London Bridge Incident
- Thread starter XeNoN89
- Start date
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,365
HaHa, that stupid woman on BBC news claiming that London is one of the safest cities and that we shouldn't be afraid. Yup, tell that to the families directly affected by this.
What are you worried about ?
That she might actually want to deal with Islamic extremisum.
Maybot puppet of Murdoch acting all hard but we all know she was a failure as HS cutting armed police to the bone and is a sham of a PM. We need a leader that will give the police and security forces the resources they need to get the job done.
They didn't, he's talking crap. Lots of eyewitness reports saying unarmed police officers running towards danger, and one BTP officer was seriously injured whilst trying to do so.
Detaining the people on the terrorism watch list would be a start.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 2,382
- Location
- York
I call bullpoo did the unarmed transport policeman who's in hospital at the moment run away? Nope brave bloke. Well done to the police who slotted the terrorist dead. No doubt there be a investigation and there get blamed for a shoot to kill instead of group hug and a good talking to by Corbyn and co.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,190
- Location
- Rollergirl
Why are you asking me, I haven't advocated that approach.
I know I am, and if you want dispute the link then fill your boots.
They already do. It's a lot of data to sift through though.
See: https://www.channel4.com/news/nsa-spying-pattern-of-life-data-analysis-intelligence
https://www.palantir.com/solutions/intelligence/
Thank you ,,,, actual sense.
Losing access to a free internet/increased surveillance. I am all for trying to protect the country but I draw a line at damaging one of our core freedoms to do so.
Irrelevant. They will find means of communication regardless of internet restrictions. If anything more restrictions on the internet will likely make the problem worse as they will find even less traceable means of communication.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
Lots of members of this forum decrying the possibility of the Internet being censored, whist happily ignoring the forum they already frequent is censored is odd to me....
great excelent news we have 35 witnesses we can put in a court room/police station and use their testimony to target the people just like you say we should!!
ah **** they're all locked up in an internment camp without trial and so any testimony from them is completely inadmissible and all those nasty terrorists can carry on going about their radicalization in our mosques...
Associate
- Joined
- 28 May 2017
- Posts
- 1,122
- Location
- Aberdeen
Bad people are armed now while innocent or 'good' people aren't. They access weapons on the black market. If guns were more easily available in the UK I would imagine you would not be able to have one if you have criminal convictions, you would need character references and maybe even psychological evaluation / reference from Doctor that you don't have mental health issues. All weapons would be recorded on a central register with owner details captured.
If even 1 in 10 people on the streets had an open or concealed carry weapon I'm sure it would make criminals of all stripes think twice.
That, but often they are reported and the authorities do nothing about it :/
As for the public owning and carrying guns... it's not a good idea. Look at the gun crime in the US because of it, FAR more Americans shoot each other than die from terrorist attacks or even wars. If they do allow people to carry guns it should be limited to defence staff, people who have been thoroughly vetted first and have access to proper training.
Last edited:
This. If anything, it would be more prudent to keep everything open and unrestricted!
And what about the ones who are innocent?
Maybe they are capable of differentiating between the rules on a privately owned discussion forum, and the law as it applies to them? If you decide to post "Muslim scum" repeatedly here then you might get a ban, but the state isn't going to silence you. Hope that clears it up.
