Female Cop Shot Dead in Bradford Armed Robbery

[Markgway]

Re-opens the debate as to whether officers should carry guns?

What do you think?

All I know is that I wouldn't even put on a uniform unless I was armed so why be a hypocrite and expect others to on our behalf?

[romerojpg]

Well not sure about that, if they acctually punished people who comit crime in the 1st place that would be a start! lock them up forever or kill them and save us all cash I say. Criminals get away with anything and get such light punishment why on earth do they care if they get caught!

[biguy]

Well not sure about that, if they acctually punished people who comit crime in the 1st place that would be a start! lock them up forever or kill them and save us all cash I say. Criminals get away with anything and get such light punishment why on earth do they care if they get caught!

And the newly elected Member of Parliament for Durham is..........

Actually I think it would be a VERY bad idea to give cops guns...You lot want to end up like America??????

[Markgway]

My original point was... is it hypocritical of the public to expect police to put their lives on the line unarmed when none of us would do the same?

I wouldn't don uniform unless I was armed so do I therefore have the right to expect others not to feel the same?

On a side note: I just heard on the news that the arrested suspects were Black. Big surprise! Isn't it about time the government comes out an admits that Blacks are far more prone to gun violence that any other ethnic group. That in itself wouldn't solve anything but at least it would bring the problem out into the open.

[thelostdragon]

In my opinion, police officers should definitely be allowed to carry guns. They are cops after all. However, cops should not be abusing their position in order to abus other people. Unfortunately, there have been so many cases of police brutality, that governments seem to seriously discuss the unarming of their police forces.

My original point was... is it hypocritical of the public to expect police to put their lives on the line unarmed when none of us would do the same?

None of us would do the same, because we have decided to go for other types of careers. Before becoming a cop, you know that you're chosing a dangerous job.

On a side note: I just heard on the news that the arrested suspects were Black. Big surprise! Isn't it about time the government comes out an admits that Blacks are far more prone to gun violence that any other ethnic group.

Can't believe to read such a discriminating statement here. Blacks are far more prone to gun violence than any other ethnic group... so why do you believe that is? Because they're black? Their skin colour affects a sudden urge for gun violence?

Found this on the subject:
http://www.geocities.com/onemansmind/rb/Crime.html

[Markgway]

None of us would do the same, because we have decided to go for other types of careers. Before becoming a cop, you know that you're chosing a dangerous job.

OK, let me rephrase. Why should we expect anyone to do a job in a context that we would not be willing to do ourselves? Yes, recruits know becoming a cop will be dangerous. But does that matter? What if cops suddenly said "Hey, this is too dangerous. I'd rather drive a cab" Who would protect our streets? You? Me? I know I wouldn't. Even with a gun I'd be out of my depth. But I think that crime is of the level now where it's unfair to expect any officer to do their job tackling violent crime without the same measure of force afforded the criminals. It's like sending a cop into a gunfight with a wooden spoon. All the people who say "No, police shouldn't be armed" would still expect some other poor bugger to go out and do their duty at 3am whilst they're tucked up in bed.

Can't believe to read such a discriminating statement here. Blacks are far more prone to gun violence than any other ethnic group... so why do you believe that is? Because they're black? Their skin colour affects a sudden urge for gun violence?

Of course it's nothing to do with skin. Why does someone always have to play the racial defence card? I'm not making this shit up. It's recent fact that violent street crime in particular regards to guns are perpetrated in the majority by young black males. I think the figure was 60-something% but it was something I read months ago. (I'm not sure an out-dated American study from 1995 has any relevance to modern-day England). It's also known that the government tried to cover up these figures. Why? Because they were afriad of a backlash. Afraid of being called racist for telling the truth. Do whites use guns? Of course. But the percentage of black males involved in gun crime is sadly overwhelming. And this finger-pointing and tut-tutting (as demonstrated by Lost Dragon) is one of the reasons why people in power are afraid to talk about the issue. Calling someone a racist is virtually a national pastime these days. Why do black males use guns more often? Almost certainly culture in my opinion. The influence of Jamaican gangs (Yardies; who brought drive-bys to the UK) on the street and American gangsta rappers via the media has no doubt played a significant part in this moral bankruptcy. But, hey, why listen to facts? It's much easier to pretend it's not true. We live in a society where it's easier to let people die (and most victims of gun crime are also black lest we forget) than debate an unpopular viewpoint. Sad.

[Markgway]

Doesn't really offer any figures from what I saw... but this article http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2190483.stm may provide more background for what I was talking about. It's a little outdated now.

Another useful link: http://www.globalblacknews.com/UKGuns.html

And another, which gives figures worse than what I thought(!) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 52,00.html

[Mordib]

edit- i wrote this before seeing marks posts above but figured id still post it in its original form (im too lazy to edit it and may as well stand by my original theories.. )

what i assume mark is implying is that statistically more gun violence is carried out by people who happen to be black ('black' isn't an ethnic group by the way, but you already knew that ) in the uk. the arguement goes if this was recognised then the reasons behind this could be investigated and solved. its roughly the same arguement as the only stopping muslims in random terrorist checks one.

the reason these arguements are unacceptable in our societies is because they are such massive generalisations, men are more prone than any other sexual group to commit rape, yet when we look to profile rapists we examine the issue in much more detail and come up with very specific traits, the same is true of gun crime and terrorism, it is true people who are black commit more crimes of this nature but their skin colour is not one a relevant factor when profiling people who commit gun crime, skin colour has no effect on anything other than the colour of the skin.

its the press' fault really, when they report such things they shouldnt include skin colour in the culprits description, at least not in the summary headlines/paragraphs. It serves no purpose other than raising racial tension. at the end of the day 6 people have been arrested for the crime the fact that they were black is just as relevant as the fact that they were men. not at all.



----------------------------------------------------------

anyway, back to the original question, no i dont think they should, it would have done no good in this case, 'dont shoot me or ill shoot you' makes no sense as a defensive measure, if anything it increases the criminals reasons to shoot.

[Markgway]

the arguement goes if this was recognised then the reasons behind this could be investigated and solved. its roughly the same arguement as the only stopping muslims in random terrorist checks one.

Well, you would be wasting your time stopping Buddhists if looking for terrorists wouldn't you? Obviously most Muslims aren't terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims. Why pretend otherwise?

it is true people who are black commit more crimes of this nature but their skin colour is not one a relevant factor when profiling people who commit gun crime, skin colour has no effect on anything other than the colour of the skin.

But how can you begin to solve black gun crime when you refuse to acknlowedge its existance? The percentages are higher for a reason? What reason you ask? I don't know as everyone is afraid to ask! It's like you're saying there IS more black gun crime, but don't tell anyone and it might go away. Ludicrous.

its the press' fault really, when they report such things they shouldnt include skin colour in the culprits description, at least not in the summary headlines/paragraphs. It serves no purpose other than raising racial tension. at the end of the day 6 people have been arrested for the crime the fact that they were black is just as relevant as the fact that they were men. not at all.

To an extent I understand what you mean and have thought this myself on many occasions. Eg. If someone is described as a black actor. BUT -- I believe the context here warrants the identification of colour/race because the problem itself is somehow related to that aspect of identification. If there was no majority figure or cultural adoption regarding black gun violence then I would agree colour is irrelevant. But that's not the case. And no amount of PC wishing and hoping will change that.

anyway, back to the original question, no i dont think they should, it would have done no good in this case, 'dont shoot me or ill shoot you' makes no sense as a defensive measure, if anything it increases the criminals reasons to shoot.

OK. Now tell me why anyone should go out unarmed and risk their life on a daily basis on your behalf?



I'm waiting............

[thelostdragon]

at the end of the day 6 people have been arrested for the crime the fact that they were black is just as relevant as the fact that they were men.

Exactly. WTF do so many people always have to add the fact that the person was black. I'm not only talking about criminals. Recently, a man came into the store I worked at and wanted to talk to my boss about something. He wasn't there and when he came back, my colleague went to him and said, 'There was a black man who wanted to talk to you.' I asked her if she would have said there was a white man if he was white. My boss never asked her what the man looked like.

Why does someone always have to play the racial defence card?

Well think about it. Maybe because it is a racial prejudice people are always giving.

Well, you would be wasting your time stopping Buddhists if looking for terrorists wouldn't you? Obviously most Muslims aren't terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims. Why pretend otherwise?

We can't say that most terrorists are Muslims, because the opinions of most of us are reliant on what we always hear about from the media or whatever. Sure, terror committed by Muslims is a very active and current topic in the media. But God knows where there are other groups of terrorists still benefitting from the international focus which is not on them.

[thelostdragon]

OK, let me rephrase. Why should we expect anyone to do a job in a context that we would not be willing to do ourselves?

Well, you could stop eating rice and vegetables then. Or would you go on a field and pick every single rice grain for the same amount of money people in Asia are getting? Every day and all day long picking one rice grain after another, just in order to return home eat and sleep just yet again to wake up and to get back on the rice field.

Yes, recruits know becoming a cop will be dangerous. But does that matter?

Of course it does. I'm sure a cop would tell you the same thing. If he was lured into becoming a cop, by lies or by somebody holding a gun to his head, then I'd say, "Poor cop". A cop chose to become a cop, just like a firefighter chose to become a firefighter. And just like Jackie Chan chose to become an action actor. People expect him to do stunts. Would they do it themselves? No. It's totally common that there are things in life some people would do and others would not.

What if cops suddenly said "Hey, this is too dangerous. I'd rather drive a cab" Who would protect our streets? You? Me? I know I wouldn't.

This could result in anything, starting from more crime, to maybe even a civil war. But at least less police brutality. I know what you mean though. I guess if that would happen, people would start to develop a sixth sense for self protection.

But I think that crime is of the level now where it's unfair to expect any officer to do their job tackling violent crime without the same measure of force afforded the criminals. It's like sending a cop into a gunfight with a wooden spoon.

I take it you're talking to me as you have quoted me and hence I have the feeling that you totally ignored the very first sentence I wrote in this thread.

[Markgway]

WTF do so many people always have to add the fact that the person was black. I'm not only talking about criminals. Recently, a man came into the store I worked at and wanted to talk to my boss about something. He wasn't there and when he came back, my colleague went to him and said, 'There was a black man who wanted to talk to you.' I asked her if she would have said there was a white man if he was white. My boss never asked her what the man looked like.

I agree with that - a point I already made in my previous post. It's just in respect to gun crime - colour IS relevant. It makes liberals uncomfortable to hear that. But the truth is often uncomfortable. If the higher percentage was white rather than black "we" wouldn't think twice about making it big news. But PC has politicians running scared.

Well think about it. Maybe because it is a racial prejudice people are always giving.

Nah, that's just paranoia talking. Racists don't need reasons to hate or condemn and they don't care who they offend. It gives me no pleasure whatsoever to live ina world where anyone uses guns: black or white. But we have to face facts if something constructive is going to be done.

We can't say that most terrorists are Muslims, because the opinions of most of us are reliant on what we always hear about from the media or whatever. Sure, terror committed by Muslims is a very active and current topic in the media. But God knows where there are other groups of terrorists still benefitting from the international focus which is not on them.

I'm only referring to 2005 (and the last few years). For a long time in the UK the worst terrorism was commited by Irish Catholics. Not all terrorists are Muslim which is why I stressed "most" because if you look at what's going on in the terrorist world (9/11, 7/7, Iraq, Jordan, Bali, Israel, etc) that's down to Muslims (or those who act in the name of Islam at any rate). I shouldn't need to state the obvious - that not all Muslims are terrorists - but sometimes I do just to save getting challenged later. I'm not trying to offend anyone just debate.

[Markgway]

Well, you could stop eating rice and vegetables then. Or would you go on a field and pick every single rice grain for the same amount of money people in Asia are getting? Every day and all day long picking one rice grain after another, just in order to return home eat and sleep just yet again to wake up and to get back on the rice field.

I hardly think picking rice copmpares with facing down violent criminals(!) We don't pick rice because we (wrongly) find it demeaning in our western societies. We don't become cops because most of us or lazy fucking cowards (myself included). Even with a gun I don't know if I'd have the balls. But without...? Forget it.

Of course it does. I'm sure a cop would tell you the same thing. If he was lured into becoming a cop, by lies or by somebody holding a gun to his head, then I'd say, "Poor cop". A cop chose to become a cop, just like a firefighter chose to become a firefighter. And just like Jackie Chan chose to become an action actor. People expect him to do stunts. Would they do it themselves? No. It's totally common that there are things in life some people would do and others would not.

That's a bit like saying if someone chooses to become a cop their live isn't worth the same as a civilian because they knew the risks involved. Maybe cops do know what's in store (maybe they don't?) but I find it hard-necked to ask them to do something dangerous which we wouldn't ourselves. Put it this way: I have no fear of picking rice.

This could result in anything, starting from more crime, to maybe even a civil war. But at least less police brutality.

Hmm... I'll overlook the bad taste joke just this once.

I know what you mean though. I guess if that would happen, people would start to develop a sixth sense for self protection.

You mean like a superhero? We could all wear matching capes and spandex!

I have the feeling that you totally ignored the very first sentence I wrote in this thread.

No, I read it. I just strongly disagree with it. I worry considerably more about criminals with guns than cops with guns... but that's just me.

[Yi-Long]

Here in Holland, cops have guns... however, they should have a very very good reason to actually use it, and usually if they do use it, it will be questioned and investigated as to whether his/her action of using the gun was justified,a nd by the book...

I do feel cops should have weapons btw, cause without them, they're just too vulnerable. I feel the system we use here in Holland is the right approach. Cops will only use their guns when it's absolutely neccesary ...
That's not to say that there wont be a couple of cops out there who could abuse their power, but it is very very rare so far.

Sadly though, the cops in Holland focus mainly on catching speeders and people who park their cars in the wrong place etc, instead if actually going after criminals, but that's a whole different matter.

I would certainly have the balls to become a cop, but I have absolutely no respect for Dutch cops, and I certainly wouldnt wanna waste my time and energy writing tickets or hiding in the bushes to catch some speeding cars etc...

[Markgway]

Here in Holland, cops have guns... however, they should have a very very good reason to actually use it, and usually if they do use it, it will be questioned and investigated as to whether his/her action of using the gun was justified,a nd by the book... I do feel cops should have weapons btw, cause without them, they're just too vulnerable. I feel the system we use here in Holland is the right approach. Cops will only use their guns when it's absolutely neccesary ...
That's not to say that there wont be a couple of cops out there who could abuse their power, but it is very very rare so far.

That's pretty much what I was thinking...

Sadly though, the cops in Holland focus mainly on catching speeders and people who park their cars in the wrong place etc, instead if actually going after criminals, but that's a whole different matter. I would certainly have the balls to become a cop, but I have absolutely no respect for Dutch cops, and I certainly wouldnt wanna waste my time and energy writing tickets or hiding in the bushes to catch some speeding cars etc...

Lol, you think that's bad? One woman speeder was locked up for three days over here. The Police have, er, apologised.

[thelostdragon]

We don't become cops because most of us or lazy fucking cowards (myself included).

I don't get that logic of yours. So what you are saying is that if more people had guts, there'd be more cops? Maybe you, Mark, don't become a cop, because you are a "lazy fucking coward" as you've put it. Fair enough. But I don't become a cop, because I always knew what I wanted to do in my life and I'm not going to become a cop, totally ignoring and wasting my dream and goal, just to prove that I'm no coward. Just because I'm not a cop, doesn't mean I'm a coward.

Actually, in psychology lessons, we read a lot and discussed a lot about that topic and we got to the result, that many cops have become cops, because they didn't know what to do in life. Because people made fun of them or because they have been bullied as childs. When they become cops, they start identifying themselves with a certain group, which of course is also supported by the uniforms etc. By becoming cops, they managed to finally be someone and to finally experience people looking up to them.

Of course it does. I'm sure a cop would tell you the same thing. If he was lured into becoming a cop, by lies or by somebody holding a gun to his head, then I'd say, "Poor cop". A cop chose to become a cop, just like a firefighter chose to become a firefighter. And just like Jackie Chan chose to become an action actor. People expect him to do stunts. Would they do it themselves? No. It's totally common that there are things in life some people would do and others would not.

That's a bit like saying if someone chooses to become a cop their live isn't worth the same as a civilian because they knew the risks involved. Maybe cops do know what's in store (maybe they don't?) but I find it hard-necked to ask them to do something dangerous which we wouldn't ourselves. Put it this way: I have no fear of picking rice.

No, it's not. It's just exactly like what I wrote. I regard a cop just as much as I look at a lawyer, doctor or business man. All of these people have decided for a certain way in their life, none of which is a way another of them would be willing to go. You know what I mean? The cop, who decided to become a cop out of his own free will, wouldn't all of a sudden become a doctor. Neither would the business man become a lawyer etc. There are exceptions of course, but these would be individual cases.

This could result in anything, starting from more crime, to maybe even a civil war. But at least less police brutality.

Hmm... I'll overlook the bad taste joke just this once.

Oh, thanks master! I'm sure I would have been banned otherwise. I'll better watch out next time as you're "overlooking" it "just this once".

I know what you mean though. I guess if that would happen, people would start to develop a sixth sense for self protection.

You mean like a superhero? We could all wear matching capes and spandex!

No, not exactly. What I meant was that people would get used to defending themselves and their families against people who try to harm them. Just to remind you, so you won't jump at me with any accusations again, I wrote this in reply to this quote of yours.

What if cops suddenly said "Hey, this is too dangerous. I'd rather drive a cab" Who would protect our streets? You? Me? I know I wouldn't.

I have the feeling that you totally ignored the very first sentence I wrote in this thread.

No, I read it. I just strongly disagree with it. I worry considerably more about criminals with guns than cops with guns... but that's just me.

LOL, you just proved that you haven't read my first sentence of this thread. Let me quote it for you, maybe you'll read it this time:

In my opinion, police officers should definitely be allowed to carry guns.

Oh and just to clarify... I have replied in a moody way, because you accused me of saying that people's life aren't worth the same.

[Markgway]

I don't get that logic of yours. So what you are saying is that if more people had guts, there'd be more cops? Maybe you, Mark, don't become a cop, because you are a "lazy fucking coward" as you've put it. Fair enough. But I don't become a cop, because I always knew what I wanted to do in my life and I'm not going to become a cop, totally ignoring and wasting my dream and goal, just to prove that I'm no coward. Just because I'm not a cop, doesn't mean I'm a coward.

My goal is to become a writer, but that's besides the point. What I'm saying is that even if I did want to become a cop, I wouldn't want to go up against armed criminals and thugs without proper protection, which is what we expect our officers to do now. Forget your own goals for a minute. Let's say you DID want to be a cop because you wanted to contribute to society by protecting the innocent, would you have the guts to do it without being armed? Knowing that so many criminals are armed and willing to blow you away? If so then you're a much braver man than I. It's easy to say "oh, I have other goals to follow" but I believe that's getting in the way of the argument. I don't WANT to be a cop. I'm talking hypothetically...

No, it's not. It's just exactly like what I wrote. I regard a cop just as much as I look at a lawyer, doctor or business man. All of these people have decided for a certain way in their life, none of which is a way another of them would be willing to go. You know what I mean? The cop, who decided to become a cop out of his own free will, wouldn't all of a sudden become a doctor. Neither would the business man become a lawyer etc. There are exceptions of course, but these would be individual cases.

So choosing to become a cop means you give up your rights to reasonable protection? I hardly think the danger of policework in 2005 compares with becoming a doctor or lawyer. It's like saying that someone who chooses to become a bartender knows the risk of getting glassed by a drunk.

Oh, thanks master! I'm sure I would have been banned otherwise. I'll better watch out next time as you're "overlooking" it "just this once".

Well, as this topic was started in relation to a female trainee officer being shot dead on her daughter's 4th birthday, I feel that cop brutality gags are cheap and inappropriate. It's not about censorship, just good taste.

No, not exactly. What I meant was that people would get used to defending themselves and their families against people who try to harm them.

But then it would become a vigilante society. Every home owner would be the next Charles Bronson. I'd much prefer to have trained officers carry guns than old man Witherspoon who runs the grocery.

LOL, you just proved that you haven't read my first sentence of this thread.

Yeah, you're right. I DID misread it. I apologise. My fault entirely. I think because so much of your subsequent text seemed to concentrate on the negatives (at least that's how it appeared to me at the time) I got, er, confused. Which happens as I'm a dork.

If you wanna wrap it up here that's fair enough....

[Yi-Long]

But then it would become a vigilante society. Every home owner would be the next Charles Bronson. I'd much prefer to have trained officers carry guns than old man Witherspoon who runs the grocery.

...except when those 'well-trained' officers are actually low-IQ losers who took up being a police-agent as a last resort... like many do here in Holland or anywhere else in the world (or they join the army...)
The average policeofficer usually isnt the brightest light in the sky... if you know what I mean.
Ofcourse, there are exceptions, and there are people joining the force with the sole intention to do good, and help society become a safer place, etc etc ... but many of them are just there so they have a job and a paycheck at the end of the month. Or because of a uniform/control-fetish...

[Markgway]

Yi-Long, you make Holland sound like the 9th circle of Hell.

[Yi-Long]

Yi-Long, you make Holland sound like the 9th circle of Hell.

Well... yeah ... cause it is
Once you follow the news a bit, you're just awestruck at how bad things are beng run and handled by the people who are in control and the people who should be dealing with the problems like crime and safety etc.
Too many corrupt and stupid politicians, none of them taking responsibilties for their mistakes, and at the most they just get a unofficial warning and they can keep doing what they're doing.

Refugees are being thrown out to unsafe or just plain wrong countries, because that's what the current right-wing voters want from tehir goverment...

The goverment makes expenses beyond all beliefs, like paying 16 million euro for a lousy website(!), as well as all the other ridiculous 'projects' like a HIGH SPEED railway etc etc...

Not too mention the new healthcare system which means poor people will have to start paying way more, and rich people will have to start paying less (everyone pays exactly the same), as well as the incredibly high taxes etc etc. Education is going downhill, and going to cost more as well...

It's all shite. cant wait till I left this hellhole

[thelostdragon]

Mark, I'm glad you finally noticed what I am talking about. I was never favouring cops without guns over cops with guns. I was simply replying to your "What if...?" questions.

I was wondering about that, because to me it seemed you were constantly trying to argument against anything I was saying, although I have been of the same original opinion of yours. Luckily, it turned out that we were just talking at cross-purposes.

[Markgway]

Yeah, it was me not reading posts carefully. Live and learn.

So, Yi, if you could move to any other country, where would it be?

[Yi-Long]

Yeah, it was me not reading posts carefully. Live and learn.

So, Yi, if you could move to any other country, where would it be?

Probably some other country which has a lot of shit wrong with it

Nah, my personal preference would no doubt be Japan, if I could find a good job there. I've been there for a couple of days in 2001, and I was just flabbergasted from the moment I set foot off the plane, at how much it just felt 'right'. It felt nice, good, safe, gorgeous, beautifull etc etc. Maybe every person has a place on earth where they 'belong', and that would be the feeling that would best describe my days in Japan.
It would be awesome to be able to live there.

Anyway, my girlfriend is chinese so she's not really all too keen on moving to japan with me. She's affraid that she wont be able to make friends, because of language as well as the history between the 2 countries etc, and I also feel she is just scared of leaving Holland. This could be a problem in our future relationship, as I definately wanna leave ...

She does seem to have less of a problem with moving to Hong Kong (big duh, since thats where her family lives) and I don't think I would have major problem with that either. However, the paychecks in Hong Kong aren't big... and the cost of actual living (rent) is pretty high ... so it certainly wouldnt be my first choice (although I absolutely LOVE their public transportation, as well as the cheap toys and clothes and stuff )

Perhaps we could settle on a place like Vancouver (Canada) or somewhere in Australia. Personally, I just want a relaxed place to live, with not too high costs, normal/good safety, relaxed good people, and little to no racism ...

Ah... it's still a bit too far into the future. Not finished school yet, and perhaps I wanna change direction back into movies, when I finish.
I'll get my diploma for graphic design, just to be safe, but I really think my love is mostly movies, so might try out acting or perhaps even script-writing or something... we'll see we'll see , they're all just only dreams as long as they are only in my head, and perhaps they'll never come out