Va. Tech shooting

[Kim]

In the states we have rights recognized - allegedly - by the government and "the people" are supposed to be in charge (through representatives).

In the UK you are/were subjects of the crown and probably are granted "rights" or priviledges.

I for one am glad we threw off the yoke of tyranny, using our guns, and sent the crown packing. Now if we could only drive the English back beyond the wall and liberate Scotland.

Alba Gu Bra.

Yeah....OK.......I too believe that Hadrian's Wall was built for a purpose.

That doesn't explain why we're allowed to talk about the kind of laws and attitudes that exist about a situation like this in the UK.....but not in the US :huh: Why is it "politics" one place and not in another? I must have had about 20 posts deleted from this thread simply for asking how a nutter like that could get a gun (it's OK....I'm not asking the question again). Meanwhile......it seems fine for people to start making all kinds of presumptions about what kind of people the British are based on our laws and guess work about our culture. Looks like a one way street to me.

 

[agilis]

Kim, for the record, I certainly did not mean to suggest that there was anything effete or cowardly about British culture (whatever that may be) or the actions of the British service personnel held by the Iranians. I do think that British, Japanese, Australian, etc. gun laws are unreasonable and excessive. The Crown Prosecutor in the case I mentioned made several supercilious "this is not the wild west" type comments.

I have had a number of my posts deleted by Scubaboard censors over the past couple of years, including one from this topic string which may have been interpreted as hostile to current US political leaders. I also perceived, perhaps incorrectly and especially when I've received chastising emails from board monitors, a pronounced bias in what was permitted and what was not. So what. Big deal. It's only a message board.

 

[Lopaka]

They may have been told not to resist. On the other hand if you are right then what is worse surrender or

From the BBC news

US drops marine's Haditha charges

................

the US military has been conducting into incidents of alleged unlawful killings by US forces in Iraq.

It is a tough question, the balance between excessive aggression, and lack of will to react at all. The psychology of response to threats is one constantly studied by military training commands. There have been many studies of past battles where it was found only a small percentage of soldiers ever returned fire. I think modern recruit training is carefully constructed to program out this lack of response to threats. If you ever went through Marine basic training, you have an idea of how wrenching it is to reshape the thought processes of young civilians into warriors.

 

[cdiver2]

Kim I think Agilis question was just that a question and a good one.

Agilis if you are right then the other side of that coin would be the incedent in the BBC report, so what is the best way to go.

 

[Kim]

agilis. I didn't really have a problem with your post as it was only doing something that I actually consider reasonable - discussing the differences between two societies and their respective positions, and historical consequences of those differences. I don't expect everyone to agree - there'd be nothing to discuss if that were true. However - it's been made more than clear by NetDoc that he doesn't want that discussion here, hence the post deletions. My first comment was directed purely at that inconsistency as in this "reversed" approach it seems to be OK as long as it's the UK under scrutiny.

The flat out attacks on the British servicemen, and other insinuations that occurred afterward though are something else completely. I thought the Mods were supposed to be watching this thread.

 

[Green_Manelishi]

Yeah....OK.......I too believe that Hadrian's Wall was built for a purpose.

That doesn't explain why we're allowed to talk about the kind of laws and attitudes that exist about a situation like this in the UK.....but not in the US :huh: Why is it "politics" one place and not in another? I must have had about 20 posts deleted from this thread simply for asking how a nutter like that could get a gun (it's OK....I'm not asking the question again). Meanwhile......it seems fine for people to start making all kinds of presumptions about what kind of people the British are based on our laws and guess work about our culture. Looks like a one way street to me.

I cannot speak to why the subject is off limits in one area vs the other. I think it interesting, and I applaud it whole heartedly, though the "typical" English response to a threat to their civilized society; eliminate the threat. Who Dares Wins; SAS all the way. GSG-9 are pretty good as well.

 

[Kim]

......though the "typical" English response to a threat to their civilized society; eliminate the threat. Who Dares Wins; SAS all the way. GSG-9 are pretty good as well.

....and that is exactly the point. We have professionals to take care of situations like that so that we don't have to do it ourselves. And you are correct....they're very good - that's probably one of the main reasons we have such a low incidence of these type of events.

As for the Germans........how many of the original Bader/Meinhof made it through their jail sentences without committing "suicide"? :14:

Our solutions run a bit deeper than just a couple of laws.

 

[cdiver2]

It is a tough question, the balance between excessive aggression, and lack of will to react at all. The psychology of response to threats is one constantly studied by military training commands. There have been many studies of past battles where it was found only a small percentage of soldiers ever returned fire. I think modern recruit training is carefully constructed to program out this lack of response to threats. If you ever went through Marine basic training, you have an idea of how wrenching it is to reshape the thought processes of young civilians into warriors.

in that it is a tough question. As for soldiers not returning fire, in the WW's I can see a need for conditioning but in the wars our troops are fighting to-day more civilians than (elusive) combatants in the area I don't think so.

All troops no matter what nationality have a very hard job to do in Iraq and a lesser extent Afgan. I understand there frustration when a IED go's of and there is no one to engage (been there done that) but a point that was driven home to me in all my training.... Identify your target before shooting.

 

[Green_Manelishi]

....and that is exactly the point. We have professionals to take care of situations like that so that we don't have to do it ourselves. And you are correct....they're very good - that's probably one of the main reasons we have such a low incidence of these type of events.

As for the Germans........how many of the original Bader/Meinhof made it through their jail sentences without committing "suicide"? :14:

Our solutions run a bit deeper than just a couple of laws.

Yes you do; it's interesting the English professionals are military but the German is Border Police, as are many US units police rather than military; although even in a dream many are not worthy to shine to boots of GSG-9.

Anywho, "the issue that shall not be discussed" is a complex one and it's obvious that the hundreds of existing ***-control laws are a miserable failure at stopping anyone who wants to commit a crime. Perhaps because they are criminals?

I think a good idea is that "everyone" be armed. Cretins and hobgoblins would be met with overwhelming lethal response before they caused much damage.

 

[H2Andy]

I don't know. For the last several posts it all seems to be about how British culture and laws produces a bunch of people who can't defend themselves.

well, that's totally wrong

the Commonwealth nations, Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand in particular, have first rate militaries

they don't match the US in hardware and techonology (but do come close in quality, if not in numbers), but they are second to none in discipline and professionalism

good troops, good blokes