Off duty police officer sacked

[libby lou lou]

If your a law abiding police officer and a relative is not then the English police can discharge the good guy because a family member may not be what the powers that be feel a good citizen


That, is what i believe it used to be here, but not any longer ?

 

[JohnD]

start here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence

Country Non-firearm homicide rate Firearm homicide rate % homicides with firearms Overall homicide rate

England & Wales[15] 1.33 0.12 8 1.57

Ireland[15] 1.01 0.32 24 1.33

United States[15] 4.55 2.97 39 7.52

So, per 100,00 population, per year, USA has a rate of firearm homicide some 30 times as high as England and Wales.

You asked about Ireland, and as you see, the USA Firearms homicide rate is only about 10 times as high as the land of the IRA.

Of all homicides, 8% are committed with firearms in England and Wales, and 39% in the USA.

"Guns don't kill people, but they make much easier and much more common"

 

[Softus]

The fact is you think everyone who owns a gun is a gun nut.

If that were a fact, which it isn't, it would be irrelevant. In the real world, my next door neighbour has a gun, and he isn't a gun nut. And the bloke six doors down owns a gun, and goes clay pigeon shooting on Sunday mornings, and he isn't a gun nut.

The important fact is that fatal shootings, in countries where widespread gun ownership is legal, is at an unacceptably higher rate than in the other countries.

 

[Norcon]

Glad I don't live in Colombia.

 

[libby lou lou]

If your a law abiding police officer and a relative is not then the English police can discharge the good guy because a family member may not be what the powers that be feel a good citizen


That, is what i believe it used to be here, but not any longer ?

Well, this landed at the wrong time,middle of a niggle (that word legal?)
Now it's quietish, am i right about the above, still,?


"Guns don't kill people, but they make much easier and much more common"


Correct with above statement,but, but, to me, means there could be another answer.

And that's what your trying to pass off, Guns do not kill, no one denies it's easier with a gun than a knife, it's easier with a knife than a stick.


syl teigers sig is bang on

 

[Softus]

syl teigers sig is bang on

I'd like to believe that the pun was intentional, but it seems unlikely, in which case it would be merely ironic.

 

[libby lou lou]

nit pick again, so, you do believe in coincidence then?

 

[gant]

As with some people not being fully aware of the BNP policies, is it not a case that there are people who shout racist without knowing the exact definition,as in, treat and believe a race to be inferior.
I`m sure irony wont be lost on some reading this thread.

 

[Softus]

is it not a case that there are people who shout racist without knowing the exact definition,as in, treat and believe a race to be inferior.

Ironic beyond measure surely?

The exact definition, if there is just the one, doesn't include active discrimination - believing is enough. And it does include the option of believing one race to be superior to all others.

 

[AtoZ]

er i didnt make them up, my old employer the police authority did under the legislation handed down to them by the home office. As you say i saw it with my own eyes, a very restrictive employer, but then i knew that when i joined.

alternativley you can view the regulations here if you have the time or inclination. Regulation 6.1 is the main one applicable to whats being discussed here, but if you look at the others youll see how restrictive they are.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20030527.htm#6


cant say i ever felt like joining the bnp, or any other party for that matter as a result of what i saw or dealt with. theyre all rubbish, they all talk rubbish, and they all have their own intrests at heart, and never change the lot of those that really need it.

i know the drill thermo and i understand your stance on it..

my point is that the ''there are rules'' is pathetic. who made those rules?
why can one or two political parties make rules that exclude the rights of others?
why are those rules not looked at and adjusted?
same reason why there is no proportional representaion and turkeys dont vote for christmas..
i fully understand why govt dont want police with opinions but the reality is that only in disneyland does that happen.
( fox hunting a point in question)

rules arguments are just lazy

btw
i am a leftie, i dont support the bnp but it is wrong to try and shut them up as a group.
people want things changed and see bnp as politically incorrect, as much as racist

 

[mark vincent]

In this country race is a red herring, we have had a woman prime minister and we could have a black prime minister some day but one thing we will never have is a prime minister with a working class accent.
Class discrimination is alive and well, a cockney in no 10 it ain't never gonna happen, to paraphrase GB shaw "once one Englishman opens his mouth another Englishman despises him"if you can afford to send your kid to public school he gets to talk like a toff even if he is as thick as 2 short planks, that means he can walk into a good job like an estate agent for example.

 

[Softus]

er i didnt make them up, my old employer the police authority did under the legislation handed down to them by the home office.

i know the drill thermo and i understand your stance on it.

If you'd understood then you wouldn't have written this:

who made those rules?
why can one or two political parties make rules that exclude the rights of others?

Is isn't political who made those rules. As Thermo has said (at least twice), it's the police force.

why are those rules not looked at and adjusted?

Because there's nothing wrong with them.

i am a leftie, i dont support the bnp but it is wrong to try and shut them up as a group.

Well I wish you would shut up, 'cos you're giving lefties a bad name.
_______________

he can walk into a good job like an estate agent for example.

 

[AtoZ]

who made those rules?

The rules were in place when the said Police Officer joined the force. They were there when he broke them. They were there when he was sacked because he broke them. It doesn't make ANY difference who made them but for your education, The Government is the answer to your question.

if you are trying to make things ''very simple'' then you are doing a p**s poor job.

I'm not TRYING to make this 'very simple', IT IS very simple.

police see real life, the rest of us see the bbc,s view. no wonder some of them would be bnp....

So its just the police that see 'real life' is it? You don't know the first thing about me or my life. Where I've come from, my upbringing, etc so don't tell me what I have seen and not seen in my life. Believe me, I could make your eyes water and skin crawl with some of the things I've seen and had happen to me.

pah
you think you're the only one to see anything nasty?
i can tell you from experience that my skin does not crawl when i see something nasty. i feel a sadness and then i move on.
best not to get into a ****ing contest with someone online because it cannot be won. i'll use your words shall i?
''You don't know the first thing about me or my life''
that said, i'd bet on me, if we were to see who's been more 'active' so to speak!

come on mr hard done by, shall we get back to your pathetic argument..which government? which party? who was the law designed to exclude? how many laws have been made and then changed since that exclusion was passed.

do you obey every single rule mr hypocrite... can i call you mr hypocrite



for someone who's 'got the tee shirt',i think you are naive in the extreme if you think police, on or off duty, wont have an opinion.

 

[mark vincent]

Democracy in this country is dead, what we have is a political cartel, there is no real difference between any of them. Labour has had their turn wrecking the country now in the spirit of good old"British fair play"it is the tories turn to wreck the country.

 

[AtoZ]

er i didnt make them up, my old employer the police authority did under the legislation handed down to them by the home office.

i know the drill thermo and i understand your stance on it.

If you'd understood then you wouldn't have written this:

who made those rules?
why can one or two political parties make rules that exclude the rights of others?

Is isn't political who made those rules. As Thermo has said (at least twice), it's the police force.

why are those rules not looked at and adjusted?

Because there's nothing wrong with them.

i am a leftie, i dont support the bnp but it is wrong to try and shut them up as a group.

Well I wish you would shut up, 'cos you're giving lefties a bad name.
_______________

he can walk into a good job like an estate agent for example.

i do understand because i have been subjected to similar rules.
the bnp rule does not apply but other similar restrictions have applied to me in my working life.

i know thermo was plod and as such will not speak out where he would damage serving officers.
thermo might have said it twice softus but lets be clear here, the police dont make rules, they follow them!

i do have a left bias but i am not all theoretical like you!
i would have hanging back whereas you will argue against, for political rather than realistic reasons.
you link too many points, that are not proven, into what is a simple argument and then spend the time trying to belittle anybody with a different view.

i think you should shut the fook up and stop spouting sheeite..
actually, you know that is not true. i read what you have to say.
why is that opportunity denied to the people that society is supposed to trust the most, the police..
its not hard to understand zampas point that our legal system would let anyone off if a bias could be proved. we all know that but i prefer the trust argument rather than the more obvious 'rules is rules' or a legal bias.

now its me being theoretical