UDs in the UK!

03 June 08

The enforced demise of the UK's gun/weapon culture, engineered by paranoid politicians, has resulted in a never-ending epidemic of UDs among incompetently-trained British police:

A British newspaper has pointed out in a recent editorial that the "select few" British police officers who are actually armed, fire their weapons far more by accident than they ever have on purpose! UDs (even the few that are actually reported, because there are too many witnesses for them to be covered up) are rampant, and extremely embarrassing, within the all of the UK's police services, particularly in light of arrogant, and manifestly dishonest, proclamations that "training" provided to officers is "the best available."

The unhappy truth is, in the UK, the blind are leading the blind, as even the blind can plainly see!

Chronically UD-prone officers are routinely treated by police administrations the same way pedophile-priests are treated by the Catholic Church. " Solutions" to the problem range from (1) promotion, to (2) lateral transfer, to (3) comfortable retirement. Guilty parties are, of course, never remediated, much less disciplined, as such a thing would embarrass incompetent police administrators and mendacious politicians.

Thus, the "solution" virtually guarantees that the problem will never be meliorated. More to the point, it guarantees the UK's veritable army of " short-men-in-cheap-suits" will all keep their pathetic jobs!

Also curious is the fact that UDs among the precious-few non-police Brits who actually own guns legally is always identified as a "crime," and the hapless gun-owner is viciously denigrated, vilified, stripped of his rights, and prosecuted. Simultaneously, the same UDs, when committed by police officers, are always called "mistakes," and the officer involved is predictably the next chief of police!

/John

Bank "Security"

03 June 08

I talked with a uniformed, "armed" bank-guard today. He was not one of our students, but I noticed he was "armed" with a 22-rimfire, autoloading, target pistol! It was sitting, unsecured, in a chintzy, chicken-hide, belt holster, and I asked him if it had been issued to him by his employer.

When you see private, security guards armed with this kind of cheap junk, it is usually because that is all they can afford, but not in this case! He, with a straight face, indicated that the 22 was his personal choice. He indicated that his reasons were:

(1) The clerk at the gunshop where he bought it told him it was extremely accurate and thus perfect for self-defense, and "That guy must knowwhat he's talking about."

(2) "I've shot larger calibers a few times, but I can't hit anything!"

(3) "It will only take one shot." at which point he placed his index finger on his own forehead.

He then volunteered that he keeps a charged magazine in the pistol, but does not keep a round in the chamber

I asked him if his boss, or his client (the bank), knew he was carrying a rimfire pistol for ostensibly serious purposes. He indicated both thought it was "okay."

In as understanding a way as I could, I told him he had been given bad advice, that his life was at great risk, along with the lives of bank customers and employees, and that he needed to get himself a serious gun, serious training, and look for another employer!

It's obvious that neither the owner of this security company, nor the bank they have as a client, could possibly care less about the safety of this young lad, nor the safety of anyone else in the bank.

Imagine that!

As this episode illustrates, the level of ignorance among the general population on this subject is astounding.

Since the FBI has devoted itself to terrorism prevention, domestic bank robberies are way up. We are in for exciting times! There will only be"the quick and the dead."

Once again, we're all on our own! It can't be said too often.

/John