Hastings

I, for one, never said that a total gun ban is a good thing. Again, it depends on the traditional approach of given society (that works in the UK won't work in the US and vice versa), but I never understood why Americans are so opposed to, for example, certain health standards for firearm owners. Usually they reply that it's a constitutional right and cannot be limited (which is somewhat weak to me as rights are subject to reasonable limitation: for example, as far as I know, certain states have 'stand your ground laws' while others don't. Would you say that those other states violate your rights to own property?) The other argument is that the government would be able to control who gets a gun and who doesn't, but for me that's kinda the whole point.. As far as the 'grandmother argument' goes (no offence meant, it's just I keep seeing this argument in all gun control debates), well, if I were to break into a house knowing I might get shot I would shoot to kill first. We had an interesting precedent in Russia: in 1960's they introduced a death penalty for rape. As a result, numbers of rape&murder skyrocketed. If you get a bullet for rape, you might as well kill first to negate that risk. Just an analogy.

Guns in the hands of mentally unstable people is the issue, and is a correctable one. There is a huge difference between many types of violence. I'm not a saint and I honestly don't care about gang violence, for example, when they kill each other, as long as it doesn't affect normal citizens. On the other hand, cases like above affect innocent people for no reason. It is a problem, and is mainly US problem (almost never happens in my home country, a real rare occurrence in many European countries). Simply speaking, you have almost nonexisting chance getting shot just because in a mall, in a school or in an office in Russia. Do you see my point?

I'd love to follow the thought trail of a police officer who sees a granny with a knife cutting dandelions. Just, you know, to see how do you end up with the decision to taser her.

Are those the same people who somehow acquired top-secret-lethal-neurotoxin, smuggled it into one of the most secure countries in the world and attempted to kill someone who had already been pardoned by Russian government a couple years ago aaaand failed? Yep, those heinous criminals should be extradited. We have enough brain-dead morons in Russia. Thank God UK hospitals apparently stock samples of Russian top-secret lethal neurotoxins so they could immediately identify the toxin and treat the poisoning.

Learning something new every day 😄

Nice finishing touch to the pursuit! Tho I'm a bit confused, she did destroy some trash near some trailers earlier, but I didn't notice any trash destroyed when she was flipped other or any trailers nearby for that matter...

Did he write the arrest report himself as well? Then the Criminal of the Year award is coming!

I'm afraid it's going to get worse if more people want to join this crusade for the sake of joining it. Being discriminated from the dialog on the sole basis of my political views is offensive and hurtful. On a serious note, thanks. Now I get the mindset of the protesters and am no longer surprised.

It guess it's the same everywhere, isn't it.

I would advise you against relying on anything RT broadcasts, as they're experts at shuffling facts and are primarily aimed at Russian viewers to demonstrate the decay of the West. And those guys are paid for by our taxes. What a joy.

On a side note, I still fail to understand the mindset of ICE-haters. No borders, no laws, those the toughest survive? Oh no wonder, these guys don't really like when facts contradict their agenda.

He can't work for a federal agency as Poland is not a federation. Someone is mistaken here.

This officer's head gotta hurt like hell. Back in military training (way way back) we had to fire a round in a confined space, just one to get the feeling. It, umm, tough on the head and ears, no joke. And he fired several! Damn, he's tough.

As a side note, I am always impressed of people who apply ways and traditions of one country to a completely different country. It's like "hey, it works for the USA to have several hundreds independent police agencies, no uniform criminal procedure code and vast officer's discretion, so you have to adopt that system too". On the posted video, well, there's no place for a roadside traffic court, because the officer's only job is to issue a ticket and you can argue it later, and there's no place for constitutional disputes in the midst of a heated protest, because cops have to prevent a fight. He wasn't arrested, just moved. IMO public order and public safety in this particular instance prevails other the right to throw verbal and literal shit at each other.

Can't argue with that, all I'm saying is that some countries can't yet afford the luxury of being humane. One day we'll be there too.

I surely hope that death penalty in this day and age is not used to show that killing is wrong. That would be one hell of a way to make an example. Well, I support the death penalty in extreme circumstances when leaving a certain creature alive poses much more danger to other people if it escapes or leaves the prison some other way. Maybe it's not that much problem in American or European prisons any more (didn't hear about any successful prison breaks recently), but in a country like mine you can never trust the penal system. Some 20 the serial rapist, sadist, killer and cannibal (went by the name of 'the Constrictor') literally ran away from the cops while being transported. Took several days to locate him, and they got him minutes away from raping his judge (an elderly lady who he'd promised at the trial he would rape). He got the execution. tl;dr death penalty is cruel for advanced and secure places, I think.

Interesting, when I commented they weren't there.

Did you make the pics? A true patrol veteran, this one!

Wow, you're serious, aren't you? Jail and handcuffs may be a joke, as they're used to subdue and contain the suspect until the court hears his case. They're not supposed to be used to teach lessons or punish people. If suspects are noncompliant, there are variety of other means, including the lethal force. The US has one of the most relaxed lethal force usage standards that I know of, and you're saying this isn't enough? Gangs and violent crimes don't appear out of nowhere and are not foreign invaders that must be killed by any means. In case of many Latin America countries gangs in those famous favelas appear because of the poor economic situation, work problems, lack of education and means to support a family by honest living. Instead of solving these problems, governments create paramilitary units with police powers, give them APCs and a green light for free fire. Are you saying the US (with its highest GDP, strong economy etc) is this deep down it has to declare a war on its citizens? Don't get me wrong, I'm in no way supporting or defending the criminals. However, the police is the wrong tool to use to solve such complicated problems as ethnic crime, ghetto crime and so on. It's like the school shootings, you can increase the police presence as much as you wish, but the reasons lie elsewhere. And suggesting that brutal treatment will do any good other than make them hate the cops even more and open the police to lawsuits from innocents mistaken for criminals (and beaten to the near death) is, in my opinion, incorrect.

I remember a local case when a driver was yanked out of the car and thrown on the ground, landing with his lobe on a stone. Was detained, processed and released this day, felt sick in the evening, was taken to a hospital and died a day later due to internal hemorrhage. I am pretty sure head kicks are not taught in the academy as a way to ensure compliance.

One thing I don't get is why they jumped on him. What if the bomb went off right when?

The one thing I can not understand is "I don't support any gun control" mentality. I sincerely state I mean zero disrespect to anyone, but I can't comprehend this way of thinking. For example, I enjoy guns (just as cars, trains, planes and other complicated and effective machinery) and wouldn't mind to get one, but I also wouldn't mind an extensive background check, as well as medical. I could very well get denied, too, I'm not the coolest and calmest person in the world. But it's a reasonable limitation of my rights, because at this point my right to have a gun and the rights of multiple others to live safely are at a balance. Same as driving. I have to qualify to get a license because an uneducated driver, or, even worse, an unfit driver is life-threatening.

They do sound excessive and they don't seem basic to me, but it's not the point here. The point is that something is wrong with the society and instead of trying to fix the reason you're up for the increased protection. I don't really understand the reasoning here. You can toughen the security as much as you like and achieve reasonable safety inside, but what's gonna happen outside of those fortified walls apparently no longer concerns you. Maybe we have different mentalities but in my book the state shall care about its citizens wherever they are. Kids in school, people on the street, visitors in a cinema, guest at a concert, they all have a right not to be afraid. That's how I grew up, felt safe and was safe.

Are you serious..? So the best way to prevent kids killing each other is to turn schools into a Wolf's Lair? Well, what if the shooter will move on to other targets, schools buses, hospital, theaters, malls, cafes, hotels... Cover everything with a barbed wire, put guards (robotic guards to prevent them going insane), authorized admission and commuting between your home base and your work camp in an APC? I'm not trying to be a smartass but you can't win a war by defensive measures. School shootings are almost exclusively a US phenomena and skyrocketed in the last 30+ years. There gotta be a reason for that.