Strudul

Lovely....

Not quite, but does the job with a lil imagination.

Sssppppfffftttt!!!

 

*coffee meets keyboard*

 

You cannot be for real. You cannot.

I'm not sure you even realise how obtuse some of your posts are, or how blind you argue a dead point...

then quite simply you have no right to comment on anything - fuel, taxes, cost of parts (because they might be imported) etc etc etc

 

no offence but this is such a ridiculous comment strudul

And I don't, I just accept things for how they are...

I took the same approach to Brexit. I disagree with the uninformed and mislead public making a decision on something they are not qualified to make a decision on, which includes myself.

Sorry, I didn't know you knew what I was thinking or doing better than I did.

all I did was state that I think a psych exam could catch out sociopaths and everyone jumped on me and started making accusations about points I never made...

As I said before, I'm not the one making false accusations and trying to argue for the sake of arguing.

I'd be more concerned about your inability to understand that I wasn't arguing for and defending it after I explicitly said i wasn't 9 times...

No, you were arguing for and defending it. Choosing to ignore the fact doesn't change that.

 

I'm not sure you even realise how obtuse some of your posts are, or how blind you argue a dead point.

You've got to be joking...

Never said it was a good idea.

I didn't say it was a good idea

I don't think it's a good idea at all.

it's not a good idea...

I don't support it or think it's a good idea.

I don't think it's a good idea though...

For the umpteenth time, I don't think it's a good idea or feasible...

I don't think the suggestion is a good idea

I wasn't arguing for it.

You are not a psychologist and have no idea how it works, yet you disagree with someones comments as if your idea is fact. Therein problem lies. And yes we go around in circles, so even when experts disagree with you, you always have to repeat yourself and have to tell everyone you are doing so as if they are idiots. What is happening is that you have no further point to make but feel you have to repeat yourself unnecessarily. Funny how you always have to do this yet the other 1000 members on here never do...strange one huh.

 

I am out of this conversation now. I should be moderating it not getting involved with people all chatting as experts about things they have no clue about.

Not at all, it's a hypothetical discussion based on opinions and very little supporting evidence on either side. I'm not sure how mine can be deemed to be stated as fact anymore than anyone else's...

However, going back to falsifiability, to claim it wouldn't work is harder to prove than claiming it could work.

I repeat myself and state I'm doing so because people are either not reading or ignoring what was said and it hinders the progression of the discussion, it has nothing to do with their intelligence. If the question has already been answered, then why keep asking it? The irony being you are accusing me of having no further point...

For someone who doesn't agree with it, you've done a good job of arguing for it. (Edit, not you Col).

 

It's a silly idea, end of. Try and argue the toss about it all you like, but it's never going to happen and would cause more problems than it solves.

That's just the thing, I wasn't arguing for it. I made that perfectly clear. Choosing to ignore the fact doesn't change that.

I defended a few specific points that had merit.

So what about other non-lethal weapons?

And just because the terrorists adapt, why can't we?

Could always do a rear wiper delete and pretend the problem doesn't exist

And for the umpteenth time I haven't said that you think its a good idea. Instead of trying to prove everyone wrong why not read what is being written and for once just accept there is merit to it. I said I liked your example, I also said there were many others that are not so positive but equally possible.

 

Like any 'solution' you have to stress test its strengths and weaknesses - any tom dick and harry knows that. To focus on one positive outcome and not consider possible consequences good and bad is just foolhardy and ultimately will lead down one path of failure.

 

There is no 'solution' to terrorism, its not going away, not whilst the ideology exists anywhere in the world that can influence people. Ekona mentioned this way back but no one took any notice. Instead the solution being suggested is not a solution at all.

 

As for psych tests, I have seen them as I worked with the Psychology department at UCL a couple of years back, and believe it or not they do have 150 question surveys that evaluate psychology (as stupid as it seems). The idea that we put all the thousand odd volunteers through extensive psych examinations by psychologists to really understand what is going on - for free - is just ridiculous and not worth comment. Otherwise you are looking at self assessment, which can always be rigged.

What you say and what you imply are 2 very different things...

Considering I've generally addressed each point individually, I'm not sure how you can accuse me of not reading what is written. However, seeing as the discussion is just going round in circles, I'm bored of repeating myself. There's 7 pages of responses that are relevant and can be applied.

It's not about proving anyone wrong. This is a problem a lot of people seem to have. It's should simply be about discussing pros / cons. Starting to get emotionally and personally invested leads to the inevitable upset and name calling...

Now, if stating that I don't think the suggestion is a good idea doesn't show acceptance of the merit of other peoples points, I don't know what does. However, since it wasn't my suggestion and I don't / didn't agree with it, there is nothing for me to admit I was wrong about...

As for psych tests, if you go back to the beginning of this discussion, I said that answering questions alone was not enough.

Nah, what we need deserve is Batman.

People with the same amount of experience as you with psych exams then commented that people could easily get through these - which you then disagreed with despite I suspect and correct me if I am wrong, that you have no knowledge of what a proper psych test is. And then digressed into how volunteers could be trained for free by volunteers and so on and so forth. And here we are...

I pointed out that none of us have any experience in psych evaluations specifically designed for the purpose in question. Since as far as I know none currently exists, you can't comment on its effectiveness.

The whole argument is hypothetical, each side can raise points, but the rules of falsifiability still apply.

OK this discussion is as mental as the idea itself. And yes I somehow made it home safely with all those thousands of 'known to police' people out there not being deported every day.

 

Strudul, I like your example - yes putting aside the stupidity of a volunteer training team, training volunteers for free, supplied with free equipment, that is stored for free securely and managed for free by a force of volunteers doing all the paperwork. And putting aside the idea that we have tens of thousands of people all across the country who would actually volunteer to do this, for free, and always turn up and always do it for the next 50 years, for free. That we change legislation that volunteer forces are allowed weapons in public and use them with possible fatal force. That by chance, the small miracle that there happens to be a chap there onsite who isn't cut down by five machete wielding lunatics before he shouts 'who goes there' and grabs a taser that has 5 charges all loaded into it and they all stand in a line and it goes through all of them incapacitating them. All that aside. Yes it might just happen like that.

 

Or, it could be they miss and get hacked to death. Or another scenario is that they actually hit the guy and detonate the bomb under their vest killing many more people than it would have if the people had the chance to get distance and they are dealt with by police.

 

Or another scenario, is that sod it the government funds the lot and takes £5bn off the police and funds our very own volunteers. They spend a year training everyone up, we are up and running and they are out there with their tasers. The terrorists then spend a few quid on some carbon for their jackets http://www.instructa...r-proof-jacket/ and said taser has no effect and the guy is hacked to death and the money spent on him instead of armed response units means they get there a few minutes later.

 

Just a few other scenarios that might happen to consider...

There are plenty of examples where civvies, police and military are equally powerless, but rather than exaggerating any weakness, why not try come up with some solutions.

For the umpteenth time, I don't think it's a good idea or feasible... How is it that you're not understanding that and I'm getting accused of trying to argue for arguments sake?

so what are debating over ?

 

you taking a stand over nothing for no reason

God knows, all I did was state that I think a psych exam could catch out sociopaths and everyone jumped on me and started making accusations about points I never made...

but your the idea of a voluntary police force already exists http://www.policespecials.com/

 

If people are not volunteering for this then there not going to do it to join the Civil Avengers although granted Civil Avengers sounds cooler

We already covered that....

English isn't a proper degree. May as well give it to bloody drama and art grads

£7k should get you a RevUp (296hp version). Might be able to find an HR (313hp version) for the money, but it will probably be a big trade off for condition and mileage.

Because why should I do what the police do but for free?

 

Now there will be volunteers but the majority will be of those from the EDL who want to settle a score which isn't going to make things better

Nobody is making you, hence the term volunteer...

And there's 6 pages of discussion on the effectiveness of psych tests to prevent EDL types being part of the SCS.

You'll get old too lol .

Sofa shops?

Super Civvy Squad, keep up granddad

Which makes it seem like you're arguing for the sake of arguing and being deliberately difficult. Its ok to say; you know what? You're right, I hadn't considered that. I did...its the future

Funny, cos I could say the same.

There is so much right place right time involved here, that even with super civvy squad, odds are a policeman is still going to be the closest attendee, unless the super civvies outnumber the police. In which case it becomes like the nationalist army in Ukraine.

Unless the terrorists purposefully direct attacks away from police presence.

i still don't see the issue with filling in the gaps with the SCS.