Why no Cannons on Police Helicopters?

"tim gueguen" wrote in message news:PCAic.247951$oR5.203713@pd7tw3no...
"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Most criminals know that shooting cops is a really BAD idea.

Yet around 150 are killed and 230 injured in the US every year and US
cops
are armed while British police typically are not.

I prefer things our way.


Your way didn't work too well in Northern Ireland.

You mean that place they sent the Army into.


Good point. The US Army certainly does not patrol my neighborhood,
city or state. No need to.

On some days (when they please the English) Northern Irelanders are
referred to as "British". On other days, it is generally considered a
crime to be Irish.


You know, those folks with really cool guns. The Royal Ulster Constabulary
made considerable use of firearms as well.


As did the Loyalist guerrillas, who greatly outnumbered their
adversaries from IRA.

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 17:03:59 +0000 (UTC), Jim Yanik
wrote:


Who's Don Harstad? This is just one man's opinion.

A retired deputy sheriff with over 30 years experience.


Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:47:53 +1200, Kerryn Offord wrote:



Jim Yanik wrote:

SNIP
Now,that UK man who shot the burglars in the back was justified,as the
police were of NO use,and he had suffered repeated burglaries.The police
failed in providing him security,so it fell upon himself to do so.
Criminals should have no right to safety while commiting their crimes.
SNIP

This is simply attempted murder. The target was no threat and was
departing, but the householder shot him anyway (that makes it vindictive).

If the householder had just shot the guy in the chest when he first
confronted him....

It seems to come down to a difference in attitudes.

Americans hold everybody else's life cheap (cheaper than the cheapest
bit of property).

Uk/NZ and others consider both lives of value, but allow reasonable
force in defence of self or others (defence of property is different).

Of course, now that NZ has given up defending itself you will be awfully
grateful when rough men with guns show up to carry the burden. Confusing
humanity for an unwillingness to defend oneself in a game for fools.

Al Minyard

"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
m...
"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:PCAic.247951$oR5.203713@pd7tw3no...
"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Most criminals know that shooting cops is a really BAD idea.

Yet around 150 are killed and 230 injured in the US every year and
US
cops
are armed while British police typically are not.

I prefer things our way.


Your way didn't work too well in Northern Ireland.

You mean that place they sent the Army into.


Good point. The US Army certainly does not patrol my neighborhood,
city or state. No need to.

On some days (when they please the English) Northern Irelanders are
referred to as "British". On other days, it is generally considered a
crime to be Irish.


Brennan - as always, you're are talking rubbish.


You know, those folks with really cool guns. The Royal Ulster
Constabulary
made considerable use of firearms as well.


As did the Loyalist guerrillas, who greatly outnumbered their
adversaries from IRA.

I guess you're a former fully paid-up member of Noraid? Good job, striking
one home against those pesky Brits for the underdog colonists. Go team!

Doyle

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 09:16:45 -0700, (Marc Reeve)
wrote:

Mary Shafer wrote:

I'll dig my n-th generation copy out and scan it in. It's with my
Sidewinder "reach out and touch someone" drawing from the Libya
incident and all the other aerospace graffiti I've collected.

Ah, bless you, Mary. Hope it's not packed too far away after the move.

Um, that's "moves". I packed it up at Dryden, moved it to Lancaster,
moved it to the first house in Palm Desert, and just now moved it to
the second house in Palm Desert. At least, I think I did. There's a
small chance it's still in Lancaster, but we'll be back up there for
the summer in a couple of weeks.

Anyway, I'll look for the file. It's a thick one, because I collected
a lot of office graffiti and xerox lore.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
m...
"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:PCAic.247951$oR5.203713@pd7tw3no...
"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Most criminals know that shooting cops is a really BAD idea.

Yet around 150 are killed and 230 injured in the US every year and
US
cops
are armed while British police typically are not.

I prefer things our way.


Your way didn't work too well in Northern Ireland.

You mean that place they sent the Army into.


Good point. The US Army certainly does not patrol my neighborhood,
city or state. No need to.

Because no part of the US has had a bunch of terrorist bombers running
around blowing things up for years. If say one of the militia groups had
engaged in a sustained and effect campaign of terror in Michigan you'd see
soldiers patrolling the street there as well. The US has been fortunate
that its terrorists have either been relatively limited in their actual
activities, or have proven ineffectual at anything beyond simple crime, like
the Order in the mid '80s. The US has never had a terrorist group as
operationally effective as the IRA or the Red Brigades.

tim gueguen 101867

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
In 2002/03, just over 3 in 100 households were burgled (this includes
attempted burglaries and burglaries where nothing was taken). "
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page55.asp

This corresponds interestingly with the 2002 US DoJ figures citing 27.7
burglaries per 1,000 households: just under 3 per 100.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus02.pdf

Something is weird here.

The US, population 300 million, has 110 million households and
reported 3 million burglaries.

The UK, population 60 million, reported 1 million burglaries.

Both are reporting the same per-household burglary rate, but the UK is
reporting a per-capita burglary rate nearly twice as high. Is the
average household size in the UK really that much smaller (less than
two)?

-jake

Alan Minyard wrote:
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:47:53 +1200, Kerryn Offord wrote:



Jim Yanik wrote:

SNIP

Now,that UK man who shot the burglars in the back was justified,as the
police were of NO use,and he had suffered repeated burglaries.The police
failed in providing him security,so it fell upon himself to do so.
Criminals should have no right to safety while commiting their crimes.

SNIP

This is simply attempted murder. The target was no threat and was
departing, but the householder shot him anyway (that makes it vindictive).

If the householder had just shot the guy in the chest when he first
confronted him....

It seems to come down to a difference in attitudes.

Americans hold everybody else's life cheap (cheaper than the cheapest
bit of property).

Uk/NZ and others consider both lives of value, but allow reasonable
force in defence of self or others (defence of property is different).


Of course, now that NZ has given up defending itself you will be awfully
grateful when rough men with guns show up to carry the burden. Confusing
humanity for an unwillingness to defend oneself in a game for fools.

Al Minyard

What makes you say NZ has given up defending itself?

There is a world of difference between defending yourself, which NZers
have no problem with, and shooting as a first response... and also not
being careful about where you are shooting (today's news story about 4
Iraqi school children being shot by US forces when they rushed out of
school to look at the Humvee that had been blown up.... is this the kind
of defending we are expected to be grateful for?)

NZs defence force is about 12000 from a population of ~4 million (0.3%
of pop)

This equates to a USA (pop ~300 million) or 900,000....

Ok, so relatively speaking, we are under protected (there is one regular
infantry battalion per 2 million..so does the US have 150 infantry
battalions?

OTOH... most enlist for more than a single 4 year tour (average more
experienced soldiers....)

"tim gueguen" wrote in
news:bX%ic.260994$Ig.101272@pd7tw2no:


"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
m...
"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:PCAic.247951$oR5.203713@pd7tw3no...
"Evan Brennan" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in
message
...
Most criminals know that shooting cops is a really BAD idea.

Yet around 150 are killed and 230 injured in the US every year
and
US
cops
are armed while British police typically are not.

I prefer things our way.


Your way didn't work too well in Northern Ireland.

You mean that place they sent the Army into.


Good point. The US Army certainly does not patrol my neighborhood,
city or state. No need to.

Because no part of the US has had a bunch of terrorist bombers running
around blowing things up for years. If say one of the militia groups
had engaged in a sustained and effect campaign of terror in Michigan
you'd see soldiers patrolling the street there as well. The US has
been fortunate that its terrorists have either been relatively limited
in their actual activities, or have proven ineffectual at anything
beyond simple crime, like the Order in the mid '80s. The US has never
had a terrorist group as operationally effective as the IRA or the Red
Brigades.

tim gueguen 101867




The US military is prohibited by LAW from operating inside the US.
(Posse Comitatus,IIRC)

Bsides,the police SWAT teams,FBI and BATF-troop are all very close to
military capabilities.Now the National Guard (considered today's militia)
could be deployed.
Although,IMO,they are merely part of the ordinary US military.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

"tim gueguen" wrote in message news:bX%ic.260994$Ig.101272@pd7tw2no...
Your way didn't work too well in Northern Ireland.

You mean that place they sent the Army into.


Good point. The US Army certainly does not patrol my neighborhood,
city or state. No need to.

Because no part of the US has had a bunch of terrorist bombers running
around blowing things up for years. If say one of the militia groups had
engaged in a sustained and effect campaign of terror in Michigan you'd see
soldiers patrolling the street there as well.


For the better part of a century? : )

And Northern Ireland is part of an island, Michigan is not. This
should have made the job much easier for the British government, but
they are simply bad policemen.


US has never had a terrorist group as operationally effective as the IRA


The British called Washington's Continental Army a terrorist group.

The IRA was successful mainly because the numbskulls of the British
security forces were so ineffective. To this day, their strategy in
Northern Ireland still has no clear objectives.