if i were there id use my vehicle to run over the assailants.
mainly because without COE the cars aren't that expensive. can replace without too much heartache.
'In broad daylight, an attacker and an accomplice repeatedly stabbed and tried to behead the man in front of dozens of passers-by.'
tried to behead..not beheaded...
hmm..with a RUSTY revolver....haiz...
Woolwich attack: killers appear to have been known to MI5 | News | The Week UK
According to the BBC TV news and Sky TV News, a big group of unarmed police (about 10) did arrive after 9 minutes.
But (because they were unarmed) the UK unarmed police were afraid and did nothing to stop the two attackers. Although they vastly out-number the 2 attackers.Instead they called for armed police to arrive. Women passers-by had more courage than the UK unarmed police.
Woolwich attack: Women passers-by hailed as heroes for shielding body of dead solider - Telegraph
In the mean time, the UK unarmed police left members of the public exposed to danger for another 14 minutes.
14 minutes later the UK armed police arrived and shot the two attackers in the legs.
Last edited by ricohflex; 24th May 2013 at 10:21 AM.
Back in 97/98 there was a vote on whether the police should carry arms and the general consensus was they should not. Bet they are kicking themselves in the arse now in light of all the security threats the UK are facing.
Back then even criminals were generally civilised. I cannot say the same now and hope Her Majesty's police force take a long hard look at such outdated practises of not arming their beat coppers with at least a service revolver.
Last edited by G-man; 24th May 2013 at 11:04 AM.
The PJ Tatler » Witness: Police Were Slow to Respond, Confront Woolwich Terrorists Because They Were Armed
Eyewitness: “There were police at the end of the road, they weren’t coming just because I think … they had a firearm. You could see police, but there was no police in the vicinity of the armed attackers.”
Woolwich attack: horror on John Wilson Street | UK news | guardian.co.uk
For what witnesses said was between 15 and 20 minutes – the timing has not been confirmed by the police – the men waited for the armed response teams they knew were coming. Unarmed officers were behind barriers, waiting too.
Might I ask, WHERE exactly in my post did I suggest that the police should be armed to the teeth, Uncle Same style, and be trigger happy?
Likewise, the police here are armed, does that mean they are trigger happy and many petty criminals and innocent bystanders are not alive?
I find your reasoning flawed.
one of my cousins was a cop in Wales. he quit after a few years cos he didn't feel safe being a cop.
criminals, heck even kids, had no respect for police or the authorities. more than a few times he felt his life was in danger and he had no usable weapon to defend himself.
And yes I still strongly believe the police in the UK needs to be armed. Do YOU feel that is gonna be the cause of death of innocent bystanders? If not, what is the reason for that "question" again?
let me put it to you. if you were put in the same situation, would you be courageous enough to approach the armed assailants?
just because the news glorified the few people who had the stones to approach the attackers, does it mean that everyone in Britain except the police are brave enough to do it? i think not. lots of people just stood by and watched.
and if you think that if you had the guts to do what do women did, by all means, condemn the British police
Many government bodies are slow to change policies, the bigger or older or more established country, the slow it may be. There's perhaps like 99 levels of red taps and 999 approvals to get a simple thing done?
WTB Manfrotto RC4 L Bracket
While the shooting of constable Bones and Hugh might not have been preventable in total, another example of why the police in the UK are in real need of being armed.