Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


420chan is Getting Overhauled - Changelog/Bug Report/Request Thread (Updated July 26)

POLICE WITH GUNS?? (UK)

Reply
- Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:24:31 EST ZTsi6WSi No.13448
File: 1411478671308.jpg -(8599B / 8.40KB, 284x178) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. POLICE WITH GUNS?? (UK)
I want to know as much information as possible about UK police and the law (especially recent changes) regarding their possession of weapons. As in, walking about on the street on a regular patrol, carrying guns.

Is this actually getting more common? Any evidence (or links to decent sources) would be GREAT,
also: what the fuck is the psycological effect on the police, the individual officers, when given such things? AND any information on --- WHERE THE GUNS ARE BOUGHT FROM (of course someone profits from the purchase; weapons companies etc).

I know I could find this out myself in the process of doing so but any pointers in interesting directions would be fantastic, cheers.
>>
Basil Fennerridge - Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:02:40 EST uM+rkBNA No.13449 Reply
What ? Since when. I've never seen a rozzer holding a weapon.

Could just be London, I hope it's just London. Cowardly weapons have no place in our "great" country. But what with the whole asylum seekers living with slapheads thing they have going on in London it was to be expected.
>>
Ebenezer Choppergold - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 15:34:58 EST czcxX/K7 No.13451 Reply
1411587298639.jpg -(70936B / 69.27KB, 600x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
you don't want your police to be armed, because look at America, NYPD shot this beautiful intelligent and sensitive dog for the crime of walking off the leash.
>>
Nigel Singerville - Wed, 24 Sep 2014 17:36:46 EST uM+rkBNA No.13454 Reply
>>13453

>implying cops shooting living creatures without good reason is a good thing.
>>
Beatrice Wellerwill - Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:21:15 EST G1iU9dN9 No.13457 Reply
>>13453
>>13454

Implying there exists good and/or bad and that they are mutually exclusive
>>
Beatrice Wellerwill - Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:26:33 EST G1iU9dN9 No.13458 Reply
Now relevant stuff

You sound a bit paranoid OP, whilst I wonder myself, you seem to bother way too much. Not up to any mischief are you?

>I know I could find this out myself in the process of doing so

wisdom
>>
Phineas Pengerspear - Sat, 27 Sep 2014 18:19:16 EST uM+rkBNA No.13460 Reply
>>13457
Don't be a philsophag.

You know full well that rash, irrational actions by any creature is generally a bad fucking action.

Now take the fact that all creatures are capable of this type of action. And you end up with a few cuts and a few bruises every now and then.

Now take a self righteous individual who is bigged up by there lifestyle and put a gun in there hand, You end up with a lot of people and creatures who did not deserve to be killed by some guy who can then hide behind his little shield and claim he feared for his life so he took someone else's to protect his own. (which he has the right to do. But he should fucking own up to it and go to fucking jail and pay the same fucking price the rest of would have to pay)

In my opinion the only people who should have guns is criminals, That way you can tell the difference between good guys and bad guys, If cops get guns. They will be worse than criminals because they can hide easier.
>>
Ebenezer Mittingtad - Sat, 27 Sep 2014 21:23:02 EST pGJLu59B No.13461 Reply
1411867382670.jpg -(105849B / 103.37KB, 800x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Why is this thread on this board
>>
Samuel Peddleworth - Tue, 07 Oct 2014 10:24:55 EST Vnga6Nww No.13495 Reply
Never been to Northern Ireland then? Every peeler carries a gun.
>>
Lydia Biblingheck - Tue, 07 Oct 2014 12:33:08 EST c/ylWPsl No.13496 Reply
1412699588061.jpg -(25668B / 25.07KB, 218x169) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
British cops with guns = dead brown people.
>>
Lydia Turveyhall - Sat, 18 Oct 2014 12:21:34 EST kGoCHGW+ No.13533 Reply
Its alright, the only thing that happens when law enforcement gets guns is the occasional senseless murder based on fear and engrained racism.

Also they'll pull the gun on you for basically any reason
>>
Ebenezer Beffinglet - Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:59:12 EST 6SuWcSca No.13545 Reply
>psychological effect
I carry a gun in the US, it has changed me into neither an asshole nor some crazed vietnam vet with PTSD issues.

There is no psychological effect from carrying a firearm. Using it maybe, but it's an inanimate object.
>>
Beatrice Brookcocke - Thu, 23 Oct 2014 21:15:26 EST 42Q4ddgb No.13546 Reply
>>13545
>inanimate objects don't have any psychological effect on people

That is a dumb ass thing to say, inanimate objects are all around us and definitely affect the way we feel and think, having a gun would definitely make some people feel different ways, some may even feel more powerful since they know if they wanted to or had to they could easily kill someone without much effort or harm to them selves or their property.

also I am not against owning guns but I think you are horribly mistaken with that line of thinking, also everything or anything can cause a person to feel any which way.
>>
Sophie Blapperbanks - Fri, 27 Mar 2015 21:38:40 EST 7UKzYljI No.13820 Reply
1427506720757.jpg -(475280B / 464.14KB, 780x919) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
i dont think the question should be 'should we give our cops guns' (in whatever city, province, territory, country, whatever you happen to live in), but instead should be 'what sorts of people are we hiring for/to be cops ?'

40 to 60 some-odd years ago, in america, police were courteous, intelligent, helpful and rightfully authoritative (examples; barney fife/andy griffith and the series ADAM-12), .... fast forward to now (plus afew foundational documents which alters police perception of the populace, and combine militarized training, equipping and policy protocol) and you have....

todays american police officer, who knows not so much as a word of the laws he is supposed to be enforcing (of course, we all know that cops enforce quotas and not laws, whether or not said crime or incident actually happened), is (more or less) self righteously racist, narcissistic, egotistical, knows nothing of the ethics of authority, views the populace as latent inevitable criminals (at best), and sees police authority as a carte-blanche free-for-all license to do anything, and basically get away with it, because he knows that if an officer gets into trouble, the police department as a whole will close ranks, do all sorts of closed hearing internal questionings, and then deliver a decidedly tame verdict/ punishment, like paid leave, or something, and then soon enough, Officer batshit will be back out on the beat, beating people to the beat, and then wash, rinse, repeat, repeat, repeat.

also, this isn't /tinfoil, because news investigations have been done (and actual documents found) on this stuff, like how police training has shifted towards being more like military bootcamp, how local and state governments incentivise their local PD's to take handouts for mil-surp equipment, weapons, and vehicles.

so, as long as UK police departments don't suddenly start slumming their criteria for hiring of police officers, im not sure handing the local bobby's a 9 mil of some sort as they leave the back desk, is going to suddenly make them like american cops, who are gleefully inclined beat your ass into a 8 foot radius greasy smear on the sidewalk just for (whatever), and then spend the next 20 minutes tasering said wet smear for shits and giggles, before they even consider to think about calling for a meat wagon (ambulance).
>>
Nicholas Gigglenat - Sat, 28 Mar 2015 15:19:21 EST OcraKUNH No.13828 Reply
>>13820
The UK police are held in check by paperwork. Every action has an equal and opposite pile of paperwork. They are discouraged from actions that result in paperwork unless they think it's worth it and that actually works pretty well.

I am still glad I live near the best educated police force in the UK. The police is still too opaque and self serving to be considered perfect or without danger of slippage though.

UK police don't need guns, they have special units for it and that's enough. Gun crime in the UK is low and yes one officer got shot and that's awful but she was caught unaware, a gun in her hand would have just meant more ammo for the guy who killed her.
>>
Edwin Fimmerpene - Wed, 01 Apr 2015 07:25:51 EST cgGck+UX No.13837 Reply
>>13545

It's different when you know that you are the only one around who's allowed to have one on them though.
>>
David Suzzlehog - Thu, 02 Apr 2015 21:06:10 EST sYuk9bwl No.13838 Reply
>>13451
Got a news article to back your story up or are you just bullshitting us?
>>
Betsy Chabblehood - Fri, 03 Apr 2015 00:54:01 EST dp5qB83L No.13839 Reply
It's a bit frightening when the police are armed in a country where citizen's use of firearms is restricted. It's a legitimate concern that OP has.
>>
Graham Sennerforth - Sat, 04 Apr 2015 08:14:48 EST OcraKUNH No.13840 Reply
>>13839
It's nearly as scary as the citizens having free access to guns. Like having a 9mm will stop the army kicking the shit out of you with their assault rifles, tanks and body armour. But hey at least it can be stolen off you and used to shoot someone.

Actually that's a concern. I wouldn't want police running with guns day to day because that means they're out there. Some will get nicked. Keeping them locked up and only brought out for special occasions when they're needed so that they're locked down and restricted in a similar way to the citizenry of the nation seems like the best way to handle it.

I've never seen a police dude on patrol with a guy when I'm out and about. I've seen them patrolling the high street and once or twice even making an arrest. As far as I know everyone I've met who's been arrested or even seen an arrest has been arrested by the same sergeant every time. I don't think they need guns round here when one guy can do all the policing for a decade.
>>
Shitting Surringstug - Sun, 05 Apr 2015 07:02:07 EST i6g4yRlY No.13841 Reply
>>13840

>It's nearly as scary as the citizens having free access to guns

My sides

Oh wait you're serious let me laugh even harder.
>>
Hannah Gendlewere - Sun, 05 Apr 2015 20:38:01 EST OcraKUNH No.13842 Reply
>>13841
Most guns which kill someone in countries who actually have gun crime are stolen from private individuals and used by someone who picked it up either that way or more likely from a shady dealer of "second hand" guns. I think that says a lot. I love how some people think having guns will stop the army blowing their shit up or just driving a tank over their house.
>>
Esther Nendleford - Mon, 06 Apr 2015 13:33:17 EST 3VlPy42e No.13843 Reply
>>13842
You're arguing with Americans. It's their religious belief that any kind of evil government can be stopped with a couple of noist nuggets, a .22 pistol and a AR-15.

To imply otherwise is to assault their religion.
>>
Rebecca Hondershaw - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 08:59:33 EST i6g4yRlY No.13845 Reply
>>13843

Exactly.

Wait r u havin a giggle at my expense m8? We ain't the only country/group to realize the logical value of the right to bear arms buddy mcbucko
>>
Rebecca Hondershaw - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 09:05:00 EST i6g4yRlY No.13846 Reply
>>13842

>I love how some people think having guns will stop the army blowing their shit up or just driving a tank over their house.

Uh yeah it will it's called asymmetrical warfare dumbass. You're such a faggot, people like you are the epitomy of cowardice, your argument is always the same. It's "these people are bigger and more powerful so we shouldn't even consider fighting them!"

Fuck off. You're bitchmade.
>>
Jenny Snodbanks - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 09:56:00 EST 3VlPy42e No.13847 Reply
>>13846
Consider this. When the US military gets deployed in a civil war scenario, the government is already past the point of giving a fuck about their civilians.

So enjoy setting up an ambush for an Army patrol only to realise that they're all in hazmat suits and you take a whuff of some good ol' CHEMICAL WARFARE.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5L7GyZeazM

When shit hits the fan, NOTHING you do can stop the military. We've gone past the point of citizen resistance since WW1.
>>
Rebecca Hondershaw - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 10:29:12 EST i6g4yRlY No.13848 Reply
>>13847

Fuck off shill. No balls.

Chemical warfare is the easiest thing to defend against and if you're not ready for it you're not prepping right. Shit after 9/11 the DoD told citizens how to defend against chemical warfare and gave out a wealth of knowledge to people who were clueless.

Who are you even, trying to act like you know what the US military would do. They're US citizens too fuckass. With friends and family right here.

You know how cheap a fucking hazmat suit and gas mask are? If it's not in your arsenal you fail at prepping. But I don't think you're a prepper, I think you're just some cunt trying to make life more depressing for everyone with your weak ass cowardly worldview of passive apathy.

Also;

>civil war
>the government
>their civilians.
>their
>civilians

Do you have even a drop of political awareness or is mental slavery all you know?
>>
Jenny Snodbanks - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 14:48:00 EST 3VlPy42e No.13849 Reply
>>13848
>hurrr durr u dun undurstand im like rambo i can beat anifing man im supurpruparud

Okay /tinfoil/ you're a cool guy. You can beat anything.
>>
Nigel Chogglechudging - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 15:28:10 EST OcraKUNH No.13850 Reply
>>13846
I don't see you out fighting them. It's more about the number of imbeciles running around shooting each other win guns. The US has one of the shittiest governments in any democratic nation, and fuckloads of people shooting each other. Those guns are really working out for you.

End of the day, the best hope anyone has is that there's a shred of humanity left in most soldiers and they defend their country rather than their government.

I suppose that said those guns might give you just enough firepower to get into a lightly guarded depot and steal some real hardware without a few military types helping. In the end look at Isis, all it took was the Iraqi army literally putting their weapons down in front of a force a fraction of their size and running and they overthrew their government. Well and tonnes of aid coming covertly from other states.

Also it means the police don't really need guns most of the time so you have police running around with guns doing day to day oppression because it's going to do more harm than good.
>>
Nigger Blendledodge - Tue, 07 Apr 2015 17:55:27 EST sYuk9bwl No.13851 Reply
>>13849
Must be really easy to win an argument when you make up shit the other side says.
>>
Rebecca Fedgekuck - Wed, 08 Apr 2015 05:33:36 EST i6g4yRlY No.13856 Reply
>>13849

I'm not even saying I could win. I'd probably die fighting to defend freedom, which is far better than living as a slave.

You only fight if you're sure you're going to win. You know what that is? Cowardice masquerading as strategy.
>>
Rebecca Fedgekuck - Wed, 08 Apr 2015 05:54:02 EST i6g4yRlY No.13857 Reply
>>13850

>I don't see you out fighting them

Good.

>and fuckloads of people shooting each other. Those guns are really working out for you.

The guns aren't the problem. If the US government were to confiscate all of them 'our' police would be shooting at least twice as many people and the tax rate would be extremely oppressive. Most shootings occur in black urban neighborhoods where economic disparity, racism, a drive to get out of poverty and the abuse that follows it by any means necessary, psychological and chemical (yes, chemical) warfare on black youth turns them against themselves and causes 90% of the shootings in the US. The other 10% are the highly publicized yet relatively rare spree shootings done by psychologically vulnerable enthusiastic kids who somehow got their hands on automatic weapons despite those being pretty much illegal everywhere (gee I wonder how that happened! They weren't stolen from someone's legal stash!!)

>End of the day, the best hope anyone has is that there's a shred of humanity left in most soldiers

lol

The American military knows psychological abuse and they let recruits have it. If you go in with a heart of gold you'll come out with at least a few breaks in it and that's by design. Yes some soldiers will side with citizens during a civil war but going on the hope that the entire military will be ~merciful~ is delusional. Most of them hate themselves and hate the people they thanklessly fight for even more.

>I suppose that said those guns might give you just enough firepower to get into a lightly guarded depot and steal some real hardware without a few military types helping. In the end look at Isis, all it took was the Iraqi army literally putting their weapons down in front of a force a fraction of their size and running and they overthrew their government. Well and tonnes of aid coming covertly from other states.

Yep and like I said SOME soldiers WILL help. There are already organizations based around this, like the Oathkeepers, who join with the first pledge being to never betray the American people by following a traitorous order even if it's by the President to kill American citizens. They pledge to recognize the American military as an enemy of the Republic if this occurs.

And yes strategically grabbing more powerful hardware would not be all that difficult. Even securing nuclear silos to stop them being used on Americans or take out an aircraft carrier launching airstrikes on cities could definitely be done. ISIS, to hell with them all the same, does not have the advantage of being in a region where the kind of 'real hardware' consists of ICBM silos.

>Also it means the police don't really need guns most of the time so you have police running around with guns doing day to day oppression because it's going to do more harm than good.

American police are idiots. You see examples of it in news about our country but basically, they may not "need" their guns but they will insist on keeping them for the "terrorists" and "criminals" who still have guns aka resistance.

If there is any institution in America which will be spearheading a move toward tyranny and oppression it will be the US police force, NOT the US military. The same thing happened in Nazi Germany and the USSR. It was the police, not the military, who organized the coups and began running the government.

The domestic police force is a much bigger threat, especially because since it's been beefed up with APCs, drones, automatic weapons, body armor, microwave weapons etc it constitutes the "standing army" the founders of this country warned about.
>>
George Cridgeson - Mon, 27 Apr 2015 03:11:15 EST i6g4yRlY No.13887 Reply
>>13885

>You come across as a very angry person

Fuck you.

>and it sounds like you're living your whole life in fear

No.

>of a ridiculous hypothetical event

Social unrest happens all the time moron.

>that if it did happen, you'd be dead anyway.

I'm alive aren't I? We all die, it's about how you go out and what you stood for in life.

>Aren't gun owners significantly more likely to be victims of gun crime in the US?

No. Citation needed in any case. And even if it's true who gives a shit. I'd rather die from a gunshot than cancer and the rates for that don't seem to favor any particular demographic. My fucking 13 year old sister got cancer around her neck. You think it's because we're just a bunch of unhealthy fat Americans?

>The US also has the highest incarceration rate in the world

Because of criminal prosecution for an endless list of nonviolent crimes. The War on Drugs is the direct cause of most unnecessary incarcerations.

>and the highest murder and violent crime rates of any Western nation.

Of any Western nation. The rest of you are bitchmade faggots who underreport crime and do things like calling Muslim extremists "asians" in the UK.

>Easy access to guns is having a real negative effect on your actual lives,

FUCK OFF.

>it doesn't seem sensible to think that's a good price to pay

I'LL PAY WHAT I WANT FAGGOT I'M A GROWN MAN, YOU WANT TO RAISE MY KIDS TOO? FUCK OFF FAGGOT.

>so you can pit your AR-15

Why is it always the AR-15s?

>against the governments overwhelming firepower

Oh boy here we go aren't you just an expert in cowardice, Jesus Fucking Christ you don't even have to be a strategist to realize "the government's overwhelming firepower" has been LOSING WARS left and right against fucking farmers with AKs and booby traps.

>in whatever fantasy scenario exists in your head.

Try historical examples fuckwad. Try Vietnam. Try Iraq. Try South America, the War on Drugs.

>A much better argument for gun ownership in my mind is the idea of personal freedoms. Why should I as an individual be restricted from owning items that I will never use in an unethical or illegal way? It's a good argument, but even then everyone has already accepted limits to their personal freedoms (nobody is complaining that they can't own their own personal nuclear weapons or chemical weapons) so now we're just left with shades of grey as to what specific weapons we think it's acceptable or not to ban.

You're not even arguing for it so why the fuck would you bother? You're just some moron with your head up your ass huffing the fumes of your theoretical bullshit. The only problem is your shit is real and you are high as fuck on it.
>>
George Cridgeson - Mon, 27 Apr 2015 03:22:49 EST i6g4yRlY No.13888 Reply
>>13887

And no I'm not always angry or afraid. I have fun and enjoy life plenty. I know where I stand though.
>>
Graham Manninghutch - Fri, 01 May 2015 04:34:47 EST i6g4yRlY No.13892 Reply
>>13891

Those statistics are flat out bullshit. Gun deaths are higher in gun law restrictive cities such as Detroit, Chicago and D.C. (the new murder capitol of the world).

States like Vermont with very liberal gun laws have almost no violent crime.

I don't even need to quote a source for that. It's such an easily verifiable fact it completely destroys your bullshit source, which is a private tax-exempt special interest group lmfao, that's not a source yo. That's a cult.

I guess that's just how desperate anti-weapon people need to get to try to 'prove' the right to bear arms is a social disease instead of a human right.
>>
Graham Manninghutch - Fri, 01 May 2015 04:38:29 EST i6g4yRlY No.13893 Reply
1430469509022.jpg -(38914B / 38.00KB, 300x528) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>13891

>For such a fun loving guy, you sure do sound angry.

And nah dude, you sound angry I have weapons.

Why you wanna disarm me faggot? Got a problem? Do you want my weapons first or the police and military's?

Gonna get them to help you then try and take yours?

Are you fucking high?

WAKE UP, THIS IS THE REAL WORLD.
>>
Graham Manninghutch - Fri, 01 May 2015 04:47:13 EST i6g4yRlY No.13894 Reply
>>13893

>Gonna get them to help you then try and take yours?

Theirs. I meant theirs.

Seriously what's your plan busta who are you trying to be when we're all dancing to the tune of your kumbaya bullshit?

You want only police and military to have weapons? You a rightist? Fascist? Monarchist? Got a career in that field you're betting on?

What are you? Where's your head, son?

You planning on disarming them? Think you've got a shot at it tough guy? Tough for peace eh? Gonna show me the way with your better example, inspire them to throw down their weapons and hug your smelly ass?

What are you?
>>
Cornelius Gocklespear - Fri, 01 May 2015 21:38:28 EST i6g4yRlY No.13898 Reply
>>13897

I'm not trying to prove I'm calm you fucking cereal box license therapist.

You're a joke, you started this argument and all you can finish with is "hmm you're not actually calm hmm"
>>
Fanny Sinninghedge - Sat, 02 May 2015 20:03:13 EST 7D0hz2dp No.13900 Reply
>>13898
You're pretty angry. Most of your posts are insults and hyperbole and purely rest on the single argument that guns will help stop an out of control government. The counter argument is that they won't help very much and them being out there does harm. The latter is pretty well proven when combined with a culture as frightened and twitchy as the US. The former has not yet happened but may yet be proven. Also you're overlooking that most places with tighter gun control also control them more for authority figures.

The main point is that maybe people having guns risks outweigh the benefits. I mean look at the US on the whole, people getting shot mostly by weapons legal gun owners had stolen off them and when the government overstep their boundaries how many police were shot in the most recent protests? None. The argument made is that the benefits are minimal but the costs of having every dumb asshole with a gun are huge.

Also you're assuming that if everyone has guns half of them won't back the powers that be. As a result they still win AND now more death. You have a lot of faith in people there.

Also of note most people would argue for control of guns used by the police. The present British stance is that police do not carry guns, there are trained teams who are called out for situations where they are needed. They use the guns for those situations and then return, before going back out on the beat without a gun. The UK also has no national guard to speak of. Armed soldiers do not just mill around ready to deal with the populace. So this armed oppression is also not happening. Aside from Borders I don't think it's common outside the US in the entire developed world. Russia perhaps? Russia will one day out crazy the US of they don't ever become a bigger military or economic player as well. Most of the world doesn't have free roaming authority figures with guns. They also have less police abuse of powers and shit like checkpoints and private prisons. Seriously, the fact the US uses it when most of the west doesn't is usually a good sign it's not working.
>>
Phineas Brookville - Mon, 04 May 2015 04:53:49 EST i6g4yRlY No.13902 Reply
>>13900 >>13900

Alright, I appreciate the long response.

>You're pretty angry. Most of your posts are insults and hyperbole and purely rest on the single argument that guns will help stop an out of control government. The counter argument is that they won't help very much and them being out there does harm. The latter is pretty well proven when combined with a culture as frightened and twitchy as the US. The former has not yet happened but may yet be proven. Also you're overlooking that most places with tighter gun control also control them more for authority figures.

It's not just guns, weapons in general. Guns are going to be replaced by directed energy weapons very soon and I do NOT want to see them only in the hands of a select few government groups.

The argument that weapons prevent government tyranny is proven every day in many ways and in historical examples. The best one I can think of, because everyone loves to reference the holocaust, is the Warsaw ghetto. The Jews there got ahold of a stash of weapons and were able to fight back. Had the Jews in other camps had such luck they would've done the same. That wasn't even 80 years ago. Humans can be incredibly sadistic and barbaric. Just look at ISIS. The Kurds were about to be massacred until they started getting weapon drops, no thanks to Turkey but I digress.

The latter has NOT been proven. The cities with more gun restrictions are the ones with the highest murder rates in the US, sometimes in the entire world. This is statistical fact. I don't know what you're referring to that proves gun control works in these cities when it clearly doesn't but I'd like to hear your side of it.

And no, tighter gun control for authorities in these areas is the complete opposite of what is happening. The closer you get to highly gun controlled cities, the higher the equipment rate for assault rifles, LRAD systems, drones, APCs, thermal scopes and other military equipment in the hands of the authorities (as well as the exorbitant taxes supporting these purchases) increases dramatically. Again, this is fact, not conjecture.

>The main point is that maybe people having guns risks outweigh the benefits. I mean look at the US on the whole, people getting shot mostly by weapons legal gun owners had stolen off them and when the government overstep their boundaries how many police were shot in the most recent protests? None. The argument made is that the benefits are minimal but the costs of having every dumb asshole with a gun are huge.

On the contrary, people are for the most part reasonable, temperate and lack the sociopathic ambitions of the minority authority figures which dominate the tax system. The servants of one hierarchical system having weapons when the majority do not however, increases drastically the risks to the MAJORITY while protecting the cloistered interests of a minority few who believe they are better than most OR simply want to be.

One dumb asshole with a gun and 99 people without one is 99 really scared people. 99 dumb assholes with a gun and 1 not so dumb asshole will probably not erupt in anything more dramatic than that 1 person deciding to go to a liberal arts school instead of managing the dairy farm.

>Also you're assuming that if everyone has guns half of them won't back the powers that be. As a result they still win AND now more death. You have a lot of faith in people there.

The 'powers that be' are not real. It's an illusion cast by the shadow of might over the meek. I do have a lot of faith in people, I believe in people. I believe in group consciousness barring the occasional act of mob stupidity. People function better in a group, like a brain populated with neurons versus one with just two brapimpls to rub together hoping to get a spark.

When everyone has weapons (at least everyone who wants to), we all become the 'powers that be'. We all become powerful and cast a shadow to be feared, at least 1 to 1. As a group, this shadow diminishes, but 1 to 1 people still are intimidating to each other. What does this do? It crushes hierarchies. I think that, contrary to what most feminists would say, the automatic firearm is one of the single greatest contributions to feminism that just hasn't been adopted by enough women. It has democratized violence and force, previously the realm of the masculine. But again, I'm digressing.

Most women will say "no, I won't participate in violence", but then violence will participate in you. The statistical likelihood of being raped as a woman is horrific. If you have a vagina or just a feminine frame even, you'll probably be raped at least once in your life.

Now, I know some women think okay that isn't so bad, but all it takes is one time to give you an incurable disease, mutilate your body, result in your death or a fate much worse; becoming a living commodity in the business of human trafficking.

I think I've made my point.

>Also of note most people would argue for control of guns used by the police.

I disagree. I think statistical surveys such as these are usually conducted by biased groups, either for or against. I simply do not look to what "most people want" according to some statistical poll when that is an easy thing to manipulate or outright fake. The basis must be ideological, not statistical.

>The present British stance

Do you realize how crazy this statement alone sounds? The British are not an amoeba. That's 64.1 million people you're talking about, as of 2013 and they are living under a government that is very keen on controlling public opinion. Such a statement as "The British Stance" simply cannot be made! There are far too many cultures, ideologies, circumstances, demographics, levels of learning etc etc etc to account for.

>is that police do not carry guns, there are trained teams who are called out for situations where they are needed. They use the guns for those situations and then return, before going back out on the beat without a gun.

As the OP states this is going to change. A man beheaded an ex-soldier in the street with a cleaver and had time to stand around arguing with people about ideology. As an American that just boggles my mind.

>The UK also has no national guard to speak of. Armed soldiers do not just mill around ready to deal with the populace.

The National Guard was actually supposed to be the militia, this is a point where I have to make clear my stance;

The National Guard are unconstitutional. They're a standing army incorporated into the United States Armed Forces. The law of Posse Comitatus is currently being violated by the use of the National Guard presided over by the executive office of the President and it is also a violation of the spirit of the original law, being the Constitution, wherein it states clearly that standing armies operating under the authority of a centralized government are the greatest threat to civil liberty.

So that's my stance.
>>
Phineas Brookville - Mon, 04 May 2015 04:54:19 EST i6g4yRlY No.13903 Reply
>>13900


>So this armed oppression is also not happening.

On the contrary. It's been happening since the hippie revolution, the necessity of which is evidence of a long-fomenting tyranny, was put down with force and violence at Kent State by the National Guard. Since then it has become much worse, with 'riot suppression' occurring right now in Baltimore, exercised by the National Guard and no one blinking an eye. It is Martial Law and the tyranny our country's constitution warned about in action, unmistakably so.

>Aside from Borders I don't think it's common outside the US in the entire developed world. Russia perhaps? Russia will one day out crazy the US of they don't ever become a bigger military or economic player as well. Most of the world doesn't have free roaming authority figures with guns. They also have less police abuse of powers and shit like checkpoints and private prisons. Seriously, the fact the US uses it when most of the west doesn't is usually a good sign it's not working.

Switzerland does it far better than we do, France has it, Mexico used to have it and when they lost it the cartels and Federales took over in a good cop/bad cop assraping of the Mexican people (there are now vigilante groups fighting both in Mexico as I type this), Australia used to have it before the Murphy Raids and subsequent covert coup d'etat and assimilation into the treasonous UKUSA Agreement, Russia does have it to a degree and there are more examples but this post is huge already.

I appreciate you giving this a serious, weighted response and apologize for attacking you verbally.
>>
Barnaby Pickville - Mon, 04 May 2015 06:18:29 EST 7D0hz2dp No.13904 Reply
>>13902
I think what this comes down to here is not the facts but our values and predictions as to how things will change. If the UK police start walking the beat daily with guns then I will turn on a penny. Also the energy weapons thing depends on technology to stop them. If defensive tech matches offensive progress than it's going to mean that it's even easier for some panicked woman or thug gangster or whatever to shoot you in a moment and kill you instantly while it won't provide any more freedom against the oppressors who have armour/shields whatever. If the weapons outstrip our defensive tech that this would be good as it would even the playing field a bit. If suddenly handguns threaten tanks and APCs then at least there'd be a bright side to civilians being vapourised like that.

The present government is our Bush. The only problem is that the opposition is our Kerry. The only fool incompetent enough to lose to Bush despite being better in every way on paper. Our political system is changing though so it's actually very hard to predict where the future of law enforcement is going, 2 elections ago we had a 2 party system with a 3rd major but irrelevent party. Last election the third party actually decided who got in. This election there are 7 parties being treated as having relevant. The ramifications of this are yet to be seen but if change continues for another couple of elections at this pace that might render concerns about the current government moot.

My biggest concern is that it's not 1 in 100 dumb assholes.

I think when the government gets to a certain point having everyone walking around strapping on is going to be a good thing. However given the costs and present risks I don't think that point has been reached. My point about the national guard was not that you endorse it, it was actually that it's an example of how much more oppressive the US is, how many more people there are with guns ready to push you around and that I can understand Americans being more pro guns given that.
>>
Polly Hezzlefore - Mon, 04 May 2015 22:20:55 EST i6g4yRlY No.13907 Reply
>>13906

"People like me" aren't going to hurt you twinkletoes. Chill out.

>>13904

>I think what this comes down to here is not the facts but our values and predictions as to how things will change.

I agree. This is political after all.

>If the UK police start walking the beat daily with guns then I will turn on a penny. Also the energy weapons thing depends on technology to stop them. If defensive tech matches offensive progress than it's going to mean that it's even easier for some panicked woman or thug gangster or whatever to shoot you in a moment and kill you instantly while it won't provide any more freedom against the oppressors who have armour/shields whatever. If the weapons outstrip our defensive tech that this would be good as it would even the playing field a bit. If suddenly handguns threaten tanks and APCs then at least there'd be a bright side to civilians being vapourised like that.

It's not really about defensive/offensive tech so much as it is about who has the funds to get and use it. Police get it from taxes and increasingly from private corporation donations, helping to cement the privatization and protection of the one-directional flow of currency.

It's also about social roles. Police tend to walk around with vests. Most people don't feel inclined to do that because they're conditioned to live ~civilian lives~.

DEWs get rid of the current armor route completely though. An APC just becomes a microwave oven. But armor to deflect DEWs can be made and combined with current kinetic armor. The advantage will always rest with who has the funds, aka the rigged 'criminal underground' whose profits come from 'illegal activities' which are kept so in order to have these criminals exist as a foil to the police state, then of course the agents of taxation themselves. Mexico's cartel wars are a shining example of this.

>The present government is our Bush. The only problem is that the opposition is our Kerry. The only fool incompetent enough to lose to Bush despite being better in every way on paper. Our political system is changing though so it's actually very hard to predict where the future of law enforcement is going, 2 elections ago we had a 2 party system with a 3rd major but irrelevent party. Last election the third party actually decided who got in. This election there are 7 parties being treated as having relevant. The ramifications of this are yet to be seen but if change continues for another couple of elections at this pace that might render concerns about the current government moot.

And here in America things are still hopelessly stuck in a red/blue shift. People talk about Hillary as if it's sensible to vote her in because "woman president". She'd be Margaret Thatcher with velvet gloves.

An active political climate like that is interesting, but just how radically different are these 7? I should read more about it. I don't know much aside from the shitfest involving UKIP and how immigration is a huge issue right now.

>My biggest concern is that it's not 1 in 100 dumb assholes.

>I think when the government gets to a certain point having everyone walking around strapping on is going to be a good thing. However given the costs and present risks I don't think that point has been reached. My point about the national guard was not that you endorse it, it was actually that it's an example of how much more oppressive the US is, how many more people there are with guns ready to push you around and that I can understand Americans being more pro guns given that.

That is a fair point. Geographically the US is a bit harder to oppress. The UK has less landmass and something like a well maintained public surveillance system does the job, whereas in the US successful oppression, ahem, ~national security~ takes a bit more power. It's (the UK) also just an older country, the power structures are long-standing and the psychological power of that alone is strong. Resistance to hierarchical tax driven oppression mostly manifests in things like Scotland's nationalism, or Muslim immigrants being edgy.

France deposed the 'nobility' though and they're just as ancient. Has that ever actually happened in the UK? I know the Queen doesn't have any real power and the monarchy has this weird funding system but the way the UK operates, the Monarchy seems like it's still there in a way.

What is with UK media referring to criminal acts by Muslim immigrants by calling them "asians" btw? That is some bizarro world shit.
>>
Albert Hacklefare - Tue, 05 May 2015 13:07:34 EST 7D0hz2dp No.13909 Reply
>>13907
I can answer a few questions because this is an opportunity to learn.

The 7 parties vary... a bit. The greens are right out there, I dig their social policies but their scientific and environmental ones are a bit iffy. They also lack balls. The SNP have always been pretty cool but without being too far out there. Alex Salmond was a smug git though, but Nicola Sturgeon is a smooth talking charisma bomb apparently so they're going to be a big deal this time around. I can't even spell the Welsh Party, they are more moderate than the SNP. The conservatives are the establishment party, Labour are establishment lite and the lib dems were promising but showed no balls and let their voters down by basically being trampled for 4 years instead of dissolving shit 18 months in. UKIP is establishment PLUS PLUS EXTRA STRONG With some thrown in "it's okay to be racist" and super austerity fuck the poor while telling them it's for their own good. Painting itself as different.

Immigration isn't a big issue really, but the papers and parties act like it's a problem. I imagine the system needs some tweaks but immigrants pay more in tax than they claim overall and fill a lot of gaps in our population while we export a million irritating middle aged Brits mostly to UAE and Spain every year and a few young ones to Australia. But hey, what do I know? I've only got more economics training than the chancellor and PM put together with an increasingly large amount of knowledge on government finance too. But they went to Eton and made the right friends. But hey, austerity is working despite you guys failing to hit every goal? Despite the nonsense that is pulling money out of a floundering economy, despite the bullshit which is bailing a demand led stall out by giving money to the rich who have the lowest propensity to spend while taking it from the poor with the highest? the more I think about it the more guns seem like a good option tbh

The Brits revolted and killed our Monarchy once. The replacement was worse. We had a puritanical government and when his son was an adult he easily reclaimed the country. I'm a strong believer in revolution being a turn of the wheel. Or actually more a shake of the snowglobe, the end is rarely worth it but the shakeup is what stops power aggregating and people starting to change the rules to suit themselves once they have more power, making them even more entrenched. We are overdue a revolution but it doesn't need to be a violent one.

They refer to Asian Muslims as asians because they're also asian I guess. When it's British muslims they're british. Jihad John wasn't known as asian. It might seem bizzarro but that's where most muslims come from so it's where most muslim extremists come from. Except the British ones. I think it's the media trying to disown them to some extent too. British media is extremely compromised though.
>>
Beatrice Serringpark - Wed, 06 May 2015 00:13:07 EST i6g4yRlY No.13910 Reply
>>13909

Ok so;

>Greens
The Green party here in the US is basically a heap of fail. The fact that they have SOME relevance in the UK is cool. Here they just have Ralph Nader getting 2% of the votes in a few elections and the ELF (that's Earth Liberation Front) being labeled a terrorist organization by the FBI for shooting at powerplants with machineguns and blowing up backhoes/chaining people to trees and all that kinda thing. Despite all that edginess barely anyone votes for them.

>SNP
I like what these guys were going for a few months ago, Scottish independence makes a lot of sense from the 'little guy' perspective and they pay a lot of unnecessary tax and support a lot of unnecessary industries exporting resources to the mainland. We don't really have an equivalent to this issue in the US. Texas wants to secede but that's because Texans have something wrong with them. There's no long history of Texan independence and war against the US to back it up like there is with Scotland vs England. Hawaii has a more cogent case for independent government but there's no really relevant movements for that. Anyhoo

>Welsh Party
Plaid Cymru. Wikipedia'd it. They want an independent State within a State. I don't even think that exists. Anywhere. Are there any nations that exist entirely inside another nation? That would be pretty cool. I guess Washington D.C. operates a bit like a foreign nation inside the US but since they're also the capitol that fact upsets some people.

>Conservatives
That's the Tories right? Same people who allowed Margaret Thatcher to exist and still think the US is a British colony? Wankers. I guess they're about the same as the Republican party here.

>Labour
So Tony Blair and such. Establishment lite, I like that. Equivalent to the Democratic party here, which tells you a lot about US "politics". Blair was the first to hop on G.W. Bush's dick when he bombed Iraq, Bush is with the Conservative/Republican party.

>Lib Dems
The same people who created the UK's infamous welfare system? Neat. Not sure we have an equivalent prominently centrist party here in the US. It tends to get watered down to the preschooler red team vs blue team mentality.

>UKIP
By far IMO the most interesting party in the UK right now. I'm not saying I agree with them, I just think their objectives and policies would make life in the UK exciting from an observer's perspective. That sounds wrong. Ok equivalent here, I guess the Tea Party would be the closest thing. They're mostly sandwiched inside the Republican party, like UKIP is the creamy nougat filling inside the Conservative party. Not to be confused with the Libertarians, who are more like the SNP wanting to break ties with the US' international 'partnerships' and military escapades.

>Immigration isn't a big issue really, but the papers and parties act like it's a problem. I imagine the system needs some tweaks but immigrants pay more in tax than they claim overall and fill a lot of gaps in our population while we export a million irritating middle aged Brits mostly to UAE and Spain every year and a few young ones to Australia.

That's interesting. The UAE emigrants, are they ethnic nationals to that region usually or is it actually caucasian people looking to get their midlife crisis on in Dubai? Everyone wants to go to Australia. Heck I wanted to go to Australia until having issues with my now ex Oz girlfriend. I don't like the direction that country is headed though. Very disturbing stuff after I researched the fallout from the Murphy Raids, that whole fiasco in Alice Springs. The mentality aussies have toward weapons is really weird too. If you have one it's like, you're a criminal but that's totally cool and all part of the game. My ex used to be like "oh yeah I dated a coke dealer who had guns, I don't like guns though". Smh.

Doesn't surprise me that immigration is a drummed up distraction, I didn't think of it that way though.

>But hey, what do I know? I've only got more economics training than the chancellor and PM put together with an increasingly large amount of knowledge on government finance too. But they went to Eton and made the right friends. But hey, austerity is working despite you guys failing to hit every goal? Despite the nonsense that is pulling money out of a floundering economy, despite the bullshit which is bailing a demand led stall out by giving money to the rich who have the lowest propensity to spend while taking it from the poor with the highest?

It probably is working, for them. In the same way the Republican party here are usually composed of major stockholders in some of the top military industrial companies (not gun companies! I'm talking about the people who build aircraft and make missiles, the US military tends to be very picky with firearm contracts) and other shitworld peddlers of shit. Poverty breeds resentment breeds purchasing of shitty mass produced shit which breeds hormonal war desires and so on.

Guns would only be a solution inasmuch as they allow Brits to resist taxation.

>The Brits revolted and killed our Monarchy once. The replacement was worse. We had a puritanical government and when his son was an adult he easily reclaimed the country. I'm a strong believer in revolution being a turn of the wheel. Or actually more a shake of the snowglobe,

I did not know that and yes revolutions do behave very cyclically. There is this one picture of a massive Swastika tilling the soil of Eastern europe, the blades of which are statues of Stalin, Hitler, Marx and I think Lenin. What was that revolt called?

>the end is rarely worth it but the shakeup is what stops power aggregating and people starting to change the rules to suit themselves once they have more power, making them even more entrenched.

That's exactly it. Revolution is about building up resistance, not about what comes after. It's the disobedience itself which is more important. That is Anarchist philosophy.

>We are overdue a revolution but it doesn't need to be a violent one.

No not necessarily. Look at what bitcoin did for multiple national populations. Or just the internet in general. Revolutionizing means of trade and communication can do plenty for shaking things up. Violence is just easier for most people because innovation is hard to do.
>>
Martin Ducklock - Sat, 16 May 2015 15:54:53 EST i6g4yRlY No.13924 Reply
>>13910

Aaaaaand it looks like Cameron and poopypants tyranny wins the day again.

Here you go my UK friend. Download it on a burner smartphone at a discrete public wifi spot, copy the file to your offline computer, print out hardcopies, wipe all evidence from your drive before getting back online and go distribute them to friends.

http://thehomegunsmith.com/

Who needs politicians to tell you what you can buy anyway.
>>
Phineas Drummlefoot - Fri, 22 May 2015 19:18:36 EST 60xkHhNw No.13935 Reply
>>13910
technically Native American tribes are nations within a nation - most of the (few) treaties actually signed with them state something to this effect. That's why you can gamble and buy fireworks there. It's also why they have so much say when it comes to land use near their reservations.
>>
Sophie Haddlestat - Sat, 23 May 2015 01:00:07 EST R0sqOdoT No.13937 Reply
>>13448
Huh? You mean your policemen did have guns before?
>>
Martha Wommleson - Sat, 23 May 2015 05:53:14 EST SxzTm37b No.13939 Reply
>>13910
There's Swaziland, that's completely enclosed by South Africa.
>>
CrazyFolksTribe !loJSOMZg0g - Tue, 23 Jun 2015 12:39:35 EST koNtb9Dp No.13977 Reply
>>13939
Nope, Swaziland also shares a border with Mozambique.
>>
笑沌 !8x8z91r9YM - Sun, 30 Oct 2016 21:20:46 EST 2TrI/rsa No.14451 Reply
1477876846778.jpg -(40435B / 39.49KB, 624x351) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>13448 I say necro-bump is fair as fuck on a board confoundingly littered with zombie shit, especially when the issue becomes pertinent again.
>Terror review suggests London police forces should merge
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-37794847
>Sadiq Khan appoints security expert for London terror review
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-36400861

dusk is wretched whilst being hexed

Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.