From: Jonathan Spencer, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
foot self in shoots?
>Why should someone who had 24 hr police protection need a gun for self
>defence?
which implies that the police *can* provide protection to Salman
>JFK.
and a bunch of others prove that protectors failed to protect
>In my opinion, tempered by many years of experience, both as an armed and
>unarmed officer, the use of a firearm as defence against sudden or
>unexpected attack is of very little value. It is impossible to assess,
>react, draw and fire an accurately placed shot if the assailant is attacking
>you with even a knife from less than 27 feet away.
But the argument is this: why should ordinary people be denied the
*chance* to defend themselves? And equally, if ordinary people are
denied the choice to carry, why should the police be allowed to carry
for their own self-defence? Plainly, it isn't a question of training,
because even if people had undertaken satisfactory training and
demonstrated competence, they would still be refused a FAC to carry (the
1997 Act notwithstanding). FWIW, I have no desire to carry, I'm merely
engaging in debate. :-)
--Jonathan Spencer, firearms examiner
"Justice is open to everybody in the same way as the Ritz Hotel."
Judge Sturgess, 22 July 1928
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
