More Workplace Violence???

[Farbin Kaiber]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2329089/Woolwich-attack-Two-men-hack-soldier-wearing-Help-Heroes-T-shirt-death-machetes-suspected-terror-attack.html

I'm sure somebody saw what I did there.

[oliver.r]

what the waffleswaffleswaffleswaffles

[10Toes]

If the victim had a gun...

[Fusion]

If the victim had a gun...

...maybe it would've somehow magically stopped the car from hitting him while he was supposedly walking the same direction, thus getting hit from the back.

[cale]

Wow, surprising that people threaten incidents like this over and over again and then finally somehow actually acts upon the threats? Britain has allowed fundamentalist Islamics far too much leniency.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Maybe if the police/military was allowed to carry firearms....

[kronus]

Maybe if the police/military was allowed to carry firearms....

oh i guess they shot the perps with their teacups and strange furry hats, then

[Vedubin01]

oh i guess they shot the perps with their teacups and strange furry hats, then

Supervisors have firearms and he is who killed him. Reports said it took 20 mins to get a supervisor there to take down the killer.

[Farbin Kaiber]

No, but they had to await the coppers/bobbies/wtf-ever they go by, called "marksmen" that actually have a gun issued to them.

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

I figure the first guys that showed on scene tossed crumpets at the suspects d0e/wafflewaffle.

[cale]

Maybe if the police/military was allowed to carry firearms....

Cops yes, having unarmed police is senseless. Their sole purpose is enforcement and keeping law, that regularly requires a fire arm.

The military though, are you implying they should be carrying their service rifles or side arms at all times? This guy was walking down the street in civi's off duty, he has no need or authority to be armed. The same would be true in America unless he was carrying a weapon of his own, I don't know of any non-middle east nations where you'd see military members off duty with their duty weapons.

[Farbin Kaiber]

I didn't say service weapons, but yes, if you are a military member, you should be able to carry. You are talking about viking warriors walking around villages without their battleaxe, or samurais in Koyoto not allowed to wear their kitana. Defenders are created to defend, not to defend on the clock.

[cale]

That's utter foolishness and is a cocktail for disaster. Hell, even your own gun loving country does not and would not allow such things. If there is not a active need for members to be armed, they are not armed, it's as simple as that. Assuming just because everyone is in uniform is capable of being trusted with a weapon 24/7 is ignorance of the realities of the military, are you going to trust a cook who shoots once every few years to be as disciplined with a rifle as a boots on the ground infantier?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Yes we do, any member of the armed forces is welcome to apply for and possess a CCP/CWP/CFP/CCW/whatever the hell you want to call it in your specific locale.

[cale]

And that is the same as an entitlement to carry simply for being in the military? No it's not, it's entitlement to apply for and prove that you're capable of carrying. It doesn't give you free reign to carry a weapon simply because you have a military ID.

[Farbin Kaiber]

But, having had military training, you are already accepted as having the training required to obtain a CCW. All you have to do is show training (military ID or other proof of enlistment) then pay the fee, and get the permit in any "Shall Issue" state.

BOOM.