• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Have-a-go hero stabbed to death after chasing muggers who stole woman's bag"

Collapse

  • shaunbhoy
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Now I advocate concealed firearms for specially licensed members of public (as well as police), that's not something that was the case in this country for some time (if ever), so that's certainly tought to argue point.
    I think that YOU are the one that needs to be "specially licensed" AtW. You are a dangerous mix of stupidity and stubbornness. Were you and Sas separated at birth?

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    The stats that I linked to are pre-1997, ie - before current ban on firearms.

    Consequently statistics support my view that guns were not the biggest issue at all and it makes sense to go (at least) to pre-Dunblane legislation.

    Now I advocate concealed firearms for specially licensed members of public (as well as police), that's not something that was the case in this country for some time (if ever), so that's certainly tought to argue point.
    Why not just buy a pen 1s extension AtW or get a Pitbull ?

    this has nothing to do with safety or getting the bad guy , does it ?




    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by RichardCranium View Post
    Quite happy to help, because I believe if you got your way, that 1/3rd of knifings would turn into fatal shootings.
    The stats that I linked to are pre-1997, ie - before current ban on firearms.

    Consequently statistics support my view that guns were not the biggest issue at all and it makes sense to go (at least) to pre-Dunblane legislation.

    Now I advocate concealed firearms for specially licensed members of public (as well as police), that's not something that was the case in this country for some time (if ever), so that's certainly tought to argue point.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    ok, I dont want to labour the point. But 250 people stabbed to death is a proportion of how many people stabbed ?
    50 people shot to death is a proportion of how many people shot ?
    You are looking at mortality rates per incident, that's beyond the point - MORE people were killed by knifes than guns PRE dunblane.

    Banning guns did not solve the problem - gun crime has doubled.

    Banning knifes did not solve the problem - they are easier to conceal than guys and quicker to use actually.

    Leave a comment:


  • RichardCranium
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Good man Richard, I CBA to read that whole document... now pass me that sandwich
    Quite happy to help, because I believe if you got your way, that 1/3rd of knifings would turn into fatal shootings. And many of the ABH knifings and ABH kickings that are not in that .PDF will also turn into fatal shootings.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by RichardCranium View Post
    It says:

    But it also says:
    ok, I dont want to labour the point. But 250 people stabbed to death is a proportion of how many people stabbed ?
    50 people shot to death is a proportion of how many people shot ?


    I think AtW should concentrate his efforts on preventing students called Sh1 tman becoming doctors


    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Good man Richard, I CBA to read that whole document... now pass me that sandwich

    Leave a comment:


  • RichardCranium
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    so how many deaths were stabbings ?
    33% of what number ?
    It says:
    While the most common method of killing in 1997 was with a sharp instrument (just under a third of offences), nine per cent of the 650 homicide victims currently recorded for England and Wales in 1997 were shot.

    To examine the data in more detail, one has to use the figures for offences as initially recorded, before court and police decisions, so the percentages appear slightly different and indicate that eight per cent of homicide victims in 1997, or 59 people, were shot. Of these, a handgun was used in 39 cases, a long barrel shotgun in 12, sawn-off shotgun in four, rifle in three cases and the remaining case was unknown, but a supposed firearm.
    But it also says:

    In 1997, 738 deaths were initially recorded as homicide.

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    It's in the document I linked to
    sorry, it wouldnt open here


    maybe I should shoot it

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by SuperZ View Post
    Saddam had the right idea, cut their hands off
    It's in the Shariat I believe to cut off hand of thiefs...

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    so how many deaths were stabbings ?
    33% of what number ?
    It's in the document I linked to

    The main point is that pre-Dunblane firearm homicides were 8% vs 33% stabbings deaths.

    How many of those were firearm offences with legit firearms with Dunblane excluded? Probably nearly non-existant.

    Leave a comment:


  • SuperZ
    replied
    Originally posted by Zippy View Post
    They committed a murder and will get life imprisonment.
    Sorry I meant the theft part.If that came with a more severe punishment the theft/murder might never have happened. Snatching a bag or whatever is quite a threatening act.
    Saddam had the right idea, cut their hands off

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    http://www.parliament.uk/COMMONS/lib...9/rp99-056.pdf

    "In 1997 around 8% of homicides involved firearms and almost one third a sharp weapon."
    so how many deaths were stabbings ?
    33% of what number ?



    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    5% of a tiny number means fck all squared
    http://www.parliament.uk/COMMONS/lib...9/rp99-056.pdf

    "In 1997 around 8% of homicides involved firearms and almost one third a sharp weapon."

    Leave a comment:


  • EternalOptimist
    replied
    5 % ?????

    thats nothing. 5% of the people who have walked on the moon had red hair and 100% of the first people were called Neil.

    5% of a tiny number means fck all squared



    Leave a comment:

Working...
X