Is it just me or is there a distinct lack of horror and disbelief in this BBC article quoting local residents seemingly more concerned with impact on their business ?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/4452626.stm
Are these quotes a genuine representation or an attempt to steer public opinion ?
Seems to me like most comments from people are moans that they’re losing money because they can’t access their business :rolleyes:
apart from a couple of our “foreign” friends … one of whom says it’s dangerous here (as opposed to Lithuania) 
and a lovely quote from this one …
A former Spanish policeman studying in Bradford did not want to be named but felt officers in the UK should be armed.
He said: "It’s really unfair just to see this kind of situation where someone is killed because they are not able to wear a gun like in most of the European countries.
I never knew that carrying a weapon saved you from being killed :rolleyes:
… of course, we can all see that arming the police forces in Europe and the USA has dramaticaly reduced the crime rate 
Yeah thats fairly big news story up here.
I’m in Leeds up the road…I hadn’t heard any opinion about lost business…
Wearing a gun can save your life when used for defense. Don’t knock it. You may not read about it everyday, but it happens. I’d rather die defending myself than die wishing I had the means to save my own life (not that I want to die, but getting killed because your government thinks law-abiding citizens should be sheep to the slaughter is just wrong).
Well, what I meant was that being armed is no defence against being killed/hurt, like body armour or such is 
Sure … if you have the weapon you can reduce the risks by defending yourself, but then you are still bound by wierd rules as to when and who you can shoot at … the criminal is bound by no such rules … and will probably use that situation to his advantage. A cop has to answer to someone if he fires his weapon … a criminal is indiscriminate, and will use any means to evade capture 
The gun culture is rapidly spreading through the UK though, and I don’t think it will be long before we join the rest of the world in having an armed police force.
Whether that’s a good or bad thing doesn’t matter … it will happen :flip:
I’ve read several articles recently regarding the UK’s lack of firearms for police. A criminal will be less likely to pull and shoot if he/she is going to be matched with someone else armed and trained to use it.
And I wish I could find the statistics (no time currently), but per capita, the UK has a much higher violent crime rate than the US. The majority of US states offer some form of concealed carry firearm law and I honestly believe it helps. Even if it doesn’t, I feel more secure in knowing that if I’m brought face-to-face with an armed criminal, I’ve at least got the tools to match them. I remember an old ex-con I knew that had done time for theft. He was more worried about a homeowner with a gun than a police officer with a gun. The homeowner is much more likely to shoot and be declared justified.
yeah…
Only cos the police have changed what they class as a violent crime, firearms offence and also what classes as a replica weapon.
Thats why you get this crap about gun crime rose 60%…cos you’ve changed the god dam boundries you muppets.
I know this from the fact that there now trying to ban replica guns (and therefore arisft) through a bill designed to stop violent crime. which in fact just stops us playing our hobby as con’s ignore the law anyhow, why’s this going to stop them?
Violent crime, and death by shooting are two seperate things. Someone could be injured by a criminal, and not die… which imo, is usually a lot better than dying by shooting. At least you still get to live.
Just a side note, please don’t go into a discussion about quality of life after being a victim of a violent crime… that’s not really the point of the argument. 