On Jan 8, 6:18*am, MIG wrote:
On Jan 8, 1:57*pm, wrote:





On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 17:54:36 +0000

Jeremy Double wrote:
There's a great difference between somebody being deprived of their life
by a deliberate act on the part of an agent of the state, and someone
being killed by the actions of a criminal.

No , theres no difference. Dead is dead.

Apart from anything else, arming all the police "ups the ante" and makes
them more likely to be targets for criminals.

So most of the world has got it wrong but little britain with its unarmed
police has it correct? Sorry , that just twee insular drivel. The british
police should have been armed from the day of their formation in the 19th
century.

B2003

The more guns there are, the more people get shot.

I don't want any of the gangs in whose crossfire I may be caught to
have guns. *The police are just the most powerful gang which, for that
reason, are the first enforcement choice of a violent Tory government
that despises its electorate.

There is far more threat to us from the people inventing the terror
alerts than from the religious loonys who would have no one listening
to them but for UK and US foreign policy.

Meanwhile here on planet earth: The US State Department and British
Foreign Office are full of cowardly compromisers. There is a real
threat out there. We are at war, a war which has only just begun.

And, IMHO the police have shown commendable restraint while facing
gangs of vandals and thugs in Westminster. Would that they had taken
a more robust line. Rubber bullets and tear gas would soon restore
the streets to a civilized state.