Originally Posted by Lutherf (Post 35959853)

The UK, unfortunately, has had too much experience with terror incidents. From 40 years ago until the Good Friday Agreement the incidents were counted by the bushel rather than by the peck. It would be easy to imagine that with all that experience in tracking and stopping incidents someone would have come up with a good solution to the problem. There isn't one.

Security services, as always, need to keep their ears to the walls and their eyes open. That's good advice for the public at large as well. Personally, I have a hard time blaming the state for failure to prevent attacks like what happened Monday. They can protect assets to come extent but it's nearly impossible to protect all people at all times.

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas (Post 35959859)

Oh I dunno - a basic "all officers should be armed" policy would do some good ; I dunno say if she was...Home sec?

Instead she focused all her energy on her pet projects, like immigration...forgot that in restricting immigration entry, the ones that were left all had access to attack unarmed civilians etc.

Forgetting that though - just having basic stuff like armed officers protecting parliament and it's surroundings would be something but that woman decides to never advocate for it, even once in 7 years...

Originally Posted by Mick

Now being treated as a Terrorist incident.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35960224)

He should be deported. He received British citizenship, just weeks earlier I believe and he does a crazy nut job attack like this.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35960233)

He would have been a lot easier to deport if he did this before becoming a British Citizen.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 35959934)

We really don't want to arm our police.

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas (Post 35960239)

Argh, this is the kind of post that sickens me. Mick...just recently I was saying that Brits are the most passive people on the planet...this is an example. I don't think that it is necessarily indicative of what kind of person she is altogether but this kind of view irritates me. This is part of the reason that I can't see an armed insurrection anytime soon - our populace is too cowardly to even arm the police, let alone anything else.

It kind of reminds me of when John Boehner was talking about why Republicans wouldn't get immigration reform through the house anytime soon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHSWe81f3yw

He knew that there was a camera and that his comments make get noticed but he didn't care - to that extent I know that mine may offend some but ultimately this is preposterous.

I dunno why but this country has a knack of having very feeble attitudes to things that they think are "scary" or "bad" or "mean"...not people, but objects. (Inanimate or otherwise).

Not just over objects though or items, like guns. Everything from privatized healthcare to certain types of food (containing certain ingredients) to certain ownership of animals to everything.

Every nation on the planet has it to some extent but nothing that I have ever seen like this - it is just part of the household furniture in the UK. (Though honestly, they're probably worried about that, too). We are pretty much, a nation of hypochondriacs / unnecessarily passively paranoid people.

The logic behind it all is preposterous, too.

"we really don't want to arm our police"?? No kidding, the things most Brits are most vocal about is banning shit. (For no good reason).

Of course you don't. I do...you don't speak for me. I am not afraid of a gun, nor the idea of a police officer who is otherwise trusted in every other way (cleared / vetted etc), to use a weapon.

It is not too hard, not too difficult - it is a very simple application of weapon that will serve as a huge deterrent.

If you don't think that Parliament houses themselves should be protected with armed officers I don't really think that there is much point in continuing this conversation.




That is not even remotely accurate! As a percentage, the number of British officers armed (as a proportionate amount of all police officers) is very minute. I think that it is just counter terrorism / flying and burglary squad plus special forces and ops that use guns routinely in the UK police services. It could be slightly different but just about every other country in the world arms it's officers...the UK is apparently different for some reason. (Along with like New Zealand / Iceland and a couple others). It is absurd.

The philosophy is just skewed, something that I would pillory all day. The facts are just outright wrong.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35960245)

Not a member of the NRA are you Chloe?

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas (Post 35960252)

No but I am not sure why that would be pertinent.

Given that umm the NRA is America's longest-standing civil rights organization, defending one of the Bill of rights, the second amendment.

I was advocating for police officers to be armed - not for the civil liberties of civilians to be protected...you seem to be ever so slightly confused here.