Michael Moore on the Election

@Finn dAbuzz,

AMEN

0 Replies

@giujohn,

You did not give the source, just some horseshit about the home office figures. My source had a link so it was proof I wasn't talking bollocks. It amazes me that you think anyone from the UK would actually believe such nonsense. You have to be really stupid to think that's going to fly.

7 police shootings last year, not 160,000. That was an obvious lie, the sort a kid would tell.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

Okay you can stop the lies, I don't think anybody's buying it... the figure I used was close to 15,000 not 160,000. I also said nothing about when the UK police officers fired their gun I stated that in 2015 according to the home office there were close to 15,000 authorized use of firearms incidents.
Also while there were a total of 7 individuals killed there were 29 incidents where the police actually fired their guns during an authorized use of Firearms incident. Additionally there were 110 incidents where the police mistakenly fired their guns some of them resulting in the death of their fellow police constable.
All this information is readily available on the internet for you to find... I'm not going to do the work for you.
Oh and by the way in 2004 according to a poll about 50% of the population thought that more UK officers should be armed... That figure is now up to over 70%.

3 Replies

@giujohn,

Quote giujohn:

Quote:

Also while there were a total of 7 individuals killed [in the UK] there were 29 incidents where the police actually fired their guns during an authorized use of Firearms incident.

Fine, so 7 people killed by police with guns in the UK. Since the USA is 4.9 times larger in population, to be equivalent the US should have 34 people killed by police. How many people were killed by police in 2015? Let's see:

Quote:

Since 2000, 14,197 people have been killed by police in America. In 2015, it was 1,357.

http://www.gq.com/story/fatal-encounters-police-statistics-interview

Also, since the UK normally doesn't allow citizens to have handguns anyway, their homicide rate, by any means, is 0.9 per 100,000 population, as opposed to 4.5 for the USA.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

So without guns, you get 83% of the murders eliminated right there, and 97% of the fatal police shootings. These statements are population-adjusted. I find it hard to believe you think stats support your ideas.

2 Replies

@Blickers,

The only thing I support... And it wasn't my idea... Is our unalienable right to keep and bear arms for our protection... and originally I believe it was to protect us from the Brits!

1 Reply

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

The only thing I support... And it wasn't my idea... Is our unalienable right to keep and bear arms for our protection... and originally I believe it was to protect us from the Brits!

As an US-citizen, you really should know your Constitution and the amendments better, I think.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

I am quite familiar with the Second Amendment and its guarantee to the individual the right to protect themselves. It's not complicated... I suspect you're going to try to make it so though.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

Well, I was just wondering ... it was to protect us from the Brits ...

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

As you said, it was not to protect us from the Brits.

At the center of the gun control debate, few things are as hotly disputed in the United States as the Constitution's Second Amendment.

History of the Second Amendment

The Second Amendment provides U.S. citizens the right to bear arms. Ratified in December 1791, the amendment says:

Report this Advertisement

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

James Madison originally proposed the Second Amendment shortly after the Constitution was officially ratified as a way to provide more power to state militias, which today are considered the National Guard. It was deemed a compromise between Federalists — those who supported the Constitution as it was ratified — and the anti-Federalists — those who supported states having more power. Having just used guns and other arms to ward off the English, the amendment was originally created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against a tyrannical federal government.

1 Reply

The cumulative ignorance in this thread is just breathtaking.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

As you said, it was not to protect us from the Brits.

At the center of the gun control debate, few things are as hotly disputed in the United States as the Constitution's Second Amendment.

History of the Second Amendment

The Second Amendment provides U.S. citizens the right to bear arms. Ratified in December 1791, the amendment says:

Report this Advertisement

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

James Madison originally proposed the Second Amendment shortly after the Constitution was officially ratified as a way to provide more power to state militias, which today are considered the National Guard. It was deemed a compromise between Federalists — those who supported the Constitution as it was ratified — and the anti-Federalists — those who supported states having more power. Having just used guns and other arms to ward off the English, the amendment was originally created to give citizens the opportunity to fight back against a tyrannical federal government.

The American Revolutionary War got its impetus from the gun control attempted by King George the Third and the British government on American colonists and coincidentally enough one of their leading generals who fought against the colonists was named Clinton.

And anyone who actually believes that in a catalogue of individual rights that the founding fathers would insert one right for the government and not the individual is a total idiot and and an unabashed historical revisionist.

Oh and by the way the National Guard is not considered the militia because the National Guard can be federalized the only true militia is what is what is referred to as the state guard and they can only be called out by the governor of that state. There was no question that in colonial times the word militia meant ALL able-bodied men from 16 to 60.

0 Replies

@giujohn,

You're the liar. I didn't check your post and must have given another zero. For that I apologise. It doesn't change the fact that 7 is significantly smaller than 15,000. You lied about that. And you lied because you can't deal with the truth so you make crap up.

No link given. I gave a link for my fact. You're still lying my source says 7 firearms incidents for the whole year. Your 29 incidents is a lie.

Being generous about the 15,000 figure and giving you a massive benefit of the doubt in assuming you didn't just make it up. That would be the time units were deployed.

You say these figures are readily available on the net, but you can't find them You're a liar. Put up or shut up.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

7 people weren't killed by the police. 7 shots were fired. Check my link, (it's the only one you'll get.)

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Yeah I'm not going to play your game and be baited into providing you with the link, find it yourself. If you can find a report for the from the home office discounting the numbers go ahead and post it.

0 Replies

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

I stated that in 2015 according to the home office there were close to 15,000 authorized use of firearms incidents.
Also while there were a total of 7 individuals killed there were 29 incidents where the police actually fired their guns during an authorized use of Firearms incident. Additionally there were 110 incidents where the police mistakenly fired their guns some of them resulting in the death of their fellow police constable.

The Home Office publishes data of police forces from England and Wales (for a very simple reason, as you will know).
There were 14,666 police firearms operations (sic!)
Police firearms operations are:
- operations where officers were stood down before being deployed (e.g. the operation was cancelled before arrival or officers did not move from a
rendezvous point into actual deployment)
- deployments for VIP protection, armed prisoner escorts, airport patrols, other guarding duties, and routine patrols

I don't know from where you got your data, but officially, there were six incidents in which police discharged firearms.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

You did not give the source, just some horseshit about the home office figures. My source had a link so it was proof I wasn't talking bollocks. It amazes me that you think anyone from the UK would actually believe such nonsense. You have to be really stupid to think that's going to fly.

7 police shootings last year, not 160,000. That was an obvious lie, the sort a kid would tell.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/police-use-of-firearms-statistics-england-and-wales-april-2015-to-march-2016/police-use-of-firearms-statistics-england-and-wales-april-2015-to-march-2016

Quote:

Home Office firearms incident figures for the year April 1 2015 to 31 March 2016

Headline figures

There were a total of 14,753 police firearms operations in the year ending March 2016; this represents a slight increase of 68 (0.5%) police firearms operations when compared with the previous year.

In the year ending March 2016, 85% of firearms operations involved Armed Response Vehicles (ARVs), compared with 84% in the previous year.

There were seven incidents in which police discharged firearms in the year ending March 2016, up from six incidents in the previous year.

There were 5,639 authorised firearms officers (AFOs) on 31 March 2016; a decrease of eight AFOs when compared with the previous year

There were 126,766 police officers in England and Wales on 31 March 2016.

A "police firearms operation" is any operation in which the use of firearms has authorised. This does not necessarily mean that weapons were drawn or used.

The United Kingdom had a murder rate of 0.9 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2013, whereas the United States rate was 3.9 per 100,000.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

giujohn wrote:
I stated that in 2015 according to the home office there were close to 15,000 authorized use of firearms incidents.
Also while there were a total of 7 individuals killed there were 29 incidents where the police actually fired their guns during an authorized use of Firearms incident. Additionally there were 110 incidents where the police mistakenly fired their guns some of them resulting in the death of their fellow police constable.

The Home Office publishes data of police forces from England and Wales (for a very simple reason, as you will know).
There were 14,666 police firearms operations (sic!)

Police firearms operations are:
- operations where officers were stood down before being deployed (e.g. the operation was cancelled before arrival or officers did not move from a
rendezvous point into actual deployment)
- deployments for VIP protection, armed prisoner escorts, airport patrols, other guarding duties, and routine patrols

I don't know from where you got your data, but officially, there were six incidents in which police discharged firearms.

Your information on armed response is incorrect

GOV.UK Search
Home Office
See more information about this Official Statistics
Official Statistics
Police use of firearms statistics, England and Wales: financial year ending 31 March 2014
Published 9 July 2015

Police firearms’ operations (operations in which firearms were authorised)
police firearms’ operations involving Armed Response Vehicles (ARVs)
police firearms’ operations where firearms were discharged (number of incidents where conventional firearms were discharged)
police firearms officers (authorised firearms officers (AFOs))
The statistics in this release are based on aggregated figures provided by individual police forces as part of the Home Office Annual Data Requirement (ADR). The ADR is a list of all mandatory data requests made to police forces in England and Wales under the Home Secretary’s statutory powers.
Police firearms’ operations are defined in the ADR notes for guidance as operations involving the authorised deployment of Authorised Firearms Officers (AFOs) where they may have to protect themselves or others from a person who (a) is in possession of a firearm, (b) has immediate access to a firearm or (c) is otherwise so dangerous that the officer’s use of a firearm may be necessary.

Deployments also include those incidents where AFOs ‘self-authorise’. This is when AFOs encounter situations where they believe that the criteria for AFO deployment have been met, and delay in seeking authority to deploy would be detrimental to public or officer safety, so AFOs deploy themselves and take the necessary and proportionate action in accordance with their training.
ARVs are police vehicles carrying armed AFOs. Police firearms’ operations involving ARVs are a subset of total police firearms’ operations. Police firearms’ operations involving ARVs are defined in the ADR notes for guidance as those where the initial or sole response was by an ARV.
Each incident is classed as only one operation regardless of the number of personnel (or deployments) or tactics employed to deal with the incident.
The following are excluded from the figures:
operations where officers had not commenced their task before being stood down (e.g. operation was cancelled before arrival or did not move from a rendezvous point into actual deployment)
deployments for VIP protection, armed prisoner escorts, airport patrols, other guarding duties, and routine patrols.

1 Reply

Telegraph.co.uk

NEWS
Police officers carry guns to routine call-outs

Britain has a proud tradition of unarmed policing except when confronting extreme dangers

By Camilla Turner
1:53AM GMT 07 Feb 2015
Britain has a proud tradition of unarmed policing, but new figures prompt fears of an 'Americanised' force

Armed police officers are being dispatched to tens of thousands of domestic incidents, road accidents and minor skirmishes each year, raising concerns about an ‘Americanisation’ of the police force, it has been claimed.

One force alone – Thames Valley police in southeast England – deployed officers with handguns to 8,709 routine jobs last year.

These call-outs make up the majority of work for many of the country’s 6,000 armed officers, according to a Freedom of Information request by the Times.

In Britain, authorised officers carry their handguns holstered on routine jobs, while heavy-duty weaponry, such as sub-machine guns or carbines, are locked in their vehicles.

The revelation last year that armed officers were being dispatched to minor disturbances in Scotland is reported to have caused widespread dismay.

The policy is now under review, following criticism leveled at Police Scotland, the national police force, that it failed to properly inform the public.

Gun control groups have said that armed police attending routine incidents undermined community trust, but senior officers said it was necessary to avoid armed officers being left idle.

Simon Chesterman, the national spokesman for armed policing, told The Times that serious threats were rare in many areas but armed officers were necessary for emergencies such as the 2010 Cumbria massacre in which a taxi driver, Derrick Bird, shot dead 12 people.

“If you are not allowed to use them for routine police duties, they become an expensive commodity and your level of policing resource is diminished,” said Mr Chesterman, deputy chief constable of the Civil Nuclear Constabulary.

“The fact of the matter is that we’re only talking about a few officers who are very highly trained. If we restrict them to firearms deployments only, It is an appalling use of public money.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

Your information on armed response is incorrect

User guide to police use of firearms statistics

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Thank you for providing this ... question: are you disputing the contradictions in the two passages in bold letters?

0 Replies

Michael Moore on the Election

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know