Met Police Don't Seem to Know What a Two Tone Is.

[E21A]

 

On 30/07/2020 at 19:31, Rogerborg said:

 

The question is whether you would inevitably be charged with murder if you defended yourself with a knife that you were carrying.

 

It becomes much less of an inevitability if the knife was being carried by the criminal who attacked you and you so happened to be able to get it off them and use it against them 😉 I mean, it’s unlikely the police would question that attacker had a knife 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Guest]

I love threads that take unexpected turns.

 

I almost always carry two EDC’s, a SAK and a custom Morris friction folder, both as legal as carrying a bag of oranges lol

[Tackle]

3 hours ago, rocketdogbert said:

I love threads that take unexpected turns.

 

I almost always carry two EDC’s, a SAK and a custom Morris friction folder, both as legal as carrying a bag of oranges lol

& Yet you've not managed to go on a frenzied stabbing spree ?.

To refer to the old adage, "guns (or knives) don't kill people, people kill people"

 

In much the same way, "poverty" doesn't turn you in to a hardened criminal, most people who plead poverty in this country haven't actually experienced real poverty, with a benefit system in place for unemployment, which also includes tax credit top-ups for working low incomes etc, no one is starving, sure many don't have the income they desire, but that's life, the issue for many is they have a feeling of "entitlement", in a "want it now" society, not wanting to accept that once the families fed & the absolute essentials are paid for, only then should you consider whether you have any disposable income for non essential so called "luxuries".

Sorry, thugs will be thugs, especially if they've been brought up with no discernible influence, to ensure they have a moral compass, many people grow up on low incomes without becoming feral rabid scum.

 

[Asomodai]

1 hour ago, Tackle said:

& Yet you've not managed to go on a frenzied stabbing spree ?.

To refer to the old adage, "guns (or knives) don't kill people, people kill people"

 

In much the same way, "poverty" doesn't turn you in to a hardened criminal, most people who plead poverty in this country haven't actually experienced real poverty, with a benefit system in place for unemployment, which also includes tax credit top-ups for working low incomes etc, no one is starving, sure many don't have the income they desire, but that's life, the issue for many is they have a feeling of "entitlement", in a "want it now" society, not wanting to accept that once the families fed & the absolute essentials are paid for, only then should you consider whether you have any disposable income for non essential so called "luxuries".

Sorry, thugs will be thugs, especially if they've been brought up with no discernible influence, to ensure they have a moral compass, many people grow up on low incomes without becoming feral rabid scum.

 

 

😄

[Tackle]

32 minutes ago, Asomodai said:

 

😄

I know, lol as we do it with most posts, bit like putting the world to rights in the pub.🤣

[Rogerborg]

Well, we all want the same thing: for Kai and lads like him to give the police no cause to either knock on or kick in their door.

[Add57]

It could have also resembled a Siminition coversion kit if the caller had described a handgun with a blue slide...still Sec5.

Or, it is rather easy to spray a weapon to make it look "less real" if someone want to make it look less obvs. 

And the Guardian is trash..

[Albiscuit]

On 01/08/2020 at 11:58, Tackle said:

& Yet you've not managed to go on a frenzied stabbing spree ?.

To refer to the old adage, "guns (or knives) don't kill people, people kill people"

 

In much the same way, "poverty" doesn't turn you in to a hardened criminal, most people who plead poverty in this country haven't actually experienced real poverty, with a benefit system in place for unemployment, which also includes tax credit top-ups for working low incomes etc, no one is starving, sure many don't have the income they desire, but that's life, the issue for many is they have a feeling of "entitlement", in a "want it now" society, not wanting to accept that once the families fed & the absolute essentials are paid for, only then should you consider whether you have any disposable income for non essential so called "luxuries".

Sorry, thugs will be thugs, especially if they've been brought up with no discernible influence, to ensure they have a moral compass, many people grow up on low incomes without becoming feral rabid scum.

 

“No one is starving” 

As a youthworker working with young people in one of the most deprived boroughs in the country I beg to differ.

 

Whilst a lot of your points are valid, I can recall at least three kids who have been known to us who came to youth club just for the hot food we provided.

 

And I won’t go into the stats and facts about food banks.

 

beleive me, people ARE starving out there!

[Asomodai]

On 01/08/2020 at 11:58, Tackle said:

& Yet you've not managed to go on a frenzied stabbing spree ?.

To refer to the old adage, "guns (or knives) don't kill people, people kill people"

 

In much the same way, "poverty" doesn't turn you in to a hardened criminal, most people who plead poverty in this country haven't actually experienced real poverty, with a benefit system in place for unemployment, which also includes tax credit top-ups for working low incomes etc, no one is starving, sure many don't have the income they desire, but that's life, the issue for many is they have a feeling of "entitlement", in a "want it now" society, not wanting to accept that once the families fed & the absolute essentials are paid for, only then should you consider whether you have any disposable income for non essential so called "luxuries".

Sorry, thugs will be thugs, especially if they've been brought up with no discernible influence, to ensure they have a moral compass, many people grow up on low incomes without becoming feral rabid scum.

 

 

To back up Al's comments. My wife is a Secondary school teacher for a state school in one of the richest boroughs in London, I used to work there and it's in fact where we met. It is based in the middle of one of the few council estates left in the borough that hasn't been bulldozed for private housing. My wife has had to put hand in pocket to give kids food often. When it is the holidays they still get over 50 kids in to school every day to have a free lunch or else they go without. Roughly half are single parent families. The other half are kids with both parents working but still cant afford to feed their children because of crippling private rents and bills. This shouldn't happen in a country that is one of the top 10 richest in the world. When I worked there we had the ambulance call out twice one term due to a kid collapsing due to malnutrition. 

 

The majority of parents are good parents who don't have any other place to turn. Poverty doesn't necessarily turn you into a criminal. But it sure as hell makes it more likely through necessity. 

 

Sadly for the past few years schools and teachers have been plastering over the cracks of our society failing our children to no reward and no end in sight. 

 

 

[Rogerborg]

How do you chaps feel about the suggestion that child benefit should be paid in the form of food vouchers which can't be used to buy booze or fags?

[Tommikka]

1 hour ago, Rogerborg said:

How do you chaps feel about the suggestion that child benefit should be paid in the form of food vouchers which can't be used to buy booze or fags?

This is a route that is destined to fail.

Those who are going to spend their child benefit elsewhere are going to find a way of abusing the vouchers.

At best they will get to spend the equivalent value in a shop that will take the vouchers in exchange for anything, at worst they will be traded with others for cash below value.

They may also be used for food but not contributing to properly feeding the children.

 

The end goal won’t help those children who really need it

 

The other avenue is the alcohol and cigarettes, you could outlaw them outright - and stop everyone from drinking alcohol and using the drug nicotine, or you could tax them more - just take more money from being available to those children.

 

You can put a higher tax or set minimum pricing on poor people’s drinks like white lightning - so it’s harder for the poor to have the vices that the better classes are allowed to have.

Minimum pricing hits the poorer harder - the middle classes can have their wine and champagne for occasions, but the poor people aren’t allowed to 

Particiularly those poor people who do put their children first and would have the cheap drinks 

 

It’s similar to saying not to give money to the people on the streets, they will only spend it on alcohol or drugs - so again it’s OK for the middle classes to have vices to let off steam after a hard day at the office but not OK for someone living on the street to get an outlet from their day to day life 

 

[Shamal]

Wring place. Sorry 👍

[Shamal]

On 27/07/2020 at 09:19, Rogerborg said:

 

Agreed, many UK retailers ignore both the spirit and letter of the law in order to make sales.  IFs should be gopping to the point where no self-respecting gangsta wannabe would be caught dead with one.

 

It's a tough call for the cops, they can only go by the report that they've received. Do you think the witness said "Yeah, it's half blue", or did they just report a firearm?  Want to bet if Kai there was racking the slide / dropping the mag?  And let's not jump to any conclusions about the witnesses' ethnicity or intentions either.

 

While I accept the legality of the family's actions, I do have to question the wisdom of it.  That's (ostensibly) an IF, so you're looking at an adult purchase and £60 minimum, it's not something picked up for £5 at the market.  Why you'd want an inner city lad in an area with a gangs and firearms problem to be playing with / training with a mock-Glock escapes me.  You've got yourself into a million pound house, don't mess it up now.

 

Make no mistake though, it is legal, and if we don't defend the rights of owners even in cases like this, who will be left to speak up when they come for us?  Let's just hope this doesn't result in knee jerk changes to the law.

 

And rights or wrong aside, it is a cromulent lesson in why we should be very circumspect with RIFs or IFs, even on our own property.  I was in a Facebook group recently where some daft lad had posted video of himself test-shooting across his (multiple) neighbours' gardens, in Grangemouth of all places (remember this debacle?), and it was just:

 

This is why I joined UKAPU to protect our hobby/sport from the dogooders and idiots who,in their own ways,would have it all stopped.

If you haven't already, think about subscribing to UKAPU.Its not much and they are working constantly to protect your right and ensure the continuing future of airsoft.

Regards

[Rogerborg]

Hmm, that reminds me, didn't I... yes, I did sign up 3 years ago and never heard a thing after the initial registration emails.

 

Oh, and it looks like I'm following them on Facebook, but my settings have defaulted to "Follow but don't ever see anything from them". Nice.

 

Let's see, blah blah, dog ate our emails, COVID, patches, huh, "insurance waver [sic]" [sic].  Tsk, they should know that it's no such thing.

 

 

[Shamal]

I didn't  mean you specifically.I should have said I think it's beneficial for all who enjoy the sport to support them, and the unseen work they do.

Costs me a tenner a year.

Surprised that you heard nothing back from them though.

Regards

[Stratton Oakmont]

21 hours ago, Tommikka said:

 

It’s similar to saying not to give money to the people on the streets, they will only spend it on alcohol or drugs - so again it’s OK for the middle classes to have vices to let off steam after a hard day at the office but not OK for someone living on the street to get an outlet from their day to day life 

I f you continue to use class as a reason to justify your message you will undermine its credibility. Useless, selfish parents are the problem and class is irrelevant the children just suffer in different ways. The poorest are just easiest to see and wring our hands over, when you support the feckless with policies that encourage state support rather than individual responsibility why would people change?

 

[Tommikka]

3 hours ago, osteoshot said:

I f you continue to use class as a reason to justify your message you will undermine its credibility. Useless, selfish parents are the problem and class is irrelevant the children just suffer in different ways. The poorest are just easiest to see and wring our hands over, when you support the feckless with policies that encourage state support rather than individual responsibility why would people change?

 

That’s part of the issue of the argument for ‘food voucher’ based child benefit or benefits.

Its a class based dinner party & daily mail argument.

Yes - selfish (or neglective) parents are that problem, not their class or how much money they have.

 

State support vs individual responsibility is also a complex matter.

You can take on all your responsibilities and still fall into the need for support from the welfare state.

There are those that abuse it, but also there are those who it is designed for

[Rogerborg]

3 hours ago, Tommikka said:

Its a class based dinner party & daily mail argument.

 

This thread needs more canapés.

 

I'd be fine getting and spending child bennies as vouchers, this isn't a suggestion for thee but not me. Sure, the worst parents would still find ways to trade them away. The groans from landlords and the cheers from betting shops when housing benefit starting being paid direct to tenants could be heard from orbit.

 

But some wouldn't, and I'm all about pragmatic harm reduction, rather than perfection-or-nothing. 

 

You'd have a tough time trading them for an airsoft IF, I'd hope.

[Stratton Oakmont]

18 minutes ago, Rogerborg said:

 

This thread needs more canapés.

 

Mushy or marrow fat?

oh canapés my mistake 

[Sneaky]

Some would say...the police are colour blind...

[John_W]

And in the Local Paper today, police are confused between Airguns and Replica guns.

https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/18802947.armed-police-arrest-teenagers-watford-town-centre/

[Rogerborg]

14 hours ago, John_W said:

And in the Local Paper today, police are confused between Airguns and Replica guns.

 

I am... so triggered... right now.

 

 

 

There's an assumption and assertion by airgun sellers and owners that firearms (i.e. air guns) can't also be imitation firearms.

 

The police seem to disagree: "arrested for possession of an imitation firearm". Also: "three males who were arrested for firearms offences" (plural).

 

Even if that's an air pistol, on any plain Clapham Omnibus interpretation of the law, it's also a realistic imitation of a real firearm.

 

Why?  Because it looks like one.  And it's intended to look like one.

 

I agree with the police on this one.  I don't want to see lads convicted for being lads, but I see no reason why the law as written wouldn't apply to anything that's a close copy of a real gun, regardless of whether it's a plastic toy, airsoft non-firearm, airgun firearm, or even a real firearm modified to look even more real.

 

Since the same defences would apply to public possession of an IF as public possession of an airgun or a firearm, it's not a concern for law abiding types.

 

It is however a reminder that public possession of an IF (realistic or otherwise, airsoft or otherwise) is an offence in itself, and we should always have our reasonable excuse to hand.

 

</rant>

[EDcase]

Of course the police and media are going to over exaggerate the initial situation.

These articles may not be reporting accurately and the police may make incorrect statements as well.

 

We don't know what happened after they were taken to the station and the police figured out they hadn't caught the terror cell they thought they had.

These lads were probably let off with warnings.

[Rogerborg]

1 hour ago, EDcase said:

These lads were probably let off with warnings

 

Mmm, maybe not "We would like to thank the people who phoned in; without your help and vigilance this gun could have been used to further commit crime."

 

"Teenage males" could mean 13 year olds playing Cops and Mostly Peaceful Protestors.  Or it could mean a gang of 19 year olds out doing some Involuntary Wealth Redistribution.  Given the city centre location, it might be the latter.  When I was a kid we'd take our flintlocks airguns out to the woods and fields to shoot each other in the legs tin cans.

 

[EDcase]

2 hours ago, Rogerborg said:

 

"We would like to thank the people who phoned in; without your help and vigilance this gun could have been used to further commit crime."

 

That's just a hype sentence to make the police look like they're doing some good.

 

While they're catching dangerous cannabis drug fiends and speeding motorists, we get murders, rapes and terrorist attacks...