US cop quits 'too risky' UK force due to poor training and lack of equipment.

[sterling180]

If there is a will there is a way, then problem solved

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

If this trainee police officer wants to carry a gun on duty, then he can inform his inspector and get a transfer to an armed patrol section-which are ordinary patrolmen and women, but are armed with a Glock 17 9mm pistols or Walther P99s, in addition to their nightsticks and C.S. sprays.

They do exist and I have seen them walking around in london and other towns and cities in the UK. Alternatively he could join the SWAT units, because he is familiar with guns and they recruit officers from the forces, to save money on extensive combat training.

Or he could join the Ministry of Defence Police and he will be issued with a service pistol and he will be allowed to wear this whilst on duty.

 

[Crimson]

"He recognised, too, that many more police officers are murdered in America — 57 last year compared with just one here — proportionately about 11 times as many."

The fact that America has several hundreds times the population of England obviously had nothing whatsoever to do with it

Pretty poor math skills, but then what else should we expect from a school system run by this government

 

[Mk VII]

298 million compared to 60 million - hardly 'several hundreds times'

 

[carebear]

11x is just about dead-on comparing populations.

What's the ratio of LEO's per non-LEO in each?

 

[madmike]

3.5X murder rate is approximately equal once you account for the different statistical methods used. The US counts wrongful deaths as they occur. The UK counts only convictions. Also, the UK statistics would regard someone breaking into your house, stealing your goods and killing you as one crime.

I burned my passport several years ago. I can't be paid enough to go back to the Third World.

And keep in mind the logic on "less guns, less crime with guns":

It is a fact that societies with no guns have less killings with guns.

Conversely, the US has never had a killing with a CRICKET BAT. If the UK were to ban CRICKET BATS, the number of murders committed with CRICKET BATS would drop dramatically.

And let's face it: there are better, safer ways to have fun than with CRICKET BATS. It's ultimately selfish to insist on a right to possess a CRICKET BAT when it can so easily be used to kill.

If the UK really cared about the safety of children, it would ban all CRICKET BATS immediately. It can't be taken seriously as a nation, and can't be progressive and western until it adopts reasonable, civilized controls on CRICKET BATS.

The facts are there, and obvious.

 

[Mk VII]

don't think we've ever had one, either. They usually use baseball bats (does anyone actually play baseball with those things?)

 

[carebear]

Americans do.

Harder to kill with a soccer ball.