From: Dave Reay, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> It
>seems to me to be yet another case of 'lets have a go at
>the police 'cos they never answer back'
In a lot of cases they are never called upon to "answer Back" or as
others may see it "to defend their actions"
>and its a popular
>national pastime from disenchanted shooters who blame
>every one but themselves for their problems.
In what way were the shooters to blame for the loss of their sport?
other than having respect for the sensibilities of the bereaved parents
of Dunblane. The police and news media had no such concerns and made
every possible opportunity to vilify the INNOCENT shooters. Its odd that
the News of The World should have suddenly found out how evil
paedophiles are, and are now being accused of a "witchhunt" against
paedophiles, when the Cullen report clearly showed that Thomas Hamilton
was a paedophile. Why was the "witchhunt" against shooters not decried?
It seems that the police are more willing to protect the rights of
paedophiles than the Law abiding citizen that shoots for a hobby!
>Lets look at the wider picture here. Police officers are
>not trained to the degree that military special forces units
>are. They perform under different rules altogether.
Yes! the military are not free to open fire on the general public, yet
we have seen enough cases of the police doing exactly that to cause
severe concern!
>As far as accountability goes, well, if the police werent
>being held to account, then what the hell is the inquest
>doing?
Exactly what the inquest did not do in the "Martin" case, it is giving
the police the right to kill when in fear of their lives and denying it
to the ordinary citizen. When did the police become a protected species?
> I speak
>from experience, as I look at the panic alarms and emergency
>equipment in my living room, due to a threat from criminals.
That is a failing of the "system" that does not allow you to protect
youreself by having handguns or other suitable defensive articles, it is
nothing to do with the shooters.
>Hobby shooters who pontificate from their sitting rooms
>don't have that to contend with. I do not relish the idea
>of the press discovering my identity and publishing my
>details either.
No! we only have to go out in the "mean streets" totally unprepared. We
are not allowed to know who the real criminals are and who to avoid. As
shooters we are not even allowed to know whether a "probationary" club
member is a psychopath or not, the plod will not allow us to run a check
on prospective club members. So we have to take them on trust, I for one
would like to know that we are not allowing "nutters" access to firearms
and the plod should take an equally responsible attitude by giving a
simple yes or no to the question "would this applicant be denied a
firearms certificate for any reason?". At least you have a load of mates
that can come to you're rescue tooled up to the knocker!
We weren't too impressed at being forced to hand over our legally owned
possesions under threat of ten years imprisonment for none compliance
either! Lifes a bitch.
>I strongly resent the undertones that are implied in the
>post from 'Rusty'. He is suggesting that the officers
>should be treated as defendants.
Why should they not? If they are innocent then they will be found
innocent and no further stigma will be attached to them, but if on the
other hand they have been found guilty then they should be subject to
the full weight of the Law, as we are. Why do you assume that because
you are a police officer that you have special priveledges that do not
allow youre version of events to be questioned, make you immune to
prosecution and have rights that the common man does not have?
> It appeared
>to be an emotionally disturbed man who unfortunately
>did a very stupid thing.
Aided and abetted by a ART that overreacted to what would have been a
relatively minor act of stupidity, if they had held back and surveyed
the situation they could have ascertained to what degree of threat they
were really being put, with a bit of diplomacy and common sense they
could have ended the confrontation without passing the "Death Sentence".
As the "Death Penalty" has been withdrawn in grate britain, it is not
unreasonable to ask why the police have arbitrarilly carried out such a
sentence!
The banning of handguns in the U.K. at the instigation of the police
(among others) has removed the veil from the eyes of shooters, who
genuinely believed that it was in the interest of the public. They are
now seeing reallity for the first time. The police are no more than an
extended arm of the "Tax collection" service, their spy cameras are
only there to provide revenue from speeding motorists, they do not
protect the children on estates, they are mounted on motorways where
children have no right to be. The "clean up" rate for the police is
abysmal, if I were to tell my boss that I had repaired 17% of the faults
he had passed to me, he would go ballistic and I would expect to be
signing on for a very long time. Don't bullshit us, if you really want
respect, F***ing earn it, hit the real criminals, leave the soft option
alone and do "the biz". otherwise you will be seen as the wankers that
you appear to be. I know a few old style "coppers" that have had the
balls to return their "Long Service Medals" and "Commendations" for Real
Bravery purely because they knew we were being victimised and sided with
our cause. For them I have the utmost respect, as for the plod that try
to make me feel like a criminal because I shoot firearms for a hobby,
well, I have only contempt.
--
Dave Reay
--
Don't hold back Dave, tell us how you really feel!<G>
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
