Hystery

But they -were- totally helpless anyway, even with their 9mm handgun. Because nothing can prepare them to face 2 terrorists armed with AK-47. Anyone would run for their life in front of that and try and evacuate the vicinity while waiting for reinforcement. They didn't have any opportunity to defend themselves because they couldn't do anything to begin with, even with a handgun.

No, I'm saying that whether they were armed or not, it wouldn't have made a single difference in that situation. Therefore, why arming them anyway, if it doesn't help them? I told you this situation was a bad example altogether.

They were armed. 9mm pistols, actually (don't ask me the exact model, I've no idea). The situation was still beyond them, as they were in no way capable of fighting back organized terrorists with assault rifles. Especially since they got assaulted by surprise. It's actually a perfect example of 'arming every cop doesn't make it any better'. They were armed, but still couldn't do anything. One of them died, even.

You know that those cops shown in the video are the equivalent of constables and lower, right? They're city cops. Their main duty is to write parking tickets and low degree fines. In no way they are trained to face individuals armed with assault rifles, of course they would try to get to safety; this situation was beyond their abilities. This particular situation is in no way a good example.

You'll have to provide me a reliable source for that, because I have never heard of such things happening anywhere in my country (and I prefer to warn in advance, sites like InfoWars and BreitBart are - not- reliable sources). As for the win, the terrorist has been neutralized and no civilians were injured, sounds like a win in my book.

Would have been a totally different story if he'd gotten out of that car with a rocket launcher. Might sounds silly, but it's that kind of thing where we can remake the whole world with 'IF's, mate. In that particular case, UK police officers proved their skills to resolve a problematic and dangerous situation without having to use a firearm, and I respect and applaud that. There's nothing naive about it.

Another brilliant proof that you don't need guns to fight terrorists. A bit of pepper spray and the dude was neutralized. Good job to the police officers, UK police is truly to be looked up to.

Isn't that already the case though? I'm pretty sure most intelligence services around the globe have a watch list with names of possible terrorists in them. Though widening the list to extremists would be a direct attack on privacy (on top of ethical problems, like who's there to judge what's extreme or not, and what kind of extreme is judged dangerous or not). Stuff said on the internet can hardly be concrete proof. Many times over the internet I have been told to 'kill myself' and the like. Should they have a police investigation on their asses for pushing to suicide?

M'yeah, but no. Technically, you're not supposed to text people for private stuff, or use snapchat, or FB, or Skype, or Discord, or anything that is not directly related to your work. If you're at work, you're there to work, plain and simple. If my boss caught me texting on my phone or using snapchat or whatever app, you bet your ass I'd get shouted at with a threat to be fired. You don't need privacy at work, as you're there to work. And it applies to everyone. Police officers included.

Besides, putting them in jail isn't going to solve anything, they'll probably just manage to radicalize some of their cellmates.

Checkpoints won't stop everything from happening anyway because you can always conceal stuff somewhere somehow, but I'll give you another possible reason as of why it's not viable over long periods of time. After the first terrorist attack in France, the government launched the Sentinel operation, which basically consisted into using our army to protect most crowded cities and touristic areas. A decent idea, if it lasted just a few months. As of now, it's been two years our soldiers have been posted around the country like that, just standing on specific spots or walking around areas, with their assault rifle, hand weapon, bulletproof vest and 30 kilos of equipment on their back. Without a single day off. They're exhausted, frustrated, and become easy targets (just last week, a guy rammed into a patrol just as they walked out of their barracks). They can't do their job at optimal efficiency. Worse, they're so disgusted that they don't even renew their contracts and leave the military all together, because they enrolled to fight, and not to stand there and play the role of overseers. Now imagine that, with police officers. Forced to just stand there, on a checkpoint. All day everyday, doing the same thing over and over, for months. This kind of thing works on short period of times when you need an immediate protection in the waiting of a bigger, more structured plan, but becomes liability when it is extended over long periods of time.

I mean... Okay? Not sure what we're supposed to discuss or what's the point of telling us that. There are hundreds of unsolved cases all over the world.

Just asking out of curiosity there, but... why RWD imperatively? That's really not the best drivetrain out there.

So long, CVPI, time to move on.

I thought everyone in Texas was a howdy cow-boy carrying a good ol' colt at their belt with a cow-boy hat and a hardly understandable accent. The more you know.

I hear ya, and I can imagine that an orange tip on your weapon is like waving a neon orange flag to signal your position when you're playing an airsoft game. But the best would be to just switch between the two, rather than getting rid of the orange tip entirely. When your weapon is with you but you're not using it, orange tip. When you get to play a game somewhere, you switch it for a black tip. Seems like the best compromise to me.

It is. Unfortunately a lot of people judge smart to remove those orange tips for whatever reason, which blurs the line between real and fake weapon (especially with airsoft guns that are almost perfect replicas of real weapons).

Don't get me wrong but... is that really important to know if some officers wear a beret or not? Seems really trivial to me...

Give the firefighter a gun, so he'll shoot down the fire in no time, and other fires will be afraid to set ablaze more things, because that's totally how you fight fire!

And if you actually got out and talked to people, you'd know thousands of imams are working to reform the Quran and modernize it. But you don't get this kind of info from xenophobic, racist alt-news websites and videos. "Lmao".

That I do agree with, but the call of fossil fuels such as gas and oil was probably too strong sadly.

Funny to hear from someone who brought up zero fact and only made-up shit with no actual surveys, researches or studies to back it up. Move on kid, let grown-up people talk about the serious business.

I'll say the same as I did to Divine hustle. Read what I said carefully again. Did I talk about the crusades? Did I even mention the crusades? Did I even say the word "crusade"? Hint: the answer to all those questions starts with a N and ends with an O. I'm glad to see you're so into the Quran that you know all those passages. Even though I intimately think you just went to Google and copy/pasted the first xenophobic website you could find. If you knew as much about the Bible as about the Quran though, you'd know that the Bible is full of identical shit. An example? Sure: 1 Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' " Exodus 22:18: "Do not allow a sorceress to live." Psalm 137: "Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us / He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." Romans 1:27: "In the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error." Judges 19:25-28: “So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight. When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. He said to her, ‘Get up; let’s go.’ But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.” You've everything. Murder of men, women and children, punishment of homosexuality, gruesome violence, and I spared you all the quotes about how a woman must submit to the man. There are dozens more like this. My point is, all holy books are the same: very old things with a shitload of outdated stuff and stupid content. Bible, Quran, it's all the same. It's the interpretation you make of it that is important. 99.99% of people will have a peaceful interpretation of it, sorting out what has to be followed and what makes no sense to follow anymore (because no one, ever, follows the Bible or the Quran at a 100%). 0.01% of people will have an interpretation of a psychopath who must carry the truth (and that both for the Bible and the Quran). Does that mean all christians/catholics/Muslims should be blamed for the 0.01% who act like crazy motherfuckers? Fuck no.

I'd suggest to read carefully what I said again. I said "IS myth". Not "Quran myth". Because, and I'll sound like I'm repeating myself but, the Quran isn't the IS. The Quran isn't the terrorist. The Quran isn't the extremism. The Quran is a holy book for a religion, like the Bible. Have you read the Bible? There's equally violent teachings of slaughtering people believing in a different god and all that. People just interpret it and manipulate it the way they want to make it fit their twisted, psychopathic vision of the world. I live in a country with 7% of the population (roughly 4.7 millions of people) actively practicing Islam as a religion, and therefore reading the Quran on a regular basis. 99.99% of them will never plan to do an attack, or to kill or punish someone who doesn't follow the Quran teachings. Ever. Because those 99.99% of people are just practicing their religion in peace, because their interpretation of the Quran is one of peace. Just like 99.99% of Christians/Catholics do with the Bible, while a tiny 0.01% of them will call upon God's will and mass shoot a crowd of black people in a church or other shits like that. Should I blame all the christians and the Bible for that tiny 0.01% acting like psychopaths? Nope. Should you blame all the muslims and the Quran for that tiny 0.01% of idiotic barbarians? Nope nope. So, no, I'm not going to convince a muslim the Quran is a myth. I'm going to try and convince a brainwashed person that the IS is a myth and the actual enemy rather than western nations (or even sometimes muslim countries, because those idiots don't make sense).

Just so you know: you don't de-radicalize people in jail. If anything, it just makes it more probable to have other prisoners be radicalized in the process. Freedom deprivation tends to push people to escape into other things. Including religion. Not for nothing that extremism convertion tends to happen in jails more than elsewhere. De-radicalization centers would be more effective, where we treat them fairly and diconstruct the IS myth.