From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I long ago wrote a paper which is on our website about the
> method for how firearms for self-defence should be reintroduced,
> I was quite surprised that Nottingham Police seem to be doing
> what I said.
??? Were they. Never heard that story Steve, do
enlighten us.
I don't think it's as difficult to do as IG makes it out to be,
all the questions of who should be allowed to carry and
what the criteria should be can be thrashed out by the
usual methods Parliament uses in all legislation designed
to regulate something. It's done all the time. I don't agree
with the blanket statement that "we don't need it here",
weather or not it is needed by every one all the time is of
course open to debate and yes there probably are only a
small number of cases where it would have actually made
any difference to the outcome but there certainly are
some circumstances where a firearm *could* be needed.
The obvious is for people who are in potentially dangerous
jobs, sercurity staff, back staff or people who regularly
deal with goods that are likely to be removed from them
by criminal violence, possibly people who have informed
on criminals etc. All of these reasons and more *may* be
satisfactory to warrant the keeping of a firearm for
protection, to say that we simply "don't need that here" is
as far from the mark as saying "The police don't need/do
need to be armed all the time as a matter of policy"
Jonathan Laws
--
If you want enlightening it's still in the publications
section of the website.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
