Westminster attack.

Originally posted by Robtard
Surt, do you really not understand the folly of your 'even if it saves one life' comment in regards to the 1 vs 64 deaths?

edit: Though it's actually less then one death per year/average in the UK

You are talking about number of cops killed in the US vs, number of cops killed in Britain.

Even if just 1 cop could be saved by arming the police, I think it would be worth doing it.

It has nothing to do with the number of cops killed here.

Not sure how you figure that, considering their incredibly low death-via-violence rate their police officers enjoy. It seems that their whacky way of doing things is working, at least better than we're doing for our cops.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not sure how you figure that, considering their incredibly low death-via-violence rate their police officers enjoy. It seems that their whacky way of doing things is working, at least better than we're doing for our cops.

I guess I'm thinking about the family of that 1.

There's really no feasible way in getting to zero, shit is going to happen.

IMO, 64 a year is far more unreasonable than less-than-one a year/average

Maybe not, all I said is if it would save even one life I would be for it.

but not 63+ lives. that's just overkill.

I wasn't talking about this country though, but okay.

If you accept that zero police deaths due to violence in the UK is impossible (which feasibly it is), I'm uncertain why you'd want to change things where it could potentially make it worse. For whatever reason (some may say their more sensible gun laws), it's working over there.

Originally posted by Robtard
If you accept that zero police deaths due to violence in the UK is impossible (which feasibly it is), I'm uncertain why you'd want to change things where it could potentially make it worse. For whatever reason (some may say their more sensible gun laws), it's working over there.

I understand now, so you just think that if they got guns they would be as bad with them as US cops are?

Originally posted by Surtur
I understand now, so you just think that if they got guns they would be as bad with them as US cops are?

Huh? I don't think our police force is by and large "bad", most cops are good people who know how to do their jobs, imo. My wanting the push for non-lethal means in taking down perps, body-cameras and better training is just sensible.

My comment was more about gun laws and it seems to be working for the UK. Look at their statics compared to ours.

Okay, and as I am saying: if giving them guns would save even one life I am for it. You implied it would "make things worse". How will it make things worse? The implication to me seemed to be that innocents might get killed, which if that isn't what you meant..again, how would things be worse by making the cops more equipped to defend themselves?

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay, and as I am saying: if giving them guns would save even one life I am for it. You implied it would "make things worse". How will it make things worse? The implication to me seemed to be that innocents might get killed, which if that isn't what you meant..again, how would things be worse by making the cops more equipped to defend themselves?

Dude, it's a matter of simple maths:

-They have less-than-one cop death per year/average
-Zero is an impossible number to reach barring something like mind controlling everyone, but then who needs cops when everyone's a drone

Considering the above, guns has the potential (read above, I said potential) to actually make it worse and not better.

So then again I ask how it would be made worse?

Originally posted by Surtur
So then again I ask how it would be made worse?

Lol. Really? Maths is how and here's the formula:

If we're at say 0.3 deaths per year/average, the chance to get lower is FAR less likely than the chance to get higher.

/maths

Originally posted by Robtard
Lol. really? Maths is how and here's how:

If we're at say 0.3 deaths per year/average, the chance to get lower is FAR less likely than the chance to get higher.

/maths

So then you are indeed saying innocents would get killed? Cuz I pointed this out before and you acted like it wasn't the case. So you can "lols math!" all you want, but make up your mind.

Dude, you asked me how it could be made worse and I explained it. The chance to improve on less-than-one death per year/average is very slim, where the change to turn it to shit is far greater. 1 death per year/average would be an increase or 64 deaths per year as another example of it potentially being made worse.

So by "turn to shit" you mean kill innocent people? That is all you had to say. So you do indeed think British cops would make the same mistakes US cops do.

FFS, Surtur, I'm talking about the UK rate of cop deaths due to guns going from less-than-one year/average to higher, as I've clearly stated multiple times and is the direct topic we've been discussing all this time.

So why would the rate of deaths increase because the cops are armed? I have asked you to explain this lol. You are saying more cops might die because they have guns?

Why? Be clear.

Literally explained it above more than once.

"If we're at say 0.3 deaths per year/average, the chance to get lower is FAR less likely than the chance to get higher."