From: "Pete Ansbro", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Commander Mike Fuller, head of Operation Trident, which
is tackling black gun crime, said seventy percent is
linked to drug disputes.>
And presumably, Commander Fuller is waiting for someone else to conclude
what might reduce this figure to zero? (real social improvement combined
with zero tolerance policing apart)
Two of them are easy for politicians to showboat over:
1. Ban drugs
2. Ban guns
the other might be a tad less easy for politicians or newspapers to utter so
here goes,
3. Ban disputes between black criminals.
Spot the easy political target which will generate bugger-all real
improvement.
And the remaining 30% - what's that linked to? Can I guess at turf wars,
petty crime, alcohol?
Or might it just possibly be that the whole 100% is linked to the unlawful
possession of illegal guns?
Pete
--
My experience with coppers such as Commander Fuller is that they
know full well that the gun laws we have do not have any real effect
on serious armed criminals. Roy Penrose has made comments to that
effect.
I have great respect for police officers like Mr Fuller and
Mr Penrose, because they are actually out there combatting crime,
unlike the sound-bite seeking politicians posing in police
uniforms who sadly make up a large proportion of the upper
echelons of the police service. I am still trying to
obtain an answer as to why the Chief Constable of Staffordshire
Police (a mostly rural country that is not particularly
distinguished in terms of its crime rate) felt the need to
spend huge amounts of taxpayer money on attending a
meeting of the International Association of Chief Officers
of Police, or why he felt justified in selling all of
Staffs Police (hardly used) pistols, to replace them with the
exact same make and model, for example.
The main reason reason armed crime dropped in this country
in 1994 and subsequent years was that Parliament raised
the prison sentence, and Roy Penrose and the Flying Squad
used ordinary investigative techniques to track down armed
criminals and stop them. They didn't need a Prevention
of Terrorism Act to do it.
The contrast between Parliament's actions in 1988 that
were followed by a five year rise in armed crime to
unprecedented levels and what happened in 1994 onwards
is plain to see.
If you ever talk to your MP it is the main point to stress.
It is far, far easier to remove criminals from guns than
to remove guns from criminals.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
