England really is a police state

Status
Not open for further replies.
"The British people are admirably law abiding and deserve better than this."

Ironically, the legendary good manners of the British people are their undoing. As we've seen in America, to gain freedom from British rule you have to break a lot of laws.

Tim
 
Derek, agricola is a LEO or equivalent in the UK. He even refers to it earlier in the thread.

I have to say agri, that you do come across as being evasive in your posts. That's probably one of the reasons you get so much flack, some of which is decidedly undeserved. Some of our LEOs post in much the same way, and get the same criticisms, only from different people.
 
To reinforce that statement of Daniel's ... indeed Ag' ... however much you may think you have answered a question, I am sorry but - time and time again to seem to skirt round issues and rarely post an answer which seems targeted and dedicated to a question.

I refer again to my question in my post #58 ... you chose to ignore it. It is a simple question and would I feel be revealing to many of us. You are an intelligent and literate man - no doubts there but - your evasion tactics do mean that the ''flack'' will always come your way. Your approach leaves folks frustrated and things end up going round in circles sometimes.

Remember - I am an ex pat' ... proud of my heritage but no longer proud to see the country go the way it has. I see problems here but thanks be - we do at least retain certain basic freedoms which once upon a time could have been seen in UK. Most of all, I am sad for those I left behind ... many of whom see all these changes and feel powerless to do more than watch and feel helpless.

I wait in hopes. :)
 
p95carry,

I refer you to post #83. Apologies if I dont pick things up first pass, but there are many points to be countered and some will be missed off; its not intentional and I do not "choose to ignore things".

Also its important to differentiate between being evasive, not allowing someone (AZRickD) to get away with his usual antics and providing answers that people do not like.

At the end of the day issues regarding UK CCW are moot unless the voters want that; they dont - however much this board would like them to, because of fundamental differences in attitude between this country's population and this boards.
 
At the end of the day issues regarding UK CCW are moot unless the voters want that; they dont - however much this board would like them to, because of fundamental differences in attitude between this country's population and this boards.

I think you're missing the point here. I haven't seen anyone deny the fact that the vast majority of Brits do not want CCW. This is common sense as they have been disarmed for years and don't know any better thanks to the biased media. The question we have been asking is what do YOU personally believe, not what the polls of British people say. They are not the ones on an American firearm enthusiast message board trying to start an arguement.....YOU are. I bring up my point again if you do not agree with us here then why bother to post? You're obviously not going to change our minds and we're obviously not going to change yours....if it IS in the fashion that I believe it to be. So that leads me to the conclusion that you just like to come here and argue. Seems kinda pointless to me.....as much as I can't stand the Democrat Underground, I'm not over there pointing out to them all their mis-facts and utter lies.....because I know it's foolish to waste my time.
 
Sorry Ag - re post #83 ... it probably didn't register as it should - and it still left some ananswered aspects for me. Thing I find a problem is
At the end of the day issues regarding UK CCW are moot unless the voters want that; they dont
Even allowing for my many years as a shooter and firearms owner and thus exposure to folks in the ''shooting fraternity'' ... I did find time and time again a quite undercurrent within many people (non shooters too), whereby they did actually wish there was more provision for self defence options, including being able to carry.

OK, the CCW issue per se is perhaps one where Brit's are for most part not either aware or enthusiastic but, the broad feeling from all those I asked, was that the ability to defend self was (in law) very reduced if not stiffled - better to 'BOHICA' then face the legal consequences. That seems to have gotten worse, and that is why many say that the advantage these days is with the criminal.

As for the voters ''not wanting'' - in fact I think a great many do but, the general effect thru the ballot box is about zero - it would take a mass protest of mammoth proportions to get such a thing even 1% nearer to the statute book ... frankly, folks feel impotent ... their vote achieves little except choosing the devil they fear least!

Another thing too - the average Joe has been somewhat inculcated with anti gun rhetoric ... look at the noises made after Ryan and Hamilton ... all geared toward ''bad gun'' and disregarding the responsible and upright citizen (oops, sorry ''subject'' LOL) .... always making out that ''the gun'' is some animate object of terrible power and threat - instead of seeing that it is people who make guns dangerous and those are primarily criminals, who will always find guns anyways.

OK enough blather - but it would be good to hear your ''secret'' take on things ... what you think was good ''way back then'' and what you think is bad .. now. Leave guns out of the quation if you wish but address your views on aspects of self defence and what you think the law abiding average person should or should not be able to do - forget ''law'' as such .. this is an excercise purely in ''pipe dreams'' if you like - assuming you might have any!
 
Dbl0Kevin,

i) i did not start this thread

ii) i did not start the abuse

So how exactly did I "start the argument"? Also whether or not I change your minds is irrelevant; what is at issue is the great deal of "facts" you are told about the UK is utter rubbish, and needs to be challenged and corrected.

P95Carry,

OK, the CCW issue per se is perhaps one where Brit's are for most part not either aware or enthusiastic but, the broad feeling from all those I asked, was that the ability to defend self was (in law) very reduced if not stiffled - better to 'BOHICA' then face the legal consequences. That seems to have gotten worse, and that is why many say that the advantage these days is with the criminal.

Apologies for harping on about this again, but that belief is a direct result of the media and the coverage of self defence in the wake of their (the media's) reporting during the Martin trial, in which after the verdict they were faced with a choice - either own up that their reporting had been scandalously biased; or ignore the whole thing and maintain their stance to the exclusion of the pesky facts of the case.

Stories about successful self-defence are rarely reported, and even when they are they are provisoed to such an extent that it makes that case (such as the farmer in the link I posted above) seem the exception to the rule (in the post-Martin world), rather than the truth - which is British justice has always robustly defended the right of anyone to defend themselves. How widely reported was
this story? ?

As for the voters ''not wanting'' - in fact I think a great many do but, the general effect thru the ballot box is about zero - it would take a mass protest of mammoth proportions to get such a thing even 1% nearer to the statute book ... frankly, folks feel impotent ... their vote achieves little except choosing the devil they fear least!

I would disagree with this; I appreciate you have been out of the country a while but voters remain very switched on as I suspect the next election will show.

OK enough blather - but it would be good to hear your ''secret'' take on things ... what you think was good ''way back then'' and what you think is bad .. now. Leave guns out of the quation if you wish but address your views on aspects of self defence and what you think the law abiding average person should or should not be able to do - forget ''law'' as such .. this is an excercise purely in ''pipe dreams'' if you like - assuming you might have any!

The current position on self defence IMHO is the right one, because it has a long history of defending the right to defend yourself, while still punishing those (like Martin and Hastings) who clearly go beyond self defence. As for possession, personally the situation pre-Hungerford was probably the ideal for this country in terms of legislation and permitted weapons, albeit mixed in with some modern elements (certain bits of the successive Acts more armed response officers, a national database of FAW certificate holders etc).
 
Readers reply:
to the original article.
Since 9/11 I have watched the erosion of civil liberties in this country engendering barely a bleat from anyone but progressives (who are seen by those in the Bush camp as Communists in disguise). I was horrified at the outright lies that got both the U.S. and Britain into the invasion of Iraq and said that if G.W. were re-elected (not that he won the popular vote the first time) I would leave the country. However, after reading this article, I cannot envision returning to Great Britain. My God! What has happened to the land of my birth? So resolute and fearless in time of war (I was a child during WWII and not once did I witness hysteria from any adult, whether parent, aunt, uncle, neighbour or teacher) and the same resolve to not be deterred from going about the daily business of living was again displayed during acts of terrorism by the I.R.A. It seems to me that Big Brother government intruded as little as possible. Have the fear and paranoia that Bush & Co. have instilled into the hearts and minds of the Americans who returned him to office (in the mistaken belief that he would protect them, when in fact his actions have spawned terrorists where there were none) infiltrated British government thinking? Please tell me that it is not so. No living American had experienced an attack on American soil before 9/11, so one can forgive the resultant shock to the psyche of a nation that thought itself immune. Here, 9/11 is still seen as the ultimate offence, with scant attention being paid to the thousands of Iraqis who have died since the invasion who had nothing to do with 9/11 in the first place. This should not be so in Britain, a nation that has already proven itself unflappable when threatened. The thought of Brits losing their basic rights because of an overreactive and incompetent bureaucracy fills me with anger. Come on, Brits. We may no longer rule the waves, but we never, never, never shall be slaves!
Valerie Luevano

I agree with your writer's view that we are seeing the emergence of an increasingly overbearing and unnecessary police state. I am a serving police officer myself and must say that we have coped perfectly well in the past without all these new powers. On the other hand, your writer was certainly committing one criminal offence in having the baton with him in the car. However, I believe that this matter could have been handled much better by the constable in question. Certainly the language used to the writer and the battery at the police station are inexcusable. I do think, however that the personal comments made about the police officer's appearance (particularly the remark about his weight) were unnecessary and detracted from the objectivity of the piece.
David Keates

I could barely contain my anger at the article about police behaviour on the embankment. A campaign by the Spectator to fire these uniformed thugs would be well received. It would also send a powerful signal to the many other aggressive, lazy, arrogant and incompetent scum of which the metropolitan force appears to be largely constituted. I am City-based investment banker, and am furious at having to put up with chippy, swaggering chimps searching my car, simply because they will never be able to afford to buy one like it.
As an ex army officer, I also concur with the point made about the absence of leadership. I can only assume that management of the Met is drawn exclusively from the pond life which it employs to harass tax-paying motorists. Anyway, here’s a tip for your readers that I've used to good effect in the past. I exaggerate my Scottish accent to ludicrous proportions when stopped. When they react to this (as they invariably do), you simply scream at them for being racist. The Hendon programming then kicks in, and they let you go. Remember, it’s racist if you ‘believe’ it is. The look of terror in their brain-dead, jobsworth eyes when you use the R word is as enjoyable as it is predictable.
Michael Donnelly

Please don't think matters are any different in Amsterdam - under similar circumstances I had the experience of spending the best part of the night in a police cell, being physically assaulted and threatened - when my wife who happens to be a solicitor arrived, she was treated to threats concerning her further career. Later I spoke to an Amsterdam magistrate I ran into at a Christmas party and he had scores of anecdotes like this one.
Should you consider a European project on police behaviour deterioration since 9/11 or such a date I'm your man.
Pieter Kievit
Amsterdam
 
I have called you on it and answered that point, please evidence it,
You surely haven't called me on the Brit press portion (which has several orders of magnitude the audience than the seven people active in this thread). As for you, you are small potatoes. I can spend painful time fishing through your vapid posts (where you strive to avoid saying anything of import), or I can wait for you to spell out your philosophy, in toto, here and lay it to rest... but for some reason you are unable to do that very simple thing which would take, what, two or three paragraphs?

You've wasted another opportunity to do so. I fully believe that you think just as I stated. It is up to you to deny it, point by point.

I got your number, A-C.

Rick
 
AZRickD,

You surely haven't called me on the Brit press portion (which has several orders of magnitude the audience than the seven people active in this thread).

Yawn. Once again you have displayed for all to see exactly how ignorant you are, as well as dishonest. Perhaps THR can establish a playground section that you would be more comfortable in?
 
ad_hominem.jpg
 
i did not start this thread

No but you chose to post in it in order to correct our "ignorant American thinking".

i did not start the abuse

If you couldn't fathom where your posts would take things then you're either naive, oblivious, or not telling the truth.

So how exactly did I "start the argument"? Also whether or not I change your minds is irrelevant; what is at issue is the great deal of "facts" you are told about the UK is utter rubbish, and needs to be challenged and corrected.

You started the arguement by coming onto an American Firearms message board and posting things that you KNEW were not in favor on this board. You have not unearthed any new "facts" about this case here. It was pretty cut and dry in the article and no one was debating that. We were simply pointing out what happens over in England and how we are disgusted by it and do NOT want it to happen HERE. But then you decided to come on over and tell us how great it is over in England. You had to give us the "facts" as you say, all the while using British society and mass voter beliefs to justify your posts instead of simply just telling us what YOU personally believe as we all do here. This board is for individuals to talk and discuss things and say what they believe, not for someone to come on over and say this is no good because the voters didn't want it and cop out in that way. (no pun intended being that your a cop)

PS. And also, being a fellow law enforcement officer I find your attitude in this thread very sad as it truely perpetuates the stereotype that police are yes men for the government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top