Looks like the U.K. will never be able to have freedom of gun ownership now

Oh, they certainly do! Its 'arm police with batons, not guns!'

 

It's not part of your culture and history because your culture and history is based upon subjugating your own rights in favor of being ruled by a benevolent (or not so benevolent) state.

Your snide accusations of racism are inappropriate.

 

I guess that's what happens when you are given your freedom, as compared to fighting for it.

You stay home and worry less about whats happening in lands far far away.

 

If you think guns are like an X-box game then your way of seeing it "differently" is based in ignorance. Just sayin'.

 

And yet, the best of Gun culture was invented by the British.....

Yet you want to re-write history and now claim otherwise.

 

No, the Police are Armed with Intellect, Guns are an additional helpful accessory.

 

Uh black people shoot other black people. In fact black people pretty much shoot a lot of other people too because they dominate violent interracial crime.

 

I hear lots of horrible speech against women from black men, calling women a ho etc.....
Lots of bad stuff.
It is as if laws and socities rules do not apply to them.

 

I was at an "event" on Saturday. The way they speak, especially to each other is simply amazing. Simply the foulest language ever heard in public.

 

Do you think that they're armed with more intellect than US police?

 

Yes.

New Scotland Yard.
I am quite proud of them.
They are quite worthy and well respected the World over in Official LE.

 

Considering news accounts of law enforcement officers in the united states, and their egregious abuses of authority simply because they can do such, this is most certainly the case. Law enforcement officers in the united states are not highly trained professionals. When it comes to handling firearms, most individual officers barely have more training than any member of the general public.

 

Members of the general public, as in people who have zero training? Or you mean general gun owning public? Even they won't have had training, unless they've been taught by someone or are a member of a gun club.

 

Members of the general public with zero training. As in no firearms experience whatsoever. This is certainly the case with law enforcement officers in the state of New York. Firearm qualification standards are abysmally low, because so few individuals living there actually have any experience handling firearms at all, other than the criminals. They did not grow up using firearms like those that live in rural communities.

 

Actually, a healthy percentage of the gun owning public has more knowledge, experience, and practice than the average police officer. I don't say this to disparage police officers either; I spent time in law enforcement, and I know how much time and energy goes into the simple realities of doing the job, including having to devote precious personal time to appearing in court. It's hard to find time to pursue practice at the range and almost impossible for an officer with a family to find time or money to pursue supplemental training, unless that officer has a passion for shooting as a hobby. When I was working, most of the agents I worked with wore the sidearm as a badge of office and had little interest in investing what personal time they had in pursuing competence. They had the basic training from the Academy only (which was rudimentary at best) and then only shot for required events like qualifications, and most could barely muster a passing score; with that only happening on their second or even their third try. I was seen as the unit "gun nut" because I had knowledge in firearms before I ever went to the Academy, and I practiced regularly on my own time; even using paid leave to take supplemental training, and I regularly shot perfect scores at qualification time. I don't say that to brag, but to point out the disparity in people's opinion of law enforcement capability and the actual state of law enforcement training overall. People like me were always in the extreme minority of active officers, and this was even thought of as beneficial politically to some agencies; I actually lost out on the first LE job I applied for because I was perceived as being "too into guns", which was interesting (and frustrating) to me because my grandfather, a career law enforcement officer, had encouraged me to pursue skill at arms because in his day departments always wanted applicants "who knew which end of the gun the bullet came out of". Unfortunately, through the 1990's and into the early 2000's there was a growing belief that people wanted law enforcement officers to be more social workers than anything else and policies were enacted that made use of force regulations so restrictive a number of officers were killed without ever drawing their sidearms, because they had been so thoroughly indoctrinated into believing they would get in serious trouble if they ever drew their weapons. In the end, I was lucky enough to work for a Federal agency that stood behind its agents in deadly force situations so long as the agent could prove he or she had properly followed policy, and the policy was fairly straightforward and unambiguous.

 

Unfortunately, they're not armed to shoot to help save the lives of others. The recent stabbing attacks in London were only stopped when armed police finally arrived 8 minutes later. Now, we don't know anything about what general duties police were in the area or if there were police who attempted to fight the attackers with batons and pepper spray, however, I guarantee you that if general duties police were armed, the attackers would've been killed long before armed police arrived. Keep in mind that it was a Saturday night in the middle of the city, so police are always out in force. Would it have taken 8 minutes in New York?

 

when a terrorist ran a car into people and tried to stab a few more near Ohio State University, an armed officer shot the jihadist mope within a minute of the attack


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/2...ro-for-quick-reaction-to-campus-attacker.html

 

Near Ohio State University? Wasn't it on the campus? Anyway, this is a perfect example of what arming police can do. They didn't have to wait for a special Ohio police force division to show up with guns.

 

There are gun rights though aren't there? Its not as if someone can't have a license for any type of gun.

What do you mean?

 

In the US, the state cannot require a license for the exercise of a right.

 

You know that this thread is related to UK right?

 

Except that in U.K. you cannot have "Any type of Gun" Firearms are limited by type, No Pistols, no Semiautomatic types, and no Firearms allowed for Defensive purposes.

 

All police in England and Wales are getting a survey if they want to carry. Should be interesting.

 

Yes, quite.

 

I don't see it happening.
82% of police officers were against it in 2006.