Interesting take on policing in the UK vs the US

[GMDino]

And yes, it from a comedy site so remember that.  But also remember it from a person who is doing the job.

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-2353-i-was-cop-in-country-with-no-guns-6-startling-truths.html

[Belsnickel]

That was bloody great.

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 02:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That was bloody great.

I really like that they try and calm the situation down first.

I've been in a couple situations (one in a former work place) that simply by talking calmly I was able to diffuse something could have gotten very bad very quickly.

[Belsnickel]

(07-12-2016, 02:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: I really like that they try and calm the situation down first.

I've been in a couple situations (one in a former work place) that simply by talking calmly I was able to diffuse something could have gotten very bad very quickly.

Talk is always the first line, and from what I understand it is here as well.

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 02:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Talk is always the first line, and from what I understand it is here as well.

But if you know you can't fall back on a gun, and more than likely the other person can't either, it seems talking works better.

[Millhouse]

It would be idealistic for our street cops not carry a firearm. Wont argue that. But there are just to many illegal & legal guns out there, especially illegal guns in the urban areas among gangs & average street thugs can get their hands on. Sadly, we are too big of a country to really do much about it. I truly believe until core issues are seriously addressed in impoverished areas where the crime/murder rates are the highest, none of what is going on will go away anytime soon.

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 04:04 PM)Millhouse Wrote: It would be idealistic for our street cops not carry a firearm. Wont argue that. But there are just to many illegal & legal guns out there, especially illegal guns in the urban areas among gangs & average street thugs can get their hands on. Sadly, we are too big of a country to really do much about it. I truly believe until core issues are seriously addressed in impoverished areas where the crime/murder rates are the highest, none of what is going on will go away anytime soon.

No doubt we have a love of guns problem here in the US.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-12-2016, 04:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: No doubt we have a love of drugs problem here in the US.

FTFY.  Gun ownership has climbed significantly in the last ten yeas while violent crime has dropped every single one of those ten years.  If there was a direct gun ownership to gun crime corollary why did it not express itself?  Better yet, why did the exact opposite occur?  Sadly, around 80% of gun related homicides can be directly traced to violence related to the drug trade.  Legalize drugs, tax them, dry up the financial incentive and that crime will largely disappear.  It worked in The Wire.  

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 09:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: FTFY.  Gun ownership has climbed significantly in the last ten yeas while violent crime has dropped every single one of those ten years.  If there was a direct gun ownership to gun crime corollary why did it not express itself?  Better yet, why did the exact opposite occur?  Sadly, around 80% of gun related homicides can be directly traced to violence related to the drug trade.  Legalize drugs, tax them, dry up the financial incentive and that crime will largely disappear.  It worked in The Wire.  

(07-12-2016, 04:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: No doubt we have a love of guns problem here in the US.

But thanks for "fixing" it, I guess?



Now go back and re-read the thread. It is about how the lack of guns leads to better endings for situations due to a lack of fear that the other guy has a gun.

btw, I agree on legalizing drugs. I disagree that we'd stop shooting each other over something else stupid just because we can.

But while I'm here:

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/

Quote:President Barack Obama claimed that “states with the most gun laws tend to have the fewest gun deaths.” Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, meanwhile, has made nearly the opposite claim, saying states with stringent gun control laws have “the highest gun crime rates in the nation.”

In looking solely at the numbers of gun deaths and gun crimes, the data back up Obama, not Fiorina. But both politicians imply a causation that’s impossible to prove — that gun control laws lead to fewer or greater gun crimes or gun deaths.
Obama talked about gun deaths, while Fiorina said “gun crime rates,” which could include aggravated assault and robberies. Let’s start with gun deaths.

Obama’s Argument

The president made his comments on Oct. 1 after a mass shooting that day at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon, left 10 people dead, including the shooter.

Obama, Oct. 1: We know that states with the most gun laws tend to have the fewest gun deaths. So the notion that gun laws don’t work, or just will make it harder for law-abiding citizens and criminals [to] still get their guns is not borne out by the evidence.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention publishes statistics on firearm deaths and the death rate, which would be a fairer measure in comparing states of various populations. The death rate is the number of deaths per 100,000 people. The CDC also gives age-adjusted death rates, since such rates are influenced by the age of the population. This levels the comparison between different groups.

For 2013, the 10 states with the highest firearm age-adjusted death rates were: Alaska (19.8), Louisiana (19.3), Mississippi (17.8), Alabama (17.6), Arkansas (16.8), Wyoming (16.7), Montana (16.7), Oklahoma (16.5), New Mexico (15.5) and Tennessee (15.4).

The 10 states with the lowest firearm age-adjusted death rates were, starting with the lowest: Hawaii (2.6), Massachusetts (3.1), New York (4.2), Connecticut (4.4), Rhode Island (5.3), New Jersey (5.7), New Hampshire (6.4), Minnesota (7.6), California (7.7) and Iowa (8.0).

Firearm deaths, however, include suicides, and there are a lot of them. In 2013, there were a total of 33,636 firearm deaths, and 21,175, or 63 percent, were suicides, according to the CDC. Homicides made up 11,208, or 33 percent, of those firearm deaths. The rest were unintentional discharges (505), legal intervention/war (467) and undetermined (281).

Homicide data for 2013 don’t give us a clear picture of homicides only by firearm; however, 70 percent of homicides for the year were by firearm. The 10 states with the highest homicide rates were: Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Maryland, Oklahoma, South Carolina, New Mexico, Missouri and Michigan. That lists includes six states that also have the highest firearm death rates.

The 10 states with the lowest homicide rates are: North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Utah, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts and Oregon.

The number of homicides that occurred in the first three states were so low that their death rates were zero. Wyoming is an interesting case, because it has one of the highest firearm death rates but a homicide rate of zero.

It would appear most gun related deaths are self inflicted. Yay?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/08/19/alcohol-is-still-the-deadliest-drug-in-the-united-states-and-its-not-even-close/

Quote:Which intoxicating substance is associated with the most lethal violence? Devotees of the Wire might presume that cocaine or maybe heroin would top the list, especially if you asked the worst causes of violence in poor, minority communities.

The correct answer, by far, is alcohol. It’s involved in more homicides than pretty much every other substance, combined. Alcohol’s relative importance has grown over the last fifteen years, as aging populations of cocaine users account for a declining proportion of violent crime. Here in Chicago, positive cocaine screens in the Cook County Jail are down by about half when compared with ten or twenty years ago. The same is true in many other cities.

Surveys of people incarcerated for violent crimes indicate that about 40% had been drinking at the time they committed these offenses. Among those who had been drinking, average blood-alcohol levels were estimated to exceed three times the legal limit. Drinking is especially common among perpetrators of specific crimes, including murder, sexual assault, and intimate partner violence.


Correlation does not equal causation, of course. If offenders all stopped drinking, we wouldn’t see a 100-percent reduction in their crimes. Yet alcohol does play a distinctive role. It lowers inhibitions and, among some people, fosters aggressive behavior that ratchets up the risk that violence will somehow occur. In my own career as a public health researcher, I’ve come into close contact with many intoxicated heroin and marijuana users. In these moments, I’ve never had reason to feel that my safety was at risk. I have been present for some scary incidents. Almost every time, alcohol was in the mix, often as things were getting a little late in a tough neighborhood near a liquor store.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-12-2016, 10:21 PM)GMDino Wrote: Now go back and re-read the thread.  It is about how the lack of guns leads to better endings for situations due to a lack of fear that the other guy has a gun.

If everyone was a millionaire then crimes would drop as well.  Neither is going to actually happen.

Quote:btw, I agree on legalizing drugs.  I disagree that we'd stop shooting each other over something else stupid just because we can.

Entirely, no.  At a much lower rate, yes.

Quote:It would appear most gun related deaths are self inflicted.  Yay?

No argument for gun control is more inane that suicide by firearm.  The US is 50th in the world for suicide rate, behind such gun control utopias as S. Korea (2nd), Japan (17th), Finland (33rd), Belgium (34th) and France (47th).  Please explain how all these people manage to kill themselves without all those firearms.

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 10:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No argument for gun control is more inane that suicide by firearm.  The US is 50th in the world for suicide rate, behind such gun control utopias as S. Korea (2nd), Japan (17th), Finland (33rd), Belgium (34th) and France (47th).  Please explain how all these people manage to kill themselves without all those firearms.

Which has nothing to do with the statistic that 63% of firearm deaths were suicides.

But maybe if you want to have a discussion on the suicide rate overall you can start another thread because there are a multitude of reasons FOR committing suicide...and in the US we seem to prefer to do with guns.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-12-2016, 11:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Which has nothing to do with the statistic that 63% of firearm deaths were suicides.

But maybe if you want to have a discussion on the suicide rate overall you can start another thread because there are a multitude of reasons FOR committing suicide...and in the US we seem to prefer to do with guns.

People use guns because it's quick and painless, but if they didn't have guns they would find another way like they do in Korea, France etc. Including suicides when talking about guncontrol is ridiculous.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-12-2016, 11:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Which has nothing to do with the statistic that 63% of firearm deaths were suicides.

But maybe if you want to have a discussion on the suicide rate overall you can start another thread because there are a multitude of reasons FOR committing suicide...and in the US we seem to prefer to do with guns.

(07-12-2016, 11:11 PM)michaelsean Wrote: People use guns because it's quick and painless, but if they didn't have guns they would find another way like they do in Korea, France etc.   Including suicides when talking about guncontrol is ridiculous.

Shh, he's being disingenuous again.  He tends to react that way when he can't directly address a point being made.  GMDabo mode.

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 11:11 PM)michaelsean Wrote: People use guns because it's quick and painless, but if they didn't have guns they would find another way like they do in Korea, France etc.   Including suicides when talking about guncontrol is ridiculous.

Which reinforces we have a love of guns problem in this country.

I wasn't talking about gun control...at all.  I was opining that where the do not have as many guns the police handle things differently and usually with less violence.

SSF blamed drugs...which, again, had nothing to do with the story in post one.

But don't tell SSF...he'll "fix" it for you.

[GMDino]

(07-12-2016, 11:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Shh, he's being disingenuous again.  He tends to react that way when he can't directly address a point being made.  GMDabo mode.

Bad day pushing paper?  Those are tough on me sometimes too.

I'm just sticking with the topic of post one...not "fixing" posts to change the subject.

If you want to talk about how drugs influence violent crime (pssst...alcohol is worse) or anything else feel free to in another thread.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-13-2016, 09:03 AM)GMDino Wrote: Which reinforces we have a love of guns problem in this country.

I wasn't talking about gun control...at all.  I was opining that where the do not have as many guns the police handle things differently and usually with less violence.

You weren't talking about gun control?  Like I said, disingenuous.

Quote:SSF blamed drugs...which, again, had nothing to do with the story in post one.

But don't tell SSF...he'll "fix" it for you.

Translation, SSF says what he really thinks instead of obfuscating and hiding behind a thin veneer of BS.  I also offer potential solutions instead of lamenting our current status in a sadly maudlin display like others I might mention.

(07-13-2016, 09:05 AM)GMDino Wrote: Bad day pushing paper?  Those are tough on me sometimes too.

I'm just sticking with the topic of post one...not "fixing" posts to change the subject.

We are staying on topic.  You brought this up to discuss your two favorite subjects.  I simply obliged you.  I'm accommodating that way.

Quote:If you want to talk about how drugs influence violent crime (pssst...alcohol is worse) or anything else feel free to in another thread.

You make this so easy I honestly feel bad sometimes.  Is violent crime related to alcohol consumption (which btw thanks to tipping me off to this, it's brand new information to me) due to the drugs consumption or it's sale?  Now ask yourself the same question about every illegal drug.  With the exception of PCP the answer should, if you're not being disingenuous, make the point clear to you.  BTW, who's changing the topic now?

[GMDino]

(07-13-2016, 10:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You weren't talking about gun control?  Like I said, disingenuous.

Nope. Was talking about how the lack of guns affects the way the police are trained and how they handle situations differently. Would it be nice to be that way here? Absolutely. But in no way did I, or have I ever, championed "gun control'.

That's just a tic from some people anytime guns are mentioned in any context other than "guns are good".

(07-13-2016, 10:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Translation, SSF says what he really thinks instead of obfuscating and hiding behind a thin veneer of BS.  I also offer potential solutions instead of lamenting our current status in a sadly maudlin display like others I might mention.

Oh you can say whatever you think...but it had little to nothing to do with the topic at hand.

(07-13-2016, 10:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: We are staying on topic.  You brought this up to discuss your two favorite subjects.  I simply obliged you.  I'm accommodating that way.

By changing it to "drugs are bad" from "UK police are trained differently and there is less violence"?

(07-13-2016, 10:29 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You make this so easy I honestly feel bad sometimes.  Is violent crime related to alcohol consumption (which btw thanks to tipping me off to this, it's brand new information to me) due to the drugs consumption or it's sale?  Now ask yourself the same question about every illegal drug.  With the exception of PCP the answer should, if you're not being disingenuous, make the point clear to you.  BTW, who's changing the topic now?

So you're going to double down and blame the alcohol causing more violent crime on drugs.

And you think *I* am disingenuous. That's funny. And unlike you.

My concern over you having all these bad days is just one human being caring about another's state of mind. It is not the "subject" of this thread. Just like drugs weren't.

Have a great day!

[SteelCitySouth]

(07-12-2016, 09:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: FTFY.  Gun ownership has climbed significantly in the last ten yeas while violent crime has dropped every single one of those ten years.  If there was a direct gun ownership to gun crime corollary why did it not express itself?  Better yet, why did the exact opposite occur?  Sadly, around 80% of gun related homicides can be directly traced to violence related to the drug trade.  Legalize drugs, tax them, dry up the financial incentive and that crime will largely disappear.  It worked in The Wire.  

Never watched the wire but this seems to be holding in Colorado.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(07-13-2016, 10:49 AM)GMDino Wrote: Nope.  Was talking about how the lack of guns affects the way the police are trained and how they handle situations differently.  Would it be nice to be that way here?  Absolutely.  But in no way did I, or have I ever, championed "gun control'.

That's just a tic from some people anytime guns are mentioned in any context other than "guns are good".

So this statement, plus, we love us some guns in America, doesn't equal a thread about guns and the benefits of not having them in our society?  The logic pretzels you tie yourself into are amazing.

Quote:Oh you can say whatever you think...but it had little to nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Except literally in this post you said it did.  Your topic, by your own admission, is that a lack of guns equals a better environment.  You then doubled down with the US loves it's guns comment.  Pointing out that the vast majority of gun related homicides are caused by the drug trade is a perfectly reasonable counter response to those not in need of medical attention.

Quote:By changing it to "drugs are bad" from "UK police are trained differently and there is less violence"?

Wait, I thought you just said it was the lack of guns that enabled this training.  Let me scroll up about three lines.  Yup, that's exactly what you said.

Quote:So you're going to double down and blame the alcohol causing more violent crime on drugs.

Hahaha, you have a serious reading comprehension problem hermano.

Quote:And you think *I* am disingenuous.  That's funny.  And unlike you.

I do think you're disingenuous, because you consistently demonstrate this quality.  You also just exhibited a disturbing lack of skill in regards to the English language.  Hopefully that's more of a one off.

[GMDino]

(07-13-2016, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So this statement, plus, we love us some guns in America, doesn't equal a thread about guns and the benefits of not having them in our society?  The logic pretzels you tie yourself into are amazing.

They are both true statements. And the post, as cited in the title of the thread is about policing differences between the two countries as described in the article.

A lack of fear of guns is part of the article.

What it does not equal is a post about "gun control".

Which I have never championed...but you can choose to believe differently.

(07-13-2016, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Except literally in this post you said it did.  Your topic, by your own admission, is that a lack of guns equals a better environment.  You then doubled down with the US loves it's guns comment.  Pointing out that the vast majority of gun related homicides are caused by the drug trade is a perfectly reasonable counter response to those not in need of medical attention.

OH, SSF...you are funny. By "my own admission" I said in a country with many fewer guns the police are trained differently. And an emphasis on dealing with suspects as people is greater.

And we do have a love of guns in this country. That statement just set off your tic about "gun control".

(07-13-2016, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Wait, I thought you just said it was the lack of guns that enabled this training.  Let me scroll up about three lines.  Yup, that's exactly what you said.

And? Oh! You think that kind of training can't be done UNLESS there is a lack of guns? Weird. I didn't know everything was either/or with you.

(07-13-2016, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Hahaha, you have a serious reading comprehension problem hermano.

Well, maybe you can explain how you saying:

Quote:Is violent crime related to alcohol consumption (which btw thanks to tipping me off to this, it's brand new information to me) due to the drugs consumption or it's sale?

...not you saying drug consumption or drug sales are behind the alcohol behind the violent crime.

(07-13-2016, 11:06 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I do think you're disingenuous, because you consistently demonstrate this quality.  You also just exhibited a disturbing lack of skill in regards to the English language.  Hopefully that's more of a one off.

I think you think because I disagree with your points, or more likely because you think you are always right, I am disingenuous when I ask questions or have a more flexible view of things.

For example I do think less guns would be a good thing. I do not think we need more laws to have more gun control in this country.

I do think better training on how to deal with people for officers would be a good thing. I do not think that would solve all the problems.

You can think about things in more than one way sometimes. And that apparently means to some that if you aren't rock solid in your beliefs at every moment you are serious.

Funny.