Terror in London.

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Gee. One cannot carry a gun in the U.K., can one? Now, how do you suppose this incident might have ended if the deceased had been "carrying"?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Gee. One cannot carry a gun in the U.K., can one? Now, how do you suppose this incident might have ended if the deceased had been "carrying"?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
First I want to express my sympathy to the Family and friends of the innocent victim.

Larry,

Yes I'm afraid this "incident" would have turned out differently if the victim had a gun.

As the cowardly bastards first ran him down with a car, that we would now have are two whack job terrorist, but now they would have a gun!

What we saw here was how a terrorist attack goes down without guns! This attack was made by two crazed, murdering terrorists using a car and knives.

Larry, how many more do you think would have died if these nuts had a gun.
 
Last edited:

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Why am I not at all surprised you'd spin my comment that way?

As usual, you've ignored my obvious point completely.

It's a total waste of time/energy to debate the issue with you.
 
Larry he was run down from behind so i doubt wether or not he was carrying a weapon would have made the slightest difference, sorry but thats a null and void argument.
poor bugger never stood a chance.
ive just read that one of the attackers did in fact have a weapon, but when he went to fire it at police it blew back and took his finger off,

john
 
Gee. One cannot carry a gun in the U.K., can one? Now, how do you suppose this incident might have ended if the deceased had been "carrying"?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...
A better question might have been, "consider if a bystander was carrying?" While the murderers were hacking away, the horror could have been stopped before the injuries were lethal. Apparently after they were done, the poor soul was left dead in the street for twenty minutes before police arrived.

Of course the matter could be solved if all knives, axes and cars are banned.
 
Then they'd just use pencils to stab you with! or slash you with sharpened door keys.

You cannot legislate the law-abiding to reduce the crimes commited by the criminally minded. You just have to make the punishment suit the crime in equal measure. This has been known since the dawn of time, only since yoghurt and vegitarianism became fashionable, have we lost sight of reality.
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Larry he was run down from behind...
...meaning the two perps chased him down on foot from behind(?), or ran over him with a vehicle from behind? (Serious question...no news report I've seen over here has mentioned either.)
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
Probably not. Some bystander/hero would have opened fire trying to save the day and you would have been killed in the crossfire.
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Why am I not at all surprised you'd spin my comment that way?

As usual, you've ignored my obvious point completely.

It's a total waste of time/energy to debate the issue with you.
Larry,

You brought guns into the discussion. You wanted to know how it would have ended up if the victim had been armed.

After they ran him down with a car, they got out and started stabbing, hacking and dragging the poor victim. At that time they would have found his gun. Now we have armed terrorists!

Christ Larry, think about what you wish for!
 
Probably not. Some bystander/hero would have opened fire trying to save the day and you would have been killed in the crossfire.
Yep Jeff & Jim you're probably right again.....I'm so happy no one was there to help defend this poor soul...furthermore we should all be thankful that these terrorist showed mercy on the remaining poeple.....
 
Now we have armed terrorists!

You're missing the part where they were ALREADY armed. They didn't want to shoot him, they wanted to hack him up, and that's what they did.

They've made a choice in their society to shun guns. With that comes tradeoffs, as with any choice. It took a special response team to arrive with weapons, a good 7 minutes after the first responders arrived. The terrorists could have taken down the first responders and a lot of other people with no realistic threat to themselves. Thank God they didn't do that, and the death toll remains at one.

Just another note- US police officers are trained to shoot to kill. Eliminate the threat. Were the police in this incident intentionally trying for nonlethal hits? If not, the bit about the crossfire is just as likely to have killed a bystander from a policeman's shot as from an armed citizen..
 
I understood from ABC news last night, it took 20 minutes for the "Special Police" (the ones with guns and not enough bullets) to arrive on site. How can that be in a city of that size? Maybe each station house doesn't have a designated shooter.

All in all it is a sad day that some piece of crap would do such a crime and so near the barracks of the solider. Sounds like some Zulu attack out of the '50s. I hope you guys take this is a warning. We've been told terrorism has been eliminated....not even used in public speeches here.
 

Keith

Moderator
First Police responders - 9 minutes after first 999 call. SO19 (armed police) 10 mins after 1st gun present report. Less than 200 yards away there were two soldiers on duty at the barracks carrying loaded LA85A2's. They could have done the job a lot quicker if they'd been allowed to.

On the bright side - the Help for Heroes charity website (helpforheroes.org.uk) is currently unavailable due to a huge response from the UK public buying Help for Heroes T Shirts and thus donating to the charity (the murdered soldier was wearing one)

That is something everyone can do. It took me 5 hours, but I've got mine on it's way. Best way to show solidarity ever.
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Christ Larry, think about what you wish for!
As regards guns & self defense, clearly 'tis you to whom that sentiment more aptly applies, sir.

I look at the issue from a 'real world' standpoint. You view it from a 'pie-in-the-sky', utopian position.

No one whose brain functions normally could possibly believe that one would be better off in any and all self-defense situations UNARMED. That position defies all logic. Will a gun guarantee a person will ALWAYS come out 'victorious' in ANY situation? No. Only a fool would believe that. But, one has THE BEST CHANCE of coming out on top when armed - especially against multiple perps. That's just an indisputable fact.

As to the 'a-perp-might-end-up-with-your-gun' argument - woudda, couldda, shudda. There ARE NO guarantees in life.
 
Top