situations.......

 

I don't believe that the presence of a larger number of armed police will prevent further attacks. Parliament was targeted because it's a target, if that makes sense ! The presence of armed police makes no difference to fanatics whose plan usually involves their own death !

 

Changing tack slightly, most police officers say they don't want to be armed - which doesn't surprise me, when you bear in mind the witch hunts they have to endure if and when armed officers actually do what they're trained and paid to do.

 

 

They don't prevent attacks, perhaps, but they do reduce the death toll. Terrorists or anybody that wishes harm for that matter hit soft targets given a choice. Had that armed CP officer not shot him dead, how many more would have been killed? Basically the sooner a good guy with a gun can get to the terrorist the less risk you have of being killed in the attack. There are political reasons why we don't like guns I get that, but that aside, the more good guys with guns the better in these situations. It's a well understood and practised tactic with the only consideration restraining it being the political implications, ie public response to seeing guns everywhere.

[jacknife 2,005]

I dread to think what would happen it an attack happened in another cities other than London

 

The responce certainly would be as quick

[scothunter 12,609]

The reason we dont have attacks like France with guns is because we do have stringent gun laws and long may they continue.

hence why they use knifes and other means.

 

not saying they might get smuggled guns in,but its a lot harder to here in the UK.

[Born Hunter 17,832]

The reason we dont have attacks like France with guns is because we do have stringent gun laws and long may they continue.

hence why they use knifes and other means.

 

not saying they might get smuggled guns in,but its a lot harder to here in the UK.

 

Bollocks, lol. Of all the guns used in Paris terror attacks how many of them were legal? Gun laws make bugger all difference unless it's an almost complete free for all. The only thing that stops a Bataclan like attack here is that our intelligence and security services are world class and the fact we have far better border control!

 

Proper trained terror cells planning a large scale marauding attack don't want Purdys or 22s, they want military spec automatic weapons and explosives and they are more than capable of getting them. But it's these groups that are the ones more easily surveilled by intelligence agencies. These lone wolves don't have the connections or gumption to obtain serious weapons, which is the main reason they fly under the radar.

[scothunter 12,609]

You must know more than the security experts mate. Cz that's what they are saying everytime they are interviewed.

 

Or is it fake news?

[Born Hunter 17,832]

You must know more than the security experts mate. Cz that's what they are saying everytime they are interviewed.

 

Or is it fake news?

 

Show me one quote that says the french attacks use legally held firearms!

 

It's well reported that the french suffer because they have bugger all border control and their intelligence agencies are second rate in comparison to ours.

[scothunter 12,609]

Was a guy on the bbc this week news thing last night im sure you can watch it on catch up.

 

oh and i didnt say they were legally held. He meant guns are not readily available in the UK. Cz of our gun laws hence why they dont shoot people and use other weapons.

[Born Hunter 17,832]

http://time.com/how-europes-terrorists-get-their-guns/

 

Once European terrorists realized the strategic advantages of guns, they quickly discovered they were surprisingly easy to find. Just beyond the countries of Western Europe, with their restrictive gun laws, lie the Balkan states, awash with illegal weapons left over from the conflicts that raged there in the 1990s.

 

Though not authorized to speak on the record, three officials and two gun experts with information on the Charlie Hebdo investigation confirmed to TIME that the weapons used in the attacks came from the Balkans and Eastern Europe. Some were deactivated weapons from Slovakia, converted to be live-firing.

 

So there you go then mate, it's not the strict gun laws that protect us, it's the efficient policing of gun laws and particularly the importation of illegal weapons. Our strict gun laws do not keep us from seeing the attacks that the continent has seen. It's our the quality of our intelligence and law enforcement that does.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Born Hunter

[scothunter 12,609]

Ok bud cheers.

[Born Hunter 17,832]

Ok bud cheers.

 

I don't mean to keep being a c**t mate. LOL. I'm just pro gun as f**k and frankly with all the pressure I feel on firearms rights etc I can't help myself but to argue with everyone.

[scothunter 12,609]

Oh f**k off ya dick!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding mate LOL

[shepp 2,285]

How long ago was it armed police killed the French tourist on that train in London ? Bad intell ? But the guy was a tourist andunarmedand they still killed him ?

 

I don't think all officers should be armed but it's something that needs looked further in a elite section of police officers ?

I don't remember that happening ?

[shepp 2,285]

I know when an arab tries his luck in Israel, they are dealt with very quickly, you certainly don't get prolonged mass terrorist murders like you did in Paris.

The IDF bulldozing the family home afterwards, tends to put off future suicide bombers a bit too

Edited March 24, 2017 by shepp

[scothunter 12,609]

Speaking of this week last night. Did anyone see it? Andrew neil started off the programme with a great speech to the wannabe terrorists .He didn't f***ing hold back! Probably painted a target on his back.