I dont think puting a armed repsonse on the ground is going to make any big difference i personally think its the community that should stamp out crime.
Time people take responsiblity for there comunity they reside in. If your neighbour is a criminal dob him in.
And for the goverment ...... give the police more power and time to deal with it rather than sitting in trees and behind bushes catching people speeding.
Even better make a quata system for the crims just like you "dont" have for the road
Second is the fastest loser
"It is better to have ridden & crashed than never to have ridden at all" by Bruce Bennett
DB is the new Porridge. Cause most of the mods must be sucking his cock ..... Or his giving them some oral help? How else can you explain it?
Before undertaking each task do the police undertake a written job safety analysis, do they attempt to eliminate risk, have they ensured that they have taken all practicable steps to ensure the safety of all parties at the scene, everyone else lives in fear of OSH but people seem to expect them to operate with total disregard to the safety of themselves & others.
The delay in entering the shop is a byproduct of our wonderful new PC world where common sense has been replaced by beauracracy & paperwork, the cops were covering their arse & who can blame them, damned if they do ,damned if they don't, no wonder the cops have become risk averse.
FFS, the Singhs lost a member of their family in a situation which we're not analysing in hindsight. Find ANYONE that wouldn't find a fault, no matter how small, and hang blame on it, seeking redress for their loss.
They are normal people, greiving at their loss.
The cops would either have been
a) genuinely worried about someone armed still being in the premises
or
b) pissed off at not being able to do more, and having to hold the Ambo's back as well.
Yeah - let's get annoyed at the cops. It seems the penchant for cop hating isn't just a KB thing after all huh?
Procedure needs examining for sure (that's not to say it needs improving, just opening up fro review)... and I understand that is what's happening.
$2,000 cash if you find a buyer for my house, kumeuhouseforsale@straightshooters.co.nz for details
A very scary thought.
#1: If it is so dangerous out in the public arena, that police have to be armed at all times, then it is far more dangerous for the average citizen going about their daily life.
The police simply arrive after any incident.
(I know a few [non-gang members, btw] who have said "If the cops are armed, then so will I be")
#2: Giving a firearm to your average policeman is a mistake. The training is extremely basic and recurrency training is minimal.
Please think of all the people you work with. How many would you NOT want to be behind, or anywhere near you, with a loaded gun? Fucktards are in all facets of life, yours included. Scary, huh?
Absolutely not. "Specialists" who know how to use a firearm correctly - such as what we currently have - does work.
The level of training required to get a person "capable" of using a bang-stick is one thing, keeping that ability fresh, is a difficult problem with the resources of NZ Plod.
You are quite correct Ix. Unfortunately it is now endemic in our society. The PC brigade has made an entire industry from "procedures" and "compliance".
I guess that is an alternative method, but a bottle opener normally works quite efficiently... (You'd think a bottle shop would have at least one).
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
Hold On a Min :slap:
Ok, Community stamps out crime, then why need a police force (or for that matter) Judicial ?
Care explain quota system for Crims (Anything like they can kill 3 before going to jail? ) And just for the record we have quota system for the road (Thats the 100 pt system if u dont understand
)
Second is the fastest loser
"It is better to have ridden & crashed than never to have ridden at all" by Bruce Bennett
DB is the new Porridge. Cause most of the mods must be sucking his cock ..... Or his giving them some oral help? How else can you explain it?
Police WERE just normal citizens, with no extra powers than Joe Citizen.
In fact, that is as it should be.
In a true democracy, government derives its power from the citizen.
It is not possible to delegate an authority that you do hold yourself.
Therefore if the government have powers that the citizens have not delegated it, the government has become the master of the people, not its servant.
Philosophy aside, would armed police have acted any differently ?
Nope. Armed or not, police would have formed a safe containment perimeter, and only proceeded when VERY sure it was safe to do so.
Is this the correct procedure ? Not for Mr Singh. But for the policeman, ambo crews, and other members of the public it is.
Look at the USA. Cops get in gun battles there. They defend themselves and leave ASAP.
Perfect examples - look at school shootings. Of all the school shootings in the USA I could only find ONE where first responder police intervened.
In all the others, specialist units arrived, formed a perimeter and waited until the gun-man gave himself up, or killed himself.
(Actually there were two exceptions, where Joe Citizen who was Joe-on-the-spot took the criminal down. Not possible in NZ as Joe can't be armed.)
So, for my money...
- Police did the correct thing by forming a perimeter and staying alive...
- Correctly protected the public & the ambo crew..
- Failed the Singhs by not informing them the ambo was on-site when family members were able to bring the victim out, but didn't know no ambo was coming
The police performance was appropriate.
But not courageous.
Perhaps thats our problem.
We all like to think that in the heat of the moment, we would have shown more courage, and we expected the police to.
But in the real world, only a few of us crawl under burning petrol tankers to comfort little girls, or will brave a gunmans bullets to save a stranger.
David must play fair with the other kids, even the idiots.
I have a question for all the people who think that the police did no wrong by hanging around for half an hour after the perps were gone.
If I rob a bank, should I take a gun and shoot someone so that the police will not be on the crime scene for more than half an hour after the deed is done, giving me plenty of time to make my escape?
If I am not armed the police would come down on me like a ton of bricks, ASAP, right?
So, are the odds stacked in favour of armed perps who shoot people?
Ride fast or be last.
TBH, it's time we adopted a "right to bear arms"
There is no reason for a person who is defending themselves, with a firearm, to be prosecuted.
If the comissioner's office can decline to charge a certain politician for conspiracy to defraud and forgery, because it wasn't in the public interest (even though there was a prima facae case), the same lenience can be extended to self-defense cases.
Given the current climate of crime, having a semi-auto 12 gauge under a shop counter isn't a silly idea.
We've been conned into giving up our right to live, because criminals are more deserving.
This is bullshit
Policing was originally a partnership between the "bobbies" and the public.
EVERYONE had a responsibility to maintain law and order - some were paid to do so...
Our current climate encourages a victim mentality. Any who don't subscribe to that are encouraged to kill the offender/s and conceal it from police. Because they know that despite the fact that they were the innocent party, they will be penalised much more harshly than the offender would have been
(And I'm NOT bagging the police - they AREN'T the ones that have created the policies that encourage the crappy system we now have)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks