NationStates Jolt Archive

It is my understanding that the police in most countries are armed. My country, Ireland is a mostly gun-free society and that even extends to the Garda Síochána (police). What about your country?

Here in the good ol’ USA, all police are armed. It’s a lot harder to resist arrest when your life’s on the line.

It is my understanding that the police in most countries are armed. My country, Ireland is a mostly gun-free society and that even extends to the Garda Síochána (police). What about your country?
Most police forces in the US are armed. In North Carolina, not only are the police armed, but so are many, many citizens. We also have a concealed carry law, which makes would-be ciminals think twice about using a gun in pursuit of their activities.

Getting offed by a little old lady when you're trying to hold up a convenience store can ruin yer whole day! :D

The PSNI (Police Service of Northern Ireland) is armed but then again they do have good reason to be

Most police forces in the US are armed. In North Carolina, not only are the police armed, but so are many, many citizens. We also have a concealed carry law, which makes would-be ciminals think twice about using a gun in pursuit of their activities.

Getting offed by a little old lady when you're trying to hold up a convenience store can ruin yer whole day! :D

Nothing wrong with that, and sounds good to me. I hope we have one in Ohio; I'm not sure what the policy is.

As far as I know there are only two countries in the world whose police are not armed as a matter of course. Great Britain and Ireland ( Not N. Ireland ).

Republic of Ireland at the moment, no, they are not armed.

I grew up in Germany, police there are armed. But I only ever heard of one or two cases where policemen actually fired their guns, and in all of those cases the policeman ended up in court for that... :D

WHich police. We have federal police, state police and city police. For each of these catagories we have military police, civil police and transport police. (Not every city has the three types seperately.)

Actually it doesn't matter as they are all armed. The only ones not armed are the traffic wardens.

I grew up in Germany, police there are armed. But I only ever heard of one or two cases where policemen actually fired their guns, and in all of those cases the policeman ended up in court for that... :D

Yeah. Heaven forbid the police officers actually protect the citizenry. :rolleyes:

As far as I know there are only two countries in the world whose police are not armed as a matter of course. Great Britain and Ireland ( Not N. Ireland ).

I thought Norway police were unarmed as well? Am I mistaken?

Yeah. Heaven forbid the police officers actually protect the citizenry. :rolleyes:

Turns out, they weren't. In two cases I know of, young inexperienced officers actually fired on innocent civilians, while the offender was caught later on without the use of firearms.

Yeah. Heaven forbid the police officers actually protect the citizenry. :rolleyes:

Do all countries with an armed police force investigate their officers after every shooting? I'm curious to this although I would think they do

Generally, police in Britain are unarmed - or at least, they don't carry guns. They do carry telescopic batons and CS incapacitant spray. There is a debate underway regarding the issue of Taser stun weapons - at present only specialist firearms officers can use them.

British police forces maintain an armed response capability, with various levels of certification including Armed Response Units (for containment) and Tactical Firearms Units (for assault and entry). Some inner city areas, including certain districts of Manchester and Nottingham, have deployed routinely-armed patrols in response to public concern about violent crime - but as yet, so far as I'm aware, these patrols have not been called upon to fire a shot.

Arguments continue in Britain as to whether all officers should be armed, with some citing officer/public safety as requiring the standard issue of guns, and others maintaining that arming the police would serve to encourage a rise in gun crime.

EDIT: There are (or were) two police forces in Britain that DO arm as a matter of course. These are the Ministry of Defence police, charged with protecting military property, but not the same as the Military Police, and the Atomic Energy Police - a dedicated, specialist force employed in protecting Britain's nuclear facilities (reactors, materials storage, etc.)

here in the UK they arent armed, but i think there is a rumour i heard, which may or may not be true, that all police cars have guns in them.

<< here in the UK they arent armed, but i think there is a rumour i heard, which may or may not be true, that all police cars have guns in them. >>

I can assure you that that is most definitely NOT true.

Do all countries with an armed police force investigate their officers after every shooting? I'm curious to this although I would think they do

I know Germany does. Rigorously. Then again, two friends of our family are police officers in Germany, one is going to retire in two years, the other has been with the police force for about 15 years. I was told you have to report every shot you fire. Neither of them ever fired their gun, apart from during training.
But then again, neither of them was ever fired on, so there simply was no need.

I live in Virginia Beach, VA USA, and our police are armed. In addition, we have concealed carry laws as well. I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but here in VA, any time an officer fires his/her weapon on duty, they take two weeks off (paid) while there is an investigation to determine whether it was a lawful use of lethal force.

Quick question, other places with concealed carry laws... do they apply to knives/blades as well?? Ours do here in Virginia.

Yeah. Heaven forbid the police officers actually protect the citizenry.
You must understand this outside of an American context. The police here don't have guns because they don't need them. Very few criminals have guns, compared to the USA.

but all rumours have a basis of truth, so maybe some police cars have. are you a PC/WPC?

Turns out, they weren't. In two cases I know of, young inexperienced officers actually fired on innocent civilians, while the offender was caught later on without the use of firearms.

I guess its different here in the US, where guns are commonly drawn when arresting people, and armed conflicts between police and the criminal element is not uncommon.

Do all countries with an armed police force investigate their officers after every shooting? I'm curious to this although I would think they do

In the US, officers have to fill out paperwork for every shot they fire.

I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but here in VA, any time an officer fires his/her weapon on duty, they take two weeks off (paid) while there is an investigation to determine whether it was a lawful use of lethal force.

Is there an investigation into the incident every time a shot is fired, or only when the bullet hurts or kills someone? (Because I don't think it's "lethal force" if no-one is actually killed.)

but all rumours have a basis of truth, so maybe some police cars have. are you a PC/WPC?

Ever heard the rumour that Elvis isn't dead but was abducted by aliens? ;)

Here in the good ol’ USA, all police are armed. It’s a lot harder to resist arrest when your life’s on the line.

All citizens are armed too (okay I exaggerate but they are allowed to bear arms and carry concealed weapons in some states too).

In Canada the police are armed with weapons though law abiding citizens are not (and hey we have the 'great' $2 billion a year gun registry which ensures all weapons are registered to prevent against them being used in crimes and it works so well... - pure sarcasim at its finest in case you could not tell, the gun registry is one example of the Liberals horrible money management here in Canada since it does not work since criminals are not going to register their illegal weapons shockingly it seems!?!). :rolleyes:

I guess its different here in the US, where guns are commonly drawn when arresting people, and armed conflicts between police and the criminal element is not uncommon.


That's one of the reasons why I like to live HERE ;)

The Swedish police do carry guns. They are also (or were) trialing the Taser electronic stun guns.

Much like someone explained for Germany, most Police will never have to fire their gun on duty (only in training). Any shots fired are rigoursly investigated.

That's one of the reasons why I like to live HERE ;)

Hey, you could just live out in the middle of nowhere like I do. Not a problem then.

Most police forces in the US are armed. In North Carolina, not only are the police armed, but so are many, many citizens. We also have a concealed carry law, which makes would-be ciminals think twice about using a gun in pursuit of their activities.

Getting offed by a little old lady when you're trying to hold up a convenience store can ruin yer whole day! :D

That'll be why Gun Crime is virtually non existant in the USA then :D :D

I think New Zealand's police are unarmed as well, any Kiwis here care to confirm?

Do all countries with an armed police force investigate their officers after every shooting? I'm curious to this although I would think they do

Here there is an internal investigation in each case. Sometimes, if the circumstances are strange, there is a public enquiry type event. Very rarely a police officer is prosecuted, and nearly always with very good cause. (Shooting his girlfriend's husband for example.)

As my friend Steve knows all too well, of course all police are armed. I live near Chicago. Basically, he had a BB pistol in his glove compartment when he was pulled over for speeding. He was asked to get his insurance card so of course he kept that in the glove compartment as well. When the police saw what was in there, they drew their weapons and ordered him out of the car. With one officer holding a gun straight at his chest from a short distance, the other flung him aginst the car and patted him down for any other weapons. Damn...they really should make it easier to differentiate between a BB gun and a real one.

Here there is an internal investigation in each case. Sometimes, if the circumstances are strange, there is a public enquiry type event. Very rarely a police officer is prosecuted, and nearly always with very good cause. (Shooting his girlfriend's husband for example.)
I have heard that in some parts of Brazil, corrupt police shoot homeless children and are rarely investigated.

Do all countries with an armed police force investigate their officers after every shooting? I'm curious to this although I would think they do
In most jurisdictions a peace officer who shoots someone is placed on administrative leave until a determination can be made as to the necessity of using his sidearm.

Australian police officers carry guns. It varies from state to state, but uses of those firearms are investigated.

Quick question, other places with concealed carry laws... do they apply to knives/blades as well?? Ours do here in Virginia.
Interesting question. I think you have to have a seperate permit in NC to carry a concealed knife, but I'm not sure.

In most jurisdictions a peace officer who shoots someone is placed on administrative leave until a determination can be made as to the necessity of using his sidearm.

That post was so… formal.

You must understand this outside of an American context. The police here don't have guns because they don't need them. Very few criminals have guns, compared to the USA.
Not what I heard, but whatever.

Hey, you could just live out in the middle of nowhere like I do. Not a problem then.

I don't care for the middle of nowhere too much, sorry. Not enough fun people around... besides, you tend to depend on your car a lot. And me without a driver's licence, let alone a car :eek:

EDIT: There are (or were) two police forces in Britain that DO arm as a matter of course. These are the Ministry of Defence police, charged with protecting military property, but not the same as the Military Police, and the Atomic Energy Police - a dedicated, specialist force employed in protecting Britain's nuclear facilities (reactors, materials storage, etc.)

Aren't the police stationed at airports routinely armed (this predates the attack on the WTC, IIRC)?

Not what I heard, but whatever.

Let's put it this way...if police here were faced with guns in the hands of criminals on a regular basis, they would push legislation that enables them to carry guns as well, now, wouldn't they? If people felt they are not protected well enough by their police forces, they would take action, demand them to carry guns, wouldn't they?
They don't, so what does that tell you?

That'll be why Gun Crime is virtually non existant in the USA then :D
No, but statistics show that gun-related crime is considerably lower in States which have concealed carry laws than in States which do not.

Let's get something clear right up front ... gun registration works, but banning guns does not. Most criminals aren't going to bother registering their weapons. Why should they? Better a concealed carry law than simply forbidding law-abiding citizens from having any means to defend themselves against criminals who couldn't give a shit about where they got their weapon.

That post was so… formal.
Face it ... I'm just a pretty fucking formal type of guy! :D

Face it ... I'm just a pretty fucking formal type of guy! :D

In that case you better get a top hat and cane in double time

Not what I heard, but whatever.

gun related deaths in the UK arn't over 150 so theres no need for regular police to have guns.

The PSNI (Police Service of Northern Ireland) is armed but then again they do have good reason to be

I always thought they should be named the Northern Ireland Peoples Police Law Enforcement Service, much better acronym :D

Let's put it this way...if police here were faced with guns in the hands of criminals on a regular basis, they would push legislation that enables them to carry guns as well, now, wouldn't they? If people felt they are not protected well enough by their police forces, they would take action, demand them to carry guns, wouldn't they?
They don't, so what does that tell you?
Look up some stats on how often a weapon is used in the commission of a crime. That might tell you more than suppositiion.

I always thought they should be named the Northern Ireland Peoples Police Law Enforcement Service, much better acronym :D

Whatever they decided to rename them, they knew that they would still carry the 'SS-RUC' tag, so they decided the whole exercise wasn't worth expending too much effort upon.

Whatever they decided to rename them, they knew that they would still carry the 'SS-RUC' tag, so they decided the whole exercise wasn't worth expending too much effort upon.

But could anyone ever stay mad at N.I.P.P.L.E.S :eek: I know for sure i couldnt

Look up some stats on how often a weapon is used in the commission of a crime. That might tell you more than suppositiion.

Supposition? Lets talk about supposition: that there are no cultural differences between the people of the USA and Ireland which are relevant to the discussion here...

Let's put it this way...if police here were faced with guns in the hands of criminals on a regular basis, they would push legislation that enables them to carry guns as well, now, wouldn't they? If people felt they are not protected well enough by their police forces, they would take action, demand them to carry guns, wouldn't they?
They don't, so what does that tell you?
How's this? Formal enough for ya? :D

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1039/forrest43ww.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

In Canada the officers carry guns but most times they only have blanks in them. :mp5:

The other law enfocers such as security gards, costomes officers ,or park wardens do not carry guns but do have pepper-spray. the only difference other then guns are that costomes officers and park wardens have more athority then police officers. This is true because at borders you dont want people bringing in things you dont want, park wardens could simply susspect pocheing of you and search or take anny thing they please. :upyours: Police officers need warrents to search and hold custity........ Witch would you ratherm have a gun or control to do whatever you think? :sniper: :rolleyes:


The Iron Curten

Look up some stats on how often a weapon is used in the commission of a crime. That might tell you more than suppositiion.

OK I did (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb0104.pdf)

There were 1,045 deaths initially recorded as homicides in England and Wales in 2002/03. This included 172 cases by Dr Harold Shipman. The most common method of killing was sharp instrument (27% of cases excluding Shipman) Guns were used in 8% of cases (excluding Shipman)

But could anyone ever stay mad at N.I.P.P.L.E.S :eek: I know for sure i couldnt

Yeah, and being caught sucking up to them would have a whole different stigma attached. :D

So how many gun related deaths happend in the us last year?

So how many gun related deaths happend in the us last year?

Nationmaster gives us this:

USA:

Murders: 12,658 (1999)
Murders with firearms: 8,259 (1999)
Total population: ~250 million

Ireland:
Murders: 38 (1999)
Murders with firearms: 12 (1999)
Total population: ~ 3.5 million

I always thought they should be named the Northern Ireland Peoples Police Law Enforcement Service, much better acronym :D

Excellent acronym! :D

How's this? Formal enough for ya? :D

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1039/forrest43ww.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)


1) Who is that?

2) Republic of Ireland
Population : 3.5 mil
Total homicide in 2003 (latest date I could find) : 63
Firearm homicide : 11

I think, last year there was one bank in Athlone that was robbed at gunpoint, but that's about it.
Im just guessing here but it seems to me that there are vast cultutral differences between the US and Ireland

How many? More than would support the argument that arming the entire population makes for a safe place to be, I would guess.

Nationmaster gives us this:

USA:

Murders: 12,658 (1999)
Murders with firearms: 8,259 (1999)
Total population: ~250 million

Ireland:
Murders: 38 (1999)
Murders with firearms: 12 (1999)
Total population: ~ 3.5 million

well lets be fair and divide the US figure by 100 so it is close to Irelands population. Call it 82, thats still nearly 7 times that of Ireland. Ireland has a few more issues too.
So why should we allow more guns to be around even if they are in the possesion of the police?

Not what I heard, but whatever.
So you have info on what crime in Irish society is like?

So you have info on what crime in Irish society is like?

Yeah, they're called Party Lines. :D

So you have info on what crime in Irish society is like?

"I never thought I'd see the like. What next? Somebody'll be murdered and then where will we be? Drive by shootings in the night - it'll be like 'Boyz n The Hood'. And then we'll have the whores selling their wares on the street, and the pimps will be using crack to keep the whores under control..."

Interesting question. I think you have to have a seperate permit in NC to carry a concealed knife, but I'm not sure.

Permit for concealed knives? Never heard of it, and if it's a law then nobody follows it.

Nationmaster gives us this:

USA:

Murders: 12,658 (1999)
Murders with firearms: 8,259 (1999)
Total population: ~250 million

Ireland:
Murders: 38 (1999)
Murders with firearms: 12 (1999)
Total population: ~ 3.5 million
Anyone know how to convert those stats into rates??

Permit for concealed knives? Never heard of it, and if it's a law then nobody follows it.
Seagrove? You live just a few miles from me! You lucky dog! LOL! :D

There's a law against carrying a kinfe with a blade longer than 3" I think, but I don't know about "concealed knives." ( shrug ) Not many people are dumb enough to bring a knife to a gun-fight; they tend to get elminated from the gene pool rather quickly! :D

Anyone know how to convert those stats into rates??

To put those figure into relation:

In the US, 5.06 people per 100 000 were murdered, 3.3 of them with firearms.
In Ireland, 1.08 people per 100 000 were murdered, 0.34 of them with firearms.

Overall, the murder rate in the US is roughly 5 times as high as that in Ireland, the murder with firearms rate is 10 times as high.

UK police are not armed...but there is the tactical firearms unit :/ but I dunno if they are police.

The whole gun thing is more complicated than most people seem to think.

In the US, there's plenty of guns in the hands of citizenry AND a strong tradition of individual liberties, and crime is high.

In Switzerland, there's arguably more guns per capita in the hands of the citizenry, but less individual liberties (Switzerland is probably among the most conservative Western states), and crime is low.

In Israel, there's plenty of guns in the hands of the citizenry, but there are heavy restrictions on actual use of guns for self-defense . You don't have the right to just shoot a burglar if he does not pose an immediate and deadly threat like you can in the US. (For instance, a few years ago, a pregnant woman was sent to prison for four or five years for wounding a psychotic teen who together with his friends was pelting her car with heavy stones. She only fired at him after one of the stones penetrated the front windshield and damn near hit her in the head AND after a warning shot AND aimed for legs- and got convicted anyway). As a result, gun crime is quite low here, and crime in general is higher than in Europe but lower than in the US.

Japan is a largely gun free society, and crime is low.

Russia is a largely gun free society (free of legal guns, that is), and crime is insanely high.

Go figure :rolleyes:

UK police are not armed...but there is the tactical firearms unit :/ but I dunno if they are police.

Yup they are police, not sure if they train with the military though. But wouldn't suprise me if they did, but as Orcadia Tertius said

Generally, police in Britain are unarmed - or at least, they don't carry guns. They do carry telescopic batons and CS incapacitant spray. There is a debate underway regarding the issue of Taser stun weapons - at present only specialist firearms officers can use them.

British police forces maintain an armed response capability, with various levels of certification including Armed Response Units (for containment) and Tactical Firearms Units (for assault and entry). Some inner city areas, including certain districts of Manchester and Nottingham, have deployed routinely-armed patrols in response to public concern about violent crime - but as yet, so far as I'm aware, these patrols have not been called upon to fire a shot.

Arguments continue in Britain as to whether all officers should be armed, with some citing officer/public safety as requiring the standard issue of guns, and others maintaining that arming the police would serve to encourage a rise in gun crime.

EDIT: There are (or were) two police forces in Britain that DO arm as a matter of course. These are the Ministry of Defence police, charged with protecting military property, but not the same as the Military Police, and the Atomic Energy Police - a dedicated, specialist force employed in protecting Britain's nuclear facilities (reactors, materials storage, etc.)

Plus there are armed Police at airports, and there have been for a very long time, way way before 9/11.

To put those figure into relation:

In the US, 5.06 people per 100 000 were murdered, 3.3 of them with firearms.
In Ireland, 1.08 people per 100 000 were murdered, 0.34 of them with firearms.

Overall, the murder rate in the US is roughly 5 times as high as that in Ireland, the murder with firearms rate is 10 times as high.

Or maybe its because in Ireland we're just crappy shots and cant finish the job even when we have a gun

Or maybe its because in Ireland we're just crappy shots and cant finish the job even when we have a gun

*lol... Well, as long as we miss, it's not murder, is it? :D

*lol... Well, as long as we miss, it's not murder, is it? :D

Cant count the knee caps :p

If you want to see a policeman with a firearm in the UK, the easiest way to do it is to go to an airport and say one of the following things:


Bomb!
Knife!
I like Teletubbies!
Gun!
Terrorist!
September!


You'll have more gun barrels aimed at your head than you could imagine within a split second then. But trust me, the resulting 'search' isn't worth it...

If you want to see a policeman with a firearm in the UK, the easiest way to do it is to go to an airport and say one of the following things:


Bomb!
Knife!
I like Teletubbies!
Gun!
Terrorist!
September!


You'll have more gun barrels aimed at your head than you could imagine within a split second then. But trust me, the resulting 'search' isn't worth it...

Or as what happened to a friend of mine, she went to germany one time (late 1980's) and brought back Kinder Suprise Eggs for me and my brother (we were like 5 and 3 at the time)...the eggs are wrapped in tin foil so needless to say, small metallic sphereical objects the size of hand grenades with smaller metallic objects in them, caused an A grade major panic which included my friend having MP5s pointed at her...

i have not seen a cop carrying a gun in new zealand. they have rifles/shotguns in the boot(trunk) of their cars, but the AOS(equivalent of SWAT) are the only ones to have sidearms i think, and only when attending a raid

Police are armed in Hong Kong. 99% of the time they're the only people armed with firearms on any street. The other 1% is when we have a freak maniac who is planning to rob the bank just across the block with AK47s, grenades and other who-knows-what smuggled from China. But those are freak cases.

Most police forces in the US are armed. In North Carolina, not only are the police armed, but so are many, many citizens. We also have a concealed carry law, which makes would-be ciminals think twice about using a gun in pursuit of their activities.

Getting offed by a little old lady when you're trying to hold up a convenience store can ruin yer whole day! :D

Same here in the "Old Dominion" (Virginia).... Armed police, and concealed carry laws...

I live in Virginia Beach, VA USA, and our police are armed. In addition, we have concealed carry laws as well. I'm not sure about the rest of the country, but here in VA, any time an officer fires his/her weapon on duty, they take two weeks off (paid) while there is an investigation to determine whether it was a lawful use of lethal force.

Quick question, other places with concealed carry laws... do they apply to knives/blades as well?? Ours do here in Virginia.

I'm orginially from Virginia Beach.... (attended Holland Elementary, Plaza Junior High [Now Plaza Middle], and Floyd E. Kellam High); but live in Richmond now.

Interesting question. I think you have to have a seperate permit in NC to carry a concealed knife, but I'm not sure.

Virginia has a "Concealed Weapons Permit" that extends to any type of weapon. Fingerprinting is required, by locality (can be either atissueonce; or subject to fingerprenting at renewal as well); and the state also honors CCW permits from other states.

The Virginia CCW also extends to all weapons (including "assault weapons") knives and blades.

Or as what happened to a friend of mine, she went to germany one time (late 1980's) and brought back Kinder Suprise Eggs for me and my brother (we were like 5 and 3 at the time)...the eggs are wrapped in tin foil so needless to say, small metallic sphereical objects the size of hand grenades with smaller metallic objects in them, caused an A grade major panic which included my friend having MP5s pointed at her...
Reminds me of something that happened to me mid 90s:
We had organized a theatre festival and invited a group from England. One of their props was a bomb dummy. Basically 6 wooden sticks in pyramid form, a big mechanical alarm clock and lots of wire. Obviously they had the extra paper work for bringing this prop over. When they came over, it was transported in a special sealed container in the cockpit and handed to them at the exit.

When it was time to return to England, I phoned up the BA and the airport and let them know that we had a bomb prop that needed special handling. OK, they said, go to the check-in counter and tell them, we'll send staff over to take your prop.

We arrived at the airport and went to the counter.
Me: Hi, I rang yesterday, we have a theatrical prop that needs special handling.
Air Company Assistant: Is it bulk luggage?
Me: No, it is fairly small, but cannot be carried on normally or put in with the rest of the luggage.
ACA: Well, if it is not bulk luggage, it has to be carried as hand luggage or put in the suitcase.
Me: We have a permit to bring this prop into the country and back to England, but it has to be handled and stored seperately.
ACA: Could you please tell me, what it is about.
Me: Sure, we have a pretend bomb which looks more like a cartoon bomb than a real one, but still needs to be carried seperately by personell of the air company.
ACA: A bomb? You want to carry a bomb aboard?
Me: Nooooooo, it is a theatrical prop!! It is only pretend, here ...
(flourishing piece of paper)
is the paperwork and here ...
(gets prop out of plastic bag)
is the prop.
ACA: My god, a bomb ....
Me: Nooooooooooooooo, it is made from wood, it is a prop.
Police: Carefully put the device on the floor and step away from it!
Me: What the ...............................

So, the two actors and I did what we were told, because looking into the barrel of guns, I decided against waving a wooden mock bomb about.
It then took me 2 minutes to explain to the policeman what all the fuss was about, another 2 minutes for him to check the permit and the prop and then I could finally check in those poor guys who, as I later learnt, decided against perfoming this particular play abroad again.

When it was time to return to England, I phoned up the BA and the airport and let them know that we had a bomb prop that needed special handling. OK, they said, go to the check-in counter and tell them, we'll send staff over to take your prop.

Makes me wonder if it wouldn't have been easier to just trash in England and build anew in the U.S. We do have wooden dowels and alarm clocks here, too.

But hindsight is always better.

Not what I heard, but whatever.


Well there has been a big outcry here in Melbourne Australia recently over the massive number of firearm/gang related deaths - ie a gang war. By my count it is around 35 dead over 3 years in this case.

*snip*

Hahahaha, maybe customer desk officers at airports have selective hearing. Words like prop, fake, dummy and spoofs are editted from their understanding. =p

Course you could have gone and said something like "But its a fake! Here, i'll prove it! I'm going to press the red button. Nothing's going to happen. Trust me!"

Make sure to wear some kevlar armor first though =p

Makes me wonder if it wouldn't have been easier to just trash in England and build anew in the U.S. We do have wooden dowels and alarm clocks here, too.
But hindsight is always better.
Yep, would have been the less heart attack inducing way all around. But as you rightly said, hindsight ...

"I never thought I'd see the like. What next? Somebody'll be murdered and then where will we be? Drive by shootings in the night - it'll be like 'Boyz n The Hood'. And then we'll have the whores selling their wares on the street, and the pimps will be using crack to keep the whores under control..."
ha ha ha, classic, good oul ted. I tink dat da reason Ireland has less gun realted deaths is because criminals here are smarter! :) tink about it, which is more punishment, bein shot nd dieing instantly or havin seven shades of shit kicked out of you, nd havin 2 spend da rest of ur short life in a wheelchair eating liquid food, witout ne knee caps.

here in the UK they arent armed, but i think there is a rumour i heard, which may or may not be true, that all police cars have guns in them.

i can say with certainty that there are no guns in u.k police cars, after a couple of rides you would notice a gun wouldn't you... (coming up to my 20th trip :()

ha ha ha, classic, good oul ted. I tink dat da reason Ireland has less gun realted deaths is because criminals here are smarter! :) tink about it, which is more punishment, bein shot nd dieing instantly or havin seven shades of shit kicked out of you, nd havin 2 spend da rest of ur short life in a wheelchair eating liquid food, witout ne knee caps.


Sorry, is there any possibility you could re write that in English? :D

Well there has been a big outcry here in Melbourne Australia recently over the massive number of firearm/gang related deaths - ie a gang war. By my count it is around 35 dead over 3 years in this case.


Heh, it's all relative. From the figures being posted earlier thats about a day and a half's work in the US, not 3 years...... Say something about differant cultures when less than one death a month causes outcry in Australia but one a day goes largely unnoticed in the USA.

Sorry, is there any possibility you could re write that in English? :D
No dice :cool:

Reminds me of something that happened to me mid 90s:
"the short version"
a freind of mine once bought a toy gun in disneyland while on a school trip. when they were on the way back he got called to the airport security office. he had three people pointing guns at him :sniper: and they made him empty his bag slowly, when he took the toy out they made him throw it across the room :eek: . his teachers were snapping, but when he explained what had happened they were fine with it. :)

Nothing wrong with that, and sounds good to me. I hope we have one in Ohio; I'm not sure what the policy is.

This covers all CCW laws in the US:

www.packing.org

And yes, Ohio has concealed carry. Several of your fellow citizens had been fighting for a VERY long time to get something in place. There were several open-carry marches.

to be fair we only have 20 Million vs 350 Million in the US, and that is not all gun related deaths in Australia, just gang related in victoria (my state, pop 3.5 Million) but here is an article from a major newspaper in Melbourne:

major point: Victorian Gun deaths are 1:100,000, mostly suicide (76%) then assault (17%) and other (200 remaining)


Link (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11202534%255E1702,00.html)
Law reforms cut gun deaths
By Jamie Duncan

GUN laws in Victoria had cut gun deaths in that state by 65 per cent over a 21 years, showing Victoria's approach to gun control was a model the whole world should adopt, researchers said today.

The Melbourne researchers were commenting after the release today of a study, Firearm Related Deaths: the Impact of Regulatory Reform.

The study, by the Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC), found Victorian gun law reforms had cut gun deaths in the state by 65 per cent from 1979 to 2000.

And the researchers say gun deaths could be a thing of the past if trends continue.

The study examined firearm-related deaths between 1979 and 2000 against gun law reforms in the wake of massacres in Hoddle and Queen streets in Melbourne and at Port Arthur in Tasmania.

Before uniform gun laws were introduced across Australia in 1997, Victoria's firearms laws were already the nation's tightest.

The annual average frequency of gun-related deaths dropped by 65 per cent from 1979 to 2000, the study showed, with suicide deaths down 54.5 per cent and deaths through gun assaults down 50 per cent.

The study showed firearm deaths remained steady before the Hoddle and Queen street massacres, both in 1987, then dropped significantly in Victoria compared to the national average when the state adopted tighter laws in 1988.

Gun deaths in Victoria and nationally fell to similar rates by 2000 after uniform gun laws were adopted following Port Arthur in 1996.

MUARC Injury Prevention chairwoman Joan Ozanne-Smith said Victoria was a world leader in gun-law reform.

The drop in gun deaths had continued in later figures from 2001 and 2002 not included in the study, Professor Ozanne-Smith said.

"There's something like a 75 per cent reduction in firearm deaths since 1979 (up to 2002) which is quite remarkable and we think this is a model for the rest of the world," she said.

"The rates of firearm deaths in the US, for example, is still 10 per 100,000 population, whereas in Victoria it's down to one in 100,000."

Given present trends, it was conceivable that gun-related deaths could be eliminated in the future, Professor Ozanne-Smith said.

"If the trends keep continuing in the way they are doing at the moment, that is a realistic prospect," she said.

"In road safety we talk about 'vision zero' with a much higher baseline than we have for firearms.

"The criminal element is a small proportion of all firearm-related deaths, and there has been a blip in Victoria in recent times, but it still makes up a small proportion of the total."

There were 2,958 deaths in Victoria between 1979 and 2000, with the vast majority (2249 or 76 per cent) the result of suicides.

Gun-related assaults accounted for 503 deaths (17 per cent) and the remaining 200 deaths are listed as unintentional or of undetermined intent.

Researcher Stuart Newstead said a colleague witnessed the shooting deaths of two students at Monash's Clayton campus in October 2002 and many staff members and students were touched by the shooting.

Huan Yun Xiang, 38, was found not guilty of murder because of mental impairment but was given a nominal sentence of 25 years in a psychiatric hospital.

"Being good scientists, you can't let your personal opinions get in the way of good science and we have made every attempt in the study to do good science, but it shows its relevance," he said.

The average coppers here don't carry guns, but there is the armed offenders squad who get called out when some old lady hears some kids playing with fire crackers and thinks there's a gun fight going on.

As for gun murders, from memory approx. 100 people die in New Zealand from gunshot wounds every year. About 13% are accidents, about 12% are murders, and the other 75% contribute to New Zealands horrible suicide rate.


found the here. (http://www.research.ryerson.ca/SAFER-Net/regions/Oceania/Nzd_OR01.html) The stats are about 10 years old now though.

to be fair we only have 20 Million vs 350 Million in the US, and that is not all gun related deaths in Australia, just gang related in victoria (my state, pop 3.5 Million) but here is an article from a major newspaper in Melbourne:

major point: Victorian Gun deaths are 1:100,000, mostly suicide (76%) then assault (17%) and other (200 remaining)


Link (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11202534%255E1702,00.html)

How are the rest of Victoria's crime stats? Are they stable? Going up? Going down? I'm not too concerned about gun crime itself, but about the effect of gun control on all crime in the area.

If you ban knives, of course knife related crime would go down, but something else generally takes the place of the banned item.

checking.... also this official article - is probably basis for the previous one i linked to: AIC Article (http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi269t.html)

It is my understanding that the police in most countries are armed. My country, Ireland is a mostly gun-free society and that even extends to the Garda Síochána (police). What about your country?
the Garda Síochána do have armed detectives. but yeah any time the 'authorities' need guns it's the army they bring in. but that hardly ever happens.

some links:
Weapon Use in Crime 2001 - 2002 (http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi062.html)
PFD detailing Crime trends, tabled to Parliment (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/dcpc/Reports%20in%20PDF/CrimeTrends.pdf)
In the Above PDF you probably want to review page 38 table 6.25 types of weapons involved in an assault 1995-1999, as well as page 13 total recorded crime 1995-1999

some links:
Weapon Use in Crime 2001 - 2002 (http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/cfi/cfi062.html)
PFD detailing Crime trends, tabled to Parliment (http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/dcpc/Reports%20in%20PDF/CrimeTrends.pdf)
In the Above PDF you probably want to review page 38 table 6.25 types of weapons involved in an assault 1995-1999, as well as page 13 total recorded crime 1995-1999

How about crime rates after the ban? Again, I'm not worried about the weapons involved.

well the first restrictions on firearms in victoria were ~1986 after the "Hoddle St Massacre" when ~10 ppl died. Much more restrictive rules were brought in, including complete registration requirements, jail time for non registration (i think) and bans on all semi and fully auto rifles, all handguns and pump shotguns (i think - to shotguns only), after the Port Arthur incident ~36 dead in 1996, so the above stats will reflect changes after/during the most recent changes.

Edit:
my expectation before reading the stats specifically was that they would be increasing at a steady rate, based on population growth, as opposed to anything else, and that the bans would (worst case) reduce the rate of increase, cause a plateau or a small decrease that would be absorbed over the next 5-10 years (best case). My understanding since is that it is more middle to first option, however fatalities from crime have dropped dramatically. Unfortunately i have no online stats for that, as it is from propriatary info that i cant link to or copy (including hospital fatality rates in emergency and recovery as well as Victorian police internal data.

well the first restrictions on firearms in victoria were ~1986 after the "Hoddle St Massacre" when ~10 ppl died. Much more restrictive rules were brought in, including complete registration requirements, jail time for non registration (i think) and bans on all semi and fully auto rifles, all handguns and pump shotguns (i think - to shotguns only), after the Port Arthur incident ~36 dead in 1996, so the above stats will reflect changes after/during the most recent changes.

Edit:
my expectation before reading the stats specifically was that they would be increasing at a steady rate, based on population growth, as opposed to anything else, and that the bans would (worst case) reduce the rate of increase, cause a plateau or a small decrease that would be absorbed over the next 5-10 years (best case). My understanding since is that it is more middle to first option, however fatalities from crime have dropped dramatically. Unfortunately i have no online stats for that, as it is from propriatary info that i cant link to or copy (including hospital fatality rates in emergency and recovery as well as Victorian police internal data.


How about all crime? Or even just violent crime? I'm trying to find any kind of correlation (if one exists) between the restrictions/bans and crime rates. I don't know if the restrictions/bans had any impact one way or the other. I hear all kinds of things in the US from both sides (crime rates increasing and decreasing), so I just wanted it from the people that live there and actually see it.

police in Belgium is armed...

i am afraid i am unable to give precise details on that as i cant find it listed on a public access forum. :-)

I can say that to my knowledge, which is reasonably good here (i get some access to restricted Vic Police data through family) there has been no major statisical variation in crime rate increases over the last 20 years, other than that caused by increased population/population density. Furthermore fatalities from violent crime have decreased by at least 1 Sigma during that time.

However a line i read in a book once i think is relevent here:
But Consider this - If you stood up right now and went outside to the street, picked a random direction and started walking, without even closing the door, alone, dressed as you are now, how many blocks would you have to go before you began to lose that sense of security, before you began to feel anxious, uncomfortable or afraid?
When i read that i was of the opinion i could have travel at least 20 kilometers in any direction before i had a chance of being remotely worried. I still hold this opinion, if anything the radius has increased due to my current age/build. What is your range? PS this is supposed to be considered at night ~10pm. There have only been 2 locations where i have not felt this. One was my 3 month working holiday in the US (LA and Stateline CA (Lake Tahoe)) and when i was in East Germany (age 10) with family, cause that entire place was scary to me.

i am afraid i am unable to give precise details on that as i cant find it listed on a public access forum. :-)

I can say that to my knowledge, which is reasonably good here (i get some access to restricted Vic Police data through family) there has been no major statisical variation in crime rate increases over the last 20 years, other than that caused by increased population/population density. Furthermore fatalities from violent crime have decreased by at least 1 Sigma during that time.


Okay, so no shift either way. Doesn't that say something? I'd try to side with freedom and let the populace choose how they were going to protect themselves, if the removal of firearms didn't help anything. Let the citizens have them back.


However a line i read in a book once i think is relevent here:

When i read that i was of the opinion i could have travel at least 20 kilometers in any direction before i had a chance of being remotely worried. I still hold this opinion, if anything the radius has increased due to my current age/build. What is your range? PS this is supposed to be considered at night ~10pm. There have only been 2 locations where i have not felt this. One was my 3 month working holiday in the US (LA and Stateline CA (Lake Tahoe)) and when i was in East Germany (age 10) with family, cause that entire place was scary to me.

If I were at home, I couldn't do 20 km in any direction certainly. The statistics say that I'm going to be fine, but I don't like to trust in statistics--there will be that .000001% chance that can pop up. My life and the lives of my family and friends are worth more than trusting in the odds.

Basically, I will carry with the hope I'll never ever have to draw the weapon. But if I have need of it, it will be there. It's like carrying a knife, pen, or light. Any of them can help you in particular situations.

except that there is a major statisical change in the number of fatalities from violent assault. This makes it worthwhile to me. (1 Sigma is something like 68%, right?, or its 34%, i forget how it works, not being a math major :-) )


I have difficulty understanding why the US has such high crime rates compared to other nations with similar socio-economic statistics, if it is not related to gun laws as that seems to be the only major difference between the nations (thinking Australia and the US here, and comparing cities of comparable size)

The norwegian police does not carry guns but have access to them if needed. An I think we only had 12 killings with guns in 2003.

Aren't the police stationed at airports routinely armed (this predates the attack on the WTC, IIRC)?

Yes, that is true.

Not only are the Houston police armed, but a good deal of them are over-zealous and trigger happy.

Why the fuck anyone would find it necessary to shoot a man 90 times just for not dropping his gun (This happened a few days ago. A group of HPD officers shot a man 90 times for not putting his gun down when he was holding a child hostage. Ever thought of, erm, shooting him in a proper area to incapacitate him?) is beyond me.

Hong Kong police are armed. And we have a surprisingly low crime rate for our population.

We also have incredibly adorable unarmed (mainly nepalese) guards for hire. We have three guarding our school, they're really sweet.

but all rumours have a basis of truth, so maybe some police cars have. are you a PC/WPC?

Some police cars do carry guns, yes - those attached to firearms units. An armed response unit officer in my area, for example, carries a Steyr AUG (although there's a move towards the HK MP5 which is popular with many British forces) plus a handgun, and the vehicle is equipped to hold these when not in use, along with additional ammunition and other equipment.

But general beat patrol cars do not carry firearms of any kind (excluding the standard CS canister, which is classified in law as a class 5 firearm for reasons that escape me).

And no, I'm not a PC, but I have had some experience, and I'm not going into any more detail than that. ;) The details of the actual equipment used by your local force (if you're British) isn't classified, so if you're really curious, you could always ask them.

Ever thought of, erm, shooting him in a proper area to incapacitate him?) is beyond me.
I would agree that shooting someone 90 times seems excessive. On the other hand, I don't know how many officers there were. Round our way, we'd probably consider it excessive if someone was shot, say, six times - but if there were three officers present, all trained to shoot twice...

Still, I think 90 is probably a fair way beyond even that sort of reasoning.

It's worth mentioning, though - and I admit I don't know whether it's the same in America - that here in Britain the police don't do this "shoot to incapacitate" thing. If you push them to the point where they decide to shoot, they're going to be shooting to kill you. Always worth bearing that in mind before you take your hostage, or whatever - because by and large they're awfully good shots...

I would agree that shooting someone 90 times seems excessive. On the other hand, I don't know how many officers there were. Round our way, we'd probably consider it excessive if someone was shot, say, six times - but if there were three officers present, all trained to shoot twice...

Still, I think 90 is probably a fair way beyond even that sort of reasoning.

It's worth mentioning, though - and I admit I don't know whether it's the same in America - that here in Britain the police don't do this "shoot to incapacitate" thing. If you push them to the point where they decide to shoot, they're going to be shooting to kill you. Always worth bearing that in mind before you take your hostage, or whatever - because by and large they're awfully good shots...

Police in my area are trained to incapacitate unless further action is necessary. In this case, there were five officers, and what they did is inexcusible. A good deal of Houston police officers abuse their power, which is why many people (even innocents) are dead.

A fair few police cars (in the UK) do now contain guns, however the officer MUST radio for authority from a senior officer at all times before unlocking the compartment it is stored in. that isn't saying ALL do, but quite alot do.
There are 3, not 2, british forces who arm as a matter of course. the two above and most special branch do aswell.

There are 3, not 2, british forces who arm as a matter of course. the two above and most special branch do aswell.

Four if you count the PSNI.

Yea, police here, unlike the rest of the UK, are all permanently armed.

I have difficulty understanding why the US has such high crime rates compared to other nations with similar socio-economic statistics, if it is not related to gun laws as that seems to be the only major difference between the nations (thinking Australia and the US here, and comparing cities of comparable size)

It's not the laws--it's the culture, plain and simple. Which aspects of the culture--less simple.... :(

It's worth mentioning, though - and I admit I don't know whether it's the same in America - that here in Britain the police don't do this "shoot to incapacitate" thing. If you push them to the point where they decide to shoot, they're going to be shooting to kill you. Always worth bearing that in mind before you take your hostage, or whatever - because by and large they're awfully good shots...

American police officers are trained, when using lethal force, to shoot for the center of mass--not the hands, not the leg, but the torso.

Not only are the Houston police armed, but a good deal of them are over-zealous and trigger happy.

Why the fuck anyone would find it necessary to shoot a man 90 times just for not dropping his gun (This happened a few days ago. A group of HPD officers shot a man 90 times for not putting his gun down when he was holding a child hostage. Ever thought of, erm, shooting him in a proper area to incapacitate him?) is beyond me.

And what's the problem with that? You want him to shoot the child if he survives a few seconds longer only being shot a few times? And it only works out to be 18 shots per officer, which I think means they just all emptied one clip extremely quickly.

But, please, I cannot really say this for sure unless there is a link to the story. I could not find it on Google News. ;)

To answer the initial question, in India every state has a separate police force and there are several other additional ones, such as the Railway Police or National Park Wardens. Indian policemen carry a curious assortment of weapons depending on the situation. Often you see them carryin gonly lathis (bambus canes) but in critical times or locations they would be armed with more (or less) modern firearms.

And what's the problem with that? You want him to shoot the child if he survives a few seconds longer only being shot a few times? And it only works out to be 18 shots per officer, which I think means they just all emptied one clip extremely quickly.

But, please, I cannot really say this for sure unless there is a link to the story. I could not find it on Google News. ;)

If a police officer needs 18 bullets to kill someone then he (or she) has NO business carrying a weapon, I would suggest it displays a complete lack of control and a serious lapse in training.

Question to Zaxon and / or Syniks. How many shots would you need to stop someone? I was in the company pistol shooting team when I was in the army, and I would reckon two from a decent (9mm) pistol should do the trick. Our snipers would be insulted if you suggested more than one round one kill.

A fair few police cars (in the UK) do now contain guns, however the officer MUST radio for authority from a senior officer at all times before unlocking the compartment it is stored in. that isn't saying ALL do, but quite alot do.
There are 3, not 2, british forces who arm as a matter of course. the two above and most special branch do aswell.

:( All right - I'm not going to kill this rumour without admitting that I have worked for the organisation in question, am I?

I stress, though, that any political, religious or other potentially contentious opinions are my own! :rolleyes:

Right, with that out of the way:

You are right to say that 'a fair few police cars' do contain guns. To clarify, however, they ALL (with the exception of forces previously mentioned and areas where routinely armed patrols are being used at present) belong to dedicated firearms units.

There are indeed a lot of urban myths doing the rounds about the British police - but that is all most of them are. The vast majority of officers you are likely to meet in this country are NOT certified to use firearms, and the vast majority of police cars you will see in the street are NOT equipped to carry guns.

With regard to authority, firearms crews have an implied authority to self-authorise should a critical situation occur spontaneously. Otherwise, yes, the authority of a senior co-ordinating officer will have to be given. The compartment in which guns are carried can be unlocked at any time by the officers without specific authority - the guns are, after all, day-to-day equipment for these officers. However, before the guns can be made ready to fire, authority must be given.

On the British mainland, there are two forces, as named, who routinely arm. There is, indeed, also the PSNI (formerly the RUC), and yes, police at major airports. Many Special Branch officers do indeed carry firearms when on specific duties that may require them - however this is not a matter of routine. Additionally, Special Branch is not an independent force, but a component of each force. The list looks as though it is getting longer, doesn't it? Nevertheless, even despite this, only a tiny proportion of British police carry guns, and I stress there is NO truth to the idea that every car has one tucked away somewhere Just In Case. Even if it did, the chances are that the officer driving the vehicle would not be certified to use the weapon - so why bother?

(I have no knowledge of the standard operations of such agencies as SOCA, but whether or not SOCA qualifies as 'police' in the classical sense I do not know. The Security Service (MI5) I would imagine does not, since it will no doubt have specific operational needs.)

If a police officer needs 18 bullets to kill someone then he (or she) has NO business carrying a weapon, I would suggest it displays a complete lack of control and a serious lapse in training.

Question to Zaxon and / or Syniks. How many shots would you need to stop someone? I was in the company pistol shooting team when I was in the army, and I would reckon two from a decent (9mm) pistol should do the trick. Our snipers would be insulted if you suggested more than one round one kill.

Depends on the person being shot. There are those that take a good 11 rounds of 9mm and stay standing and have to be wrestled to the ground, and those that take one and drop instantly. Drugs, physical condition, and mental condition are all huge factors in resisting temporary cavity wounds. Regardless of the number of times hit, they still have a 60% chance of survival after being shot (I'm guessing it's higher for single shot instances and lower for multi-shot instances).

Several departments are moving away from the 9mm because it won't penetrate properly, takes more hits to drop a target, etc. They have been moving to rounds such as the .40 Smith and Wesson, 10mm, the .357SIG, as well as back to the venerable .45ACP which can deposit more energy into the target, to disrupt nerve impulses by creating larger temporary cavities and hitting vital organs.

Self defense pistol classes say to shoot until they aren't standing because you are already within sprinting distance, and you don't know if they've been hit in a place that will drop the attacker. Shots to the heart may not stop an attacker for up to a minute (easily enough time to get to you from 30 feet). The only way to instantly stop an attacker is to hit their spine or brain stem and disrupting the nerve impulses to the muscles (not the easiest targets in the universe--especially if the target is moving--given that they are at the rear of the target).

Snipers wait until the target is moving very slowly, or stopped. Hitting a moving target at even 10 yards isn't easy in any sense (this is what I love about those reactionists who claim that a .50 cal will drop a plane out of the sky--won't happen with one shot--won't even hit the thing). A police officer has the worst target possible--a variable rate moving target that stops and starts and zig-zags. 18 rounds in a pistol may very well not be enough to even hit the target.

Let's put it this way, I will shoot until the target drops, runs away, or I'm out of ammunition. Hopefully, nine rounds of .45ACP EFMJ (Expanding Full Metal Jacket) will be enough. Actually, I hope just seeing the Glock 30 that I carry will be enough for the assailant to leave the area.

To answer the initial question, in India every state has a separate police force and there are several other additional ones, such as the Railway Police or National Park Wardens. Indian policemen carry a curious assortment of weapons depending on the situation. Often you see them carryin gonly lathis (bambus canes) but in critical times or locations they would be armed with more (or less) modern firearms.

There is a central reserve police force (CRPF) which is under the central governments control. Well equipped and trained and are currently employed in Kashmir replacing the BSF (Border security force). Other Special police divisions like the riot police, special task force etc are well equipped.

Regarding State police, the less said the better. Corrupt and politicised and most often are not effectively equipped and often it will be facing criminals having better weapons than the police. You can see vintage WW II type rifles in police stations in rural areas :D The sight of a physically unfit cop with a huge belly (the butt of the jokes in Indian circles) with a WW II rifle will bring laughter to a criminal...

It is my understanding that the police in most countries are armed. My country, Ireland is a mostly gun-free society and that even extends to the Garda Síochána (police). What about your country?
The police in Australia seem to mostly have their arms. In fact, I've never seen an armless cop.

(I'm sure this joke has been made by now, but I can't pass up such an obvious bad joke!)

Yes, Here in dublin they are not armed. but after the attacks in london i saw some armed gardi with machine guns in st stephens green. I wish they had guns. id feel more protected