# Gun control and the London attack



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Watched Fox News this morning and they had a segment on the BRAVE police. That first responded to the attackers in London. Well in some form of wisdom they were unarmed. In fact the officers only had sticks or batons. Which of course some got stabbed, in the face, neck and arms while trying to save lives. BRAVELY risking their own safety, with a stick. AFTER 2 PRIOR ATTACKS IN AS MANY MONTHS.

Yes that's right. Go out on patrol against terrorist trying to kill as many people as possible and here's your stick. Gun with nonlethal rubber bullets, taser, pepper spray, NNOOOO here's your stick. Well it only took the officers, with guns. 8 minutes to respond and finally save the day. I bet that was the longest 8 minutes in those poor stick yielding officers lives.

Now, could the great citizens of London come to the aid of the poor officers fighting for everyone's lives. NO they are also unarmed, of course. They got tweets from the police to "RUN, HIDE, TELL". WTF is the British government thinking????

Why the POS mooselimb pricks haven't tried this in the US. Cause they would be gunned down in the street's by the cops or armed citizens. Gun control what a joke. I think I'll go out back and practice some gun control. Maybe I'll one day my crack at moohamit.


----------



## Antonio Francis (May 29, 2017)

"Why the POS mooselimb pricks haven't tried this in the US. Cause they would be gunned down in the street's by the cops or armed citizens."

100% agree. Couldnt write my feelings about this better than you did.

World is becoming super dangerous and politicians and "forces" dont understand this.


----------



## stowlin (Apr 25, 2016)

I'm fairly certain the liberal response would be look, gun control worked, the terrorist had to use a van and knives. In America they'd have rifles and kill far more people. 

Police get a lot of flak in our country and often earned, but it's hard to deny that most of them will run to trouble not away from it. I read the first officer to encounter them was off duty and he was using a chair to engage them.


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

While I carry "frequently", but not always, that is going to change. I really need to get the wife into carrying.


----------



## mikes (Apr 20, 2017)

I like watching UK, Australian and New Zealand police shows similar to the US "Cops". Their outlooks on guns are stupid. Actually I watched a UK episode last night that the officer said basically he was scared of guns. The UK might not have a lot of gun crime but their knife crime is high.

And yes, you'd think they would arm more officers because of the increase of these attacks.

I carry my Glock most of the time. The only time I don't is at work. 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Illini Warrior (Jan 24, 2015)

mikes said:


> I like watching UK, Australian and New Zealand police shows similar to the US "Cops". Their outlooks on guns are stupid. Actually I watched a UK episode last night that the officer said basically he was scared of guns. The UK might not have a lot of gun crime but their knife crime is high.
> 
> And yes, you'd think they would arm more officers because of the increase of these attacks.
> 
> ...


simple answer - nope - very likely increase the numbers of these patrolling specially armed squads - possibly more of the weapons carriers for arming the regular bobbies .... but you won't be seeing holstered weapons and God forbid slung long guns ....


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Chipper said:


> Why the POS mooselimb pricks haven't tried this in the US. Cause they would be gunned down in the street's by the cops or armed citizens. Gun control what a joke. I think I'll go out back and practice some gun control. Maybe I'll one day my crack at moohamit.


This is the way it should be. But we have anti American politicians trying at all levels to remove our right.

I go nowhere unarmed, even my yard.

Paranoid? no just cautious. An attack can happen anywhere at anytime.

We are due for one here, I don't intend on being a statistic.

I don't plan on standing there in an event with one thumb in my ass and one in my mouth playing switch.

I may die, but I sure as hell am not going as a sheep on my knees.


----------



## Oddcaliber (Feb 17, 2014)

Another prime example of a stupid law!


----------



## Moonshinedave (Mar 28, 2013)

paraquack said:


> While I carry "frequently", but not always, that is going to change. I really need to get the wife into carrying.


There's times I head out for just a little errant, I sometimes think "'I'm not putting on my weapon, I'll just be a few minutes". Then I stop and think, it's going to be one of those Ï ain't gonna carry times, when I am , for once in my life, gonna need it" I put it on, when I go out, the only place I don't carry is at work, (and then there's one in my auto) and anywhere it's illegal, which is very few places here in WV.


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

I just renewed my five-year CCW license. I carry everyday. You cannot schedule an emergency.


----------



## RJAMES (Dec 23, 2016)

I agree the British police should be armed. 

However the theory about how this would not happen if citizens were armed is flawed. The attackers do not care about surviving, they assume they will die or plan to kill themselves anyway. Unless you notice a suicide bomber ahead of time, before he blows himself up. You cannot stop him. You can keep them away from a large number of people but you cannot stop him from blowing himself up or more likely being blown up using a cell phone should he loose his nerve. The last suicide bomber at Manchester did not even try and get thru security just wait until everyone is headed home and walk into a crowd leaving. 

If the British citizen were armed then the attackers - also British citizens would be armed. Instead of cutting a few with knives they gun down tens if not hundreds with semi automatic rifles. 

If guns were available and used you might get lucky and take out the attackers or you might get unlucky and your round goes thru the gunman and hits another civilian. Once enough guns are out and people shooting how can you tell who to shoot and not shoot? They are not wearing uniforms. Do you shoot the olive skinned guy with a rag on his head who just shot the white man? The man shot could be the attacker and the olive skinned rag wearer an off duty Sikh Policeman . 

Very hard to tell what is going on once shooting starts in a crowded area with no one wearing any uniforms. 

In both the US and Britain we need to work on including every citizen in cultural , Social and political settings so that they do not think they have to resort to extreme measures and violence. 

I think the British will end up arming every policeman. I do not see much changing with US gun laws.

Until we figure out how to end hatred for hatred sake, accept the fact that other people should be allowed to be free to practice their religion not forced to practice yours ( what ever that religion is) we will never end terrorism . Most of the attacks in Europe where committed by men who are not religious yet were denied educational and economic opportunity, based on where there ancestors came from, they did not assimilate even though they were born in the country and were 2nd or third generation. They were discriminated on based on their ethnic origin, race, religion their family practiced. 

Every time we assume someone is a terrorist based not on their actions/ behaviors but on where ancestors came from , skin color, religion we insure terrorist win.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

The Brits got ride of most privately owned firearms after WW 1. They were in a badway after Dunkirk in WW 2. The Army was wrecked, most of its equipment if occupied France, Invasion was expected but no fire arms to around. US citizens donations and lend lease saved their butts. So they disarmed themselves immediately after [email protected] These dopes are getting a taste of reality by combating terror with billy clubs.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

RJAMES said:


> Until we figure out how to end hatred for hatred sake, accept the fact that other people should be allowed to be free to practice their religion not forced to practice yours ( what ever that religion is) we will never end terrorism . Most of the attacks in Europe where committed by men who are not religious yet were denied educational and economic opportunity, based on where there ancestors came from, they did not assimilate even though they were born in the country and were 2nd or third generation. They were discriminated on based on their ethnic origin, race, religion their family practiced.
> 
> Every time we assume someone is a terrorist based not on their actions/ behaviors but on where ancestors came from , skin color, religion we insure terrorist win.


Even though isis has claimed responsibility for the attack, it was probably 3 white guys from Brooklyn looking to blame islam. islam is the religion of peace after all.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Our resident libtards are talking out their asses again, God.

The "F"N" muzslime are taught to hate every non muzslime from birth, social conditions mean shit to them.

They, 99%, live the existence of fermented dog shit in their countries of origin, and the libtards smoke that shit.

The are taught that they are superior to all non believers and to look down at them. 

A-hole libtards try to sell lack of jobs and social conditions as a excuse for the attacks,

far too impotent to really define the problem or a real solution for it, libtards are the real lemmings to izslime.

The only thing you can do with A-hole libtards is to feed them to ISIS, not much good for anything else.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

After Britain Attack, Trump Feuds With London Mayor


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

@RJAMES...
Well, bless your little heart. 
Thanks for your thoughts.


----------



## Moonshinedave (Mar 28, 2013)

We'll say: ïf guns were legal in UK perhaps a few good people might've stopped the killing:
They'll say: it guns were legal in UK then the chances are just as good the bad guys would also have guns.
I'll say:, If guns were legal in UK, then I'll at least have a chance to save my, and my love ones, and perhaps some other innocent person(s) life, and that is all I can ask for in life, is just the chance.
(be advised I've been drinking)


----------



## 8301 (Nov 29, 2014)

paraquack said:


> While I carry "frequently", but not always, that is going to change. I really need to get the wife into carrying.


I carried off and on for a few years until a episode last year that wasn't a problem but got me thinking. Now I never go beyond my tiny town a few miles away without something in the pocket and usually I've got a pistol in the glovebox for those times when I leave the house and forget to pocket a toy.

The habit of carrying was easier than the habit of arranging things differently in my pockets to allow a pocket for carrying but with time and regular carrying it soon became a habit I'm glad to now have.


----------



## indie (Sep 7, 2013)

I was just talking with my husband about this this morning. After years of contemplating, I finally went out and got my concealed carry and am carrying all the time. It took a neighbor to push me into it, but I really feel as though it is our patriotic duty to be prepared to defend. And I'm so thankful that we live in a country where that is still an option.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

indie said:


> I was just talking with my husband about this this morning. After years of contemplating, I finally went out and got my concealed carry and am carrying all the time. It took a neighbor to push me into it, but I really feel as though it is our patriotic duty to be prepared to defend. And I'm so thankful that we live in a country where that is still an option.


Glad to hear it. :vs_clap:


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

No_One said:


> It would be hard to shoot in a crowded area with people because of accidently shooting a bystander....then their family or the person themselves might sue you in the end.


Gunsite Raven used to teach that when you were in that situation you should crouch down and then shoot "up" at the attacker. A miss would go harmlessly into the ceiling.

My issue is that you have to think creatively and respond quickly. These guys are out to kill you. Your performance might not be flawless, but hesitation is going to get everyone killed.


----------



## Moonshinedave (Mar 28, 2013)

No_One said:


> It would be hard to shoot in a crowded area with people because of accidently shooting a bystander....then their family or the person themselves might sue you in the end.


That's quite possible, also someone, perhaps law enforcement, might see you have a weapon, and think you are one of the bad guys. These are real problems, whose to say what a person will or can do in a particular situation? Perhaps even if you are armed, not using it might be the correct action? One thing's for sure, if you aren't armed your choices are limited.


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Been in a few, and none are similar to the other, you need to quickly adapt to the incident or die.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

I'm with Moonshine on this.

Three men, with nothing but knives, terrorized and killed 7(last I heard) innocent people.
Any armed civilian with even a rudimentary amount of training would have been able to end the "arm's reach" threats, or stop them in their tracks until police arrived.
But no... UK civilians are not allowed to defend themselves with proper tools of force.
If they were, and the attackers could also access firearms, then again you *could* have a civilian that stops them, or holds them back. Bullets may fly, but some will be coming back up range, and that can paralyze some attackers. At least an option would exist.
But no... UK civilians are not allowed to defend themselves with proper tools of force.

I make no distinction between a knife and a gun when it comes to lethal force.
Both can kill. How "easy" they are to use in doing so is a debate I leave to slimeball leftists who like to bicker over such grotesque issues.
The point is, they both can kill.
When faced with an opponent with a deadly weapon and a will to kill, any citizen should be able to respond with equal or greater force.
But no... UK civilians are not allowed to defend themselves with proper tools of force.

When you remove the choice of defense from your citizens, you leave them with no choice but to die at the hands of one who will use all available means of illegal force to achieve their goal.

To the UK, you disarmed your citizens and hold fast to a policy that allows dangerous influences into your country, all while spying on your citizens' every move.
A lot of good any of that has done. You have all the evidence to go after the bad people AFTER they've succeeded, but have nothing available to stop their success.
Fix your once great country or suffer an agonizing death.


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

No_One said:


> But again, you see all of the panic people running...tripping over each other.


Happened to me two Christmases ago at the East Towne Mall. Banger showed off a .32 ACP to one of his "homelies" and shot himself in the leg. The first I heard anything was several hundred teenage girls screaming and running for the door.

I was taught to "stand and survey" before you run. The rapport of a firearm can reverberate off walls and you could actually be running towards the gunman.

Without warning, a guy ran right into my back, bounced off and fell down. Before I could even bend over to pick him up, he had jumped up and started running again. When the crowd thinned out, I crossed the promenade to B&N, located my wife and we took "the scenic route" to our SUV.

I hate to say this, but it took +10 minutes for Madison SWAT to show up.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Kauboy said:


> To the UK, you disarmed your citizens and hold fast to a policy that allows dangerous influences into your country, *all while spying on your citizens' every move*.
> A lot of good any of that has done. You have all the evidence to go after the bad people AFTER they've succeeded, but have nothing available to stop their success.
> Fix your once great country or suffer an agonizing death.


Yes, yes... I quoted myself.
I was a bit stupefied when I read the end of a Rolling Stone article linked from Drudge: (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/l...ne-love-manchester-benefit-our-report-w485769)



> And it felt incredibly safe. As I made my own way to the tram, I wrote in my Apple Notes app, "Helicopter hovering overhead," which to me signified that the fans were being watched over. *Then two policemen stopped me and asked me who I was with and whether I'd written anything about a helicopter into my phone, without explaining the technology of how they'd read my Notes app.* After a friendly back-and-forth, they looked through my bag, checked my ID and business card and determined I wasn't a threat. "You have to understand, tensions are running high," one of the men said with a smile and a handshake, allowing me through the gate. Manchester was secure tonight.


Be a good little sheep. Let us play "security theater" to make you feel safer, while invading your privacy with no real benefit or stoppage of future attacks. - The British government (probably)


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

It has taken 50 years, but, the Brits are well trained sheeple today.


----------



## indie (Sep 7, 2013)

SOCOM42 said:


> It has taken 50 years, but, the Brits are well trained sheeple today.


Now it's our turn.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

indie said:


> Now it's our turn.


Naw, you're not capable of being sheeple. Neither am I nor lot's of others here. It's just not in our nature.


----------



## indie (Sep 7, 2013)

inceptor said:


> Naw, you're not capable of being sheeple. Neither am I nor lot's of others here. It's just not in our nature.


They're sure going to try, though.


----------



## inceptor (Nov 19, 2012)

indie said:


> They're sure going to try, though.


Let them. I can go from 0 to a$$hole in 1.6 seconds. It used to be 1.2 then I got old. :tango_face_grin:


----------



## indie (Sep 7, 2013)

inceptor said:


> Let them. I can go from 0 to a$$hole in 1.6 seconds. It used to be 1.2 then I got old. :tango_face_grin:


We need the ability to "love" posts.


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

Actually I think the reverse is going to happen.

The leftists in this country have money, lots of free time and some gated communities. They have created their own "soft targets."

Where do you think a jihadist is going to strike first? An upscale mall where guns are not permitted or a beer tent in Sturgis where everyone is packing?

And they love to criticize Trump. So the first leftie mall goes up in smoke, two dozen die, and the next thing you hear is Pelosi shrieking from the floor of Congress that President Trump is not doing enough to protect the country.

American Democrats aren't being killed--yet. Wait until the casualties pile up.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

inceptor said:


> Let them. I can go from 0 to a$$hole in 1.6 seconds. It used to be 1.2 then I got old. :tango_face_grin:


Although I have lost a step as well I am still quite fast at getting to asshole stage. :tango_face_grin:


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

Prepared One said:


> Although I have lost a step as well I am still quite fast at getting to asshole stage. :tango_face_grin:


I am much older, I STAY in asshole condition all the time!

My standard line; I may be an asshole, but I am not stupid.

It took a long time to perfect that brown ring, I am not going to let it shrink at this stage of the game.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

I've been told by many, that I can become an instant a$$hole. Never been timed. I will admit if the wrong button is pushed it's pretty dam fast.:vs_laugh:


----------



## Illini Warrior (Jan 24, 2015)

The Tourist said:


> Actually I think the reverse is going to happen.
> 
> The leftists in this country have money, lots of free time and some gated communities. They have created their own "soft targets."
> 
> ...


actually - except for a few of the terrorist attacks like Fort Hood and the Naval Base attacks - the US terrorist attacks have been in liberal areas of the country and most likely "American DemoCraps" .... 911 - Boston Marathon Bombing - San Bernardino - various mall attacks ....

and any further terrorist attacks will likely continue the trend - they want numbers and the publicity - that means the major urban areas and DemoCraps .... but - Prez Trump will want to take action - the Big City Mayor will want to hold hands in unison with the local Muslims and spout outrage that they are being singled out .... not any difference between the radical Muslims, sanctuary city illegals and the BLM blacks - all will condoned for their actions until the end of time ....


----------



## The Tourist (Jun 9, 2016)

Well, if the leftists are happy to welcome terrorists while the body count rises, then I agree with James Tiberius Kirk.

The problem is that my wife works in a job rife with lefties and socialists. She could catch a slug and die because some puppy-hugger didn't want to be called a racist.


----------

