Jump to content

London Attacks


sipar69

Recommended Posts

So basically you plan to help the police force out is an unpaid police force ?

That is what the word volunteer usually means...

 

Not sure how many times I have to keep pointing out that it's not my plan and I don't think it's a good idea though...

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Give a tazer to everybody with a degree in mathematics, economics, any of the respected sciences (no ologies except biology) and English (literature or language), free, on the house. That would cover enough of the population to prevent an incident IMMEDIATELY that someone started hacking and slashing, and limit the chance of the local pikies getting their hands on them too. Selected people would be able to choose not to take the tazer if they wished.

 

I do not have a degree by the way, so please don't accuse me of excluding people in my thought-of-in-5-seconds-plan, it's just an example that I came up with in 5 seconds, obviously I'm not saying it's implementable, just giving an example of A criterium that would cover enough of the population to be faster than the police in response to this type of attack. I'm talking about arming a high percentage of people who spend their nights out in The Borough and other affluent places where the jihadis want to take advantage of our decadence, say 10% of that demographic, who are also, typically, mature, responsible contributing members of society.

 

Again, this is only worth even considering if these incidents start becoming more frequent, but arming the population with tazers is not a bad middle ground between what we have now and what the US has (10% of the entire population (not just 10% of the higher educated, as I suggest) carrying a loaded firearm).

Edited by Aashenfox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if they have a bomb and a tazero sets it off?

 

I didn't say it was perfect, but then, nothing is. When they invented cars that went faster than 1mph, they said 'hey what if the cars come off the road and kill people?' You know what they said to that? Yep, that's gonna happen, deal with it! Now it is the single biggest killer of innocent people. ;)

Edited by Aashenfox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Strudul got his point across eventually, you seem to want to argue for more than the 5 minutes that Strudul is allowed, please, Steve, don't feed strudul, he'll get another warning and I kinda like having him around. :lol:

Edited by Aashenfox
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.instructables.com/id/DIY-carbon-tape-Taser-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...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

 

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...