Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: The gun goofball philosophy ;-)

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Fred J. McCall

unread,
Dec 30, 2009, 12:26:43 PM12/30/09
to
"Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

:
:Licensed to carry....doesn't say anything about how many were trained or
:fired a gun at some point during their training.
:

"As of 2005, around seven per cent of officers in London are trained
in the use of firearms."

"On 24 August 1985 John Shorthouse aged 5 was shot dead in a police
raid on his home in Birmingham. The incident produced hostility
towards the police over two days after John's death when a policewoman
was dragged from her patrol car and beaten by youths. PC Brian
Chester, stood trial for manslaughter but was acquitted. Following the
Shorthouse case, West Midlands police abandoned its practice of
training rank-and-file officers for firearms duties and formed a
specialist squad."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_use_of_firearms_in_the_United_Kingdom


:
:Sorry, all you've shown is that few are permitted to carry guns. Says
:nothing about how many have trained with guns.
:

See above. In London it's 7%. That would be like NYC or LA only
having 7% of their officers trained with firearms.

:
:In fact, to set matters straight let's check to see what I actually said:
:
:"Sure, but I bet they still have to learn how to shoot, even though they
:don't regularly carry."
:
:Now how is that anything other than an expression of personal opinion?
:

It's wrong. They aren't.

:
:It's certainly not a claim of anything more than my belief that British
:police still have to learn how to shoot, and that I'm willing to make a bet
:to that effect.
:

You lose. The figure is 7% for all of London.

:
:So, you're reading a whole lot more into it than what was said, since the
:only claim is that I would bet that my opinion is right. That's it. That's
:the only claim being made.
:

How is stating an opinion and then claiming it is correct any
different than simply claiming something? This is a difference that
it would appear makes no difference.

:
:So who is making shit up?
:

Scoot, SappyIsMe, and Wee Willie Black.


--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates

William Black

unread,
Dec 30, 2009, 2:15:17 PM12/30/09
to

Well in this instance you're defending me.

Which is a nice change, I think...

--
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.

Fred J. McCall

unread,
Jan 3, 2010, 12:47:13 PM1/3/10
to
William Black <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

:

I defend the facts, Willie. That leaves me on your side in the
minority of cases, but here you seem to have hooked a real idiot.


--
"The odds get even - You blame the game.
The odds get even - The stakes are the same.
You bet your life."
-- "You Bet Your Life", Rush

Scout

unread,
Dec 30, 2009, 7:20:55 PM12/30/09
to
Fred J. McCall wrote:
> "Scout" <me4...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Licensed to carry....doesn't say anything about how many were
>> trained or fired a gun at some point during their training.
>>
>
> "As of 2005, around seven per cent of officers in London are trained
> in the use of firearms."

Better, however this still doesn't establish they haven't shot a gun, much
less touched one in the course of their duties. After all, I suspect that
pretty much every cop is going to have a gun demonstrated to them, given
hands on demonstrations of how to clear and secure firearms that they might
come upon in the course of their duties. So while only a few are certified
as trained that's still a long way from saying they have never fired a gun,
held a gun or touched a gun in the course of their duties.

<snip>


0 new messages