I understand class warfare and fighting for rights and justice and what not (not saying that's what's going on or anything, but I do try to see both sides), but for the life of me, I'll never understand why destroying and looting private property and terrorizing hard working, normal people will stick it to the police and people in government. To actually change things, you have to create a sense of solidarity among all people. Destroying their property is just pissing people off, with good reason. But by all accounts, the riots are no longer about making a stand against injustice. Just a bunch of idiot kids who call themselves anarchists trying to wreak as much havoc as humanly possible.
Police? Who needs the police? Last time i had trouble on the block i went out with an old revolver. the damn thing hadn't been fired in fifty years, it wasn't even loaded. In fact, I'm pretty sure it doesn't even have a firing pin. but its the thought that counts.
Isn't gun ownership in Sweden pretty high, 30+ guns per 100 people I believe? I would have thought in a country where other people have plenty of guns, waving one round that can't actually defend you is a pretty stupid thing to do...
The laws may be pretty strict, but there are still 30+ guns per 100 people regardless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_gun_ownership
Entirely true of course, but it's instinct propelling rioters, not logic. When they feel frustrated, powerless and/or victims of injustice (like you, I'm not affirming or dismissing anything here), the inner ape tells them to form a group and run around the savannah screaming and hooting, throwing rocks and dragging branches around. The commotion will scare off rivals or predators, etc, etc, blah blah blah. It's not a reasoned or effective response to the problem (the rioters are just fouling their own nest on multiple levels and alienating everyone) but the whole point is that the response isn't reason - it's instinct. And, not wanting to be grossly judgemental here, but for various social and economic reasons the people in the inner city areas so very often operate on survival instinct, more so than others. And different people have different responses to social affairs. Your comment suggests to me that your mind works like mine - your instinctive understandings are based on community and belonging, so you seek to encourage solidarity and mutual care as a response to underlying social problems. Many people, however, operate on a tribal basis, where the response is to jocky for power and influence against other subdivisions of society. And when that way of thinking meets the survivalist instincts of the economically deprived inner city, the illogical but natural way to respond is to hurl things, to hoot and smash.
Well, all I can say is I hope you stay safe, guys. One of our business partners in the UK have their offices in Crowthorne, I hope they're staying safe as well.
Don't we have a member here who is a member of the UK police? I can't remember his name at the moment....
Didn't this all start because the cops shot someone...? AFAIK they're not allowed to use water cannons, rubber/plastic bullets, or anything else to contain a riot...
I tried to touch base with Hoshi's sis. I also sent an e-mail to a mutual friend in another part of England, who might have reached her by phone. No replies yet. ETA: Our mutual friend responded and said it's school holiday time so Hoshi's sis might be on vacation. I hope that's the case.
Given the nature of the comment I'm going to assume you're not British. If our Police were armed it's more likely the criminals would arm themselves in response. It should also be noted that the scenes over the last few days are the exception rather than the rule, it easy to make knee jerk reactions and to say well if the Police were armed it would have been different. Which might be true but different in a good way? And remember this falred up after a Police shooting, though people were holding a peacful demonstration regarding that until it was high-jacked. It might be the sunner holidays and schools are out but that isn't an excuse. Nor is the well there is nothing for them to do. Quite a few people on these boards will remember a time before Computers (or very basic ones compared to day, the Spextrum, Amiga etc..), the Interent, games consoles, cinema multiplexes, remember 3 channel TV instead of the dozens/hundreds of channels we have now. What needs to be done is to instill a respect for the law in people, the justice system to favour the victim and not the perp. You can try and blame some of the issues on the government but rioting is not the right way to go about affecting change. Write to your MP, organise a peaceful demonstration, create an e-petition (if it gets over 100 000 signatures) it might be debated in Parliament and of course voice your opinion at the ballot box. You won't always get the party you voted for forming the Government but that's democracy. The sad thing is that what a lot of these young people who engaged in the riots and have been caught and convicted don't release that they have made their future prospects worse.
No if there is something i've learned about brits over the years is that they're incredibly idealistic. But please tell me you dont actually belive that? if there is a need for weapos they will get them. And the only thing the cops will accomplish is dwindling numbers. The town i live in is the center of crime in the entire country. We have everything from guns, drugs to trafficing going through the docks. We have unarmed police too. Well batons dont count. And they dont do a helluva lot of good. I actually patched up a police officer the other day. Five against one. No matter the training. He was screwed. Now if unarmed police officers are so common as you say, i'm stunmed that there still is a Britain left.
Excuse me, but it seems pretty dumb to think the criminals aren't already armed; that's what the black market's for. That's what's ironic about excessive gun laws--they just make sure that only law-abiding people are defenseless. I mean, I don't think citizens need to have military weapons (no AK-47's or other fully-automatic military rifles, RPG's, and so on), but I see nothing wrong with owning a pistol or a rifle if you take the proper training to make sure you know how to handle and safely secure your weapon. Training which ought to be mandatory but reasonable (i.e. not making the requirements so strict that a reasonable person cannot qualify).
Considering the fact that Britain continues to exist, does that not prove to you that what you consider to be common sense is actually wrong? It's the same in Ireland, our police force, the Garda Síochána, are predominantly made up of unarmed officers with armed response units for situations where firearms are necessary. As the first commissioner of the force once said: "The Garda Síochána will succeed not by force of arms or numbers, but on their moral authority as servants of the people." Idealism? Sure, but it works for us, so get over it.
From a practical standpoint, doesn't the lack of firearms in the hands of the first responders contribute to further death and injury in the case where a criminal is armed? To then have to wait for an armed unit to arrive--that means in effect the armed criminal knows he or she has a certain time in which the police can be held hostage and they can kill or maim with impunity.
According to the Garda website, 83 officers have died since the creation of the force in 1923, far and away the majority of those are due to vehicular collisions, and the most recent officer to die of a gun-related incident was in 2001. And from what I can gather, he was a member of the Special Detective Unit, which are armed. So it would appear that no, unarmed officers being shot and killed in the line of duty is uncommon. If I was to hazzard a guess why this is then I would say it is possibly because an unarmed force gives armed criminals less... necessity to fire their weapons. If you foe is only armed with a truncheon, why shoot when you can run?