Female police officer gunned down in UK?

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Vulcan
Gee Rip ya really steped in a **** this on this one

You'll note he did not link any of his U.S. related sources. Also note, that when you do search on officers killed in the line of duty, about 40% of those deaths are auto accidents.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Mostly they don't. Occasionally they do.

It's worth pointing out that this was the 38th murder of a police officer in the UK since 1985.

In the same period, the US has seen approx 1350 police officers murdered (1302 to the end of 2004), excluding the terrorist attacks on 11th September.

How do police officers in the US keep getting murdered when they have guns to protect themselves?

Where are your links? I don't see anything to back these statistics up.

In 2004, almost 1/2 the fallen officers (and this includes State, local and federal officers) are traffic-related accidents:
154 police officers lost their lives in the US in 2004. Seventy-two local, state and federal officers died from traffic-related accidents while 57, about one-third, died from shootings, the organizations said. A variety of causes led to the other deaths.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6762180/

[Nashwan]

You'll note he did not link any of his U.S. related sources. Also note, that when you do search on officers killed in the line of duty, about 40% of those deaths are auto accidents.

I didn't mention accidents, because the figures I quoted are for officers murdered in the line of duty.

See the table here: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2004/table1.htm

It's titled "Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed"

When you look at last year's figures, for example, it breaks down the weapons used:

"Of the 57 officers slain, 54 were killed by assailants using firearms. Of these, 36 officers were killed with handguns, 13 were killed with rifles, and 5 were killed with shotguns. In addition, 2 officers died when vehicles were used as weapons, and one was killed with a knife."
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2004/section1felonkilled.htm

Edit: if you still doubt these are murder figures, look at http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2004/section1summaries.htm which gives a bbrief description of each incident last year.

[Nashwan]

By the way, Nashwan, do you have figures for the number of British police officers who were shot and killed since the beginning of 1984? I know of Yvonne Fletcher (1984) and Keith Broadhurst (2003) and now Sharon Beshenivsky, but I read of another officer shot in 1994 and also an off duty cop who had a go but was shot in 1988.

I found something on police officers shot and killed in England and Wales, but it only covers 1992 - 2003. There was 1 in 1992, 1 in 1993, 1 in 1995. The Keith Broadhurst and Sharon Beshenivsky killings were both after that, so the total is 5 from 1992 - 2005.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by texace
USA allows guns = bad

UK disallows guns = good

That's about all I ever see in these threads.

What an incredible thing to say in a thread that started with a post about how...

USA allows guns = good

UK disallows guns = bad.



PS:  If you exlude the number of murders in Canada commited by murderers (they skew the statistcs), then Canada has a murder rate of 0.00 per 100,000.  Take that yanks and brits!

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Thrawn
What an incredible thing to say in a thread that started with a post about how...

USA allows guns = good

UK disallows guns = bad.



PS:  If you exlude the number of murders in Canada commited by murderers (they skew the statistcs), then Canada has a murder rate of 0.00 per 100,000.  Take that yanks and brits!

The thread was about

USA Cops are allowed weapons=Good

UK Cops are not allowed weapons=Bad

I realize the mistake that I've made of not narrowing down the statement I initially posted.

[Swoop]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
So Swoop, after reading the above replies, seems no one who is from the UK has attempted to touch my 2nd question about Police in UK being armed.  Should they consider arming all police officers, naturally after extensive training?

No.


My reason is simple but won't be very popular.


In Great Britain the job of the copper is.......well it's crappy.  You spend your entire time dealing with the dregs of society, you get no thanks or praise from the general public and are generally looked down.  The wages are ****.  The hours are long.  And you look like a bleedin idiot in one of those tit helmets.  Oh and the public refer to you as 'The filth'.

Who in their right mind would become a copper?

Answer:  Ex-service meat heads lacking the IQ to do anything else and odd idealistic people......lacking the IQ to realise what they're getting into.

They're also putting lots of time into recruiting 'community police officers' recently, they look like coppers but aren't really.  They're cheaper than regular police officers.  


Should these civilian officers be armed?  Jesus, no way.

Should regular police be armed?  Christ no!  

Put it into perspective.  How many American police officers were shot at while responding to a bank robbery last month?

It happens so infrequently in Britain that it makes international news.


Leave the arms to SO19 and the armed response vehicles, these are highly trained officers who've demonstrated a certain aptitude for the job and some good judgement.  There is such a thing as a good copper.  But there ain't many.

[storch]

Originally posted by Swoop
No.


My reason is simple but won't be very popular.


In Great Britain the job of the copper is.......well it's crappy.  You spend your entire time dealing with the dregs of society, you get no thanks or praise from the general public and are generally looked down.  The wages are ****.  The hours are long.  And you look like a bleedin idiot in one of those tit helmets.  Oh and the public refer to you as 'The filth'.

Who in their right mind would become a copper?

Answer:  Ex-service meat heads lacking the IQ to do anything else and odd idealistic people......lacking the IQ to realise what they're getting into.

They're also putting lots of time into recruiting 'community police officers' recently, they look like coppers but aren't really.  They're cheaper than regular police officers.  


Should these civilian officers be armed?  Jesus, no way.

Should regular police be armed?  Christ no!  

Put it into perspective.  How many American police officers were shot at while responding to a bank robbery last month?

It happens so infrequently in Britain that it makes international news.


Leave the arms to SO19 and the armed response vehicles, these are highly trained officers who've demonstrated a certain aptitude for the job and some good judgement.  There is such a thing as a good copper.  But there ain't many.

interesting insight into your societal psyche.  let me see if I grasp this entirely.  there are people who provide an invaluable service to the whole community by keeping the bad element (which exists in all societies) at bay.  they are generally looked down upon by the protected?  they are underpaid?  why would you be opposed to they being armed?   for the record, where I'm from we teach our children to respect authority and we most certainly are very appreciative of all our first responders.  the only place where this may not be the case is in the areas of town where the citizens are those that have a proclivity to break laws and harm primarily themselves and often times the greater society.  the UK seems really messed up to me.  moreso than what I thought from my last visit over a decade ago.

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Furball
thats pretty poor and disrespectful bait rip.  very low.

its like saying how do people in the USA get drugs when drugs are outlawed.

The wife and mother of five you used in your bait: -

http://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/section-item.asp?sid=12&iid=2029

Ah, so it is OK to point this crap out to the Americans?  I'll remember this post in the future.  

Karaya

[Hangtime]

'Gun Control' is NOT about Guns.

It's about CONTROL.

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by storch
interesting insight into your societal psyche.  let me see if I grasp this entirely.  there are people who provide an invaluable service to the whole community by keeping the bad element (which exists in all societies) at bay.  they are generally looked down upon by the protected?  they are underpaid?  why would you be opposed to they being armed?   for the record, where I'm from we teach our children to respect authority and we most certainly are very appreciative of all our first responders.  the only place where this may not be the case is in the areas of town where the citizens are those that have a proclivity to break laws and harm primarily themselves and often times the greater society.  the UK seems really messed up to me.  moreso than what I thought from my last visit over a decade ago.

Yeah storch, like everyone looks up to the Pi....um I mean cops in the USA. They are totally respected there, are well paid, and are mostly university graduates.























BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

OINK OINK

[Furball]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
Ah, so it is OK to point this crap out to the Americans?

I dont!!

Well, at least i cannot remember ever doing so?

[Pooh21]

What are 2 40 yearold unarmed women rookies doing being the 1st response to a bank robbery call?

[storch]

Originally posted by Vulcan
Yeah storch, like everyone looks up to the Pi....um I mean cops in the USA. They are totally respected there, are well paid, and are mostly university graduates.


well, that pretty well sums up what a sc... er person you are doesn't it.  btw I'm not a police officer or first responder.  the police officers in my town all have at least an associate's degree.  furthermore the insurance companies pay into a pool that provides retired police officers with an excellent pension equalling their last year's salary and adjusting for inflation.  given the homes where they live and the cars that they drive I would say they are well above the national income average.  but then again I don't live in some vulcan bassackwards town populated by a bunch of vulcan morons either.  I certainly believe the opposite might true for you though.

[lazs2]

oops.. I was wrong...  http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

blacks commit 7 times more homicides than the rest of the population.  

There if we have a rate of even 5 homicides per 100,000 then if you take out the black population (of which england has little 2-3% tops)  you get about 2.5 at most per 100,000...

england is like 1.7   with 1.7 vs 2.5... it's really not worth getting all excited about... and... taking out our blacks still leaves more minortity population than is found in the UK... it does not get rid of the poor either.

if... we took out every police death caused by a black I am sure the police death rate would be very low also.

As Hang points out.... gun control is about control..

It is pathetic to think that there are men out there that think they are better off losing the right to defend themselves... most tho are young and don't see past their own youth... they know they can maybe beat off an attacker in anything like a fair fight...

and... you live on a tiny little island where the bad guy knows he can't get away... it's friggin silly to compare.  

My point is that taking the white population of the U.S.  Guns don't make us any more or less murderous than any other country ..  Blacks here would be just as murderous no matter what also.

every study ever done on gun control in the U.S. points to the fact that no gun control measure has  ever done any good and in allmost every case does much more harm...

1 or 2 more or less killings per 100,000 is meaningless tho to the poor old infirm man in his apartment when the home invasion happens... or the woman who's ex is beating her door down...  it is meaningless in the face of the 1.5-3 million times a year that guns stop a person bent on criminal intent...

1 or 2 killings per 100,000 is meaningless compared to the countless millions of citizens murdered by their governments after they had their guns taken away.

It is meaningless in the light of U.S. citizens sending guns to england so that they wouldn't have to use rakes and shovels to defend against invaders...

It is meaningless in light of the great firearms genious that is spawned here like John Browning.