Thread: Armed Police buying lunch

Originally Posted by Tussock

You can't defend yourself with a gun. You can defend yourself with a stick or a shield, but not a gun. A gun can only eliminate a threat.

Now, for 99% of what cops do, that gun is a threat to the cop. When you talk to a police officer, do they stand 5m away? No. So you stand and talk to a police officer and the gun is a threat to the police officer and to you. In defensive terms you are fighting over a gun. Not a good situation.

So you need two police officers. One to talk to you and one to stand off to the side and provide cover. Now you are talking to a police officer in the pie shop, at gun point.

Most of this I learned from a senior detective. The rest I learned doing firearms drills with Australian police officers in a civilian Jiu Jistu gym (this is all technically Jiu Jitsu). The senior detective described from experience the awkwardness of fighting someone while trying to throw your side arm to your partner. "Mostly a pain in the arse" I believe he said.

I'm happy for them to have an arsenal in the car, I just fail to see the logic of wearing one strapped to you. Every situation they are in right now involves a firearm, and they bought the firearm!

They are for threatening and only make sense if you use them the way the Americans or other violent countries do and just threaten people a lot and shoot a lot of people.

If I talk to police at gun point, that is not policing by consent. That is policing by coercion. They have fundamentally changed the nature of this country and its laws and principles.

Just watching the US cops on duke tv now, the above rings true