Poirot, "You can't allow the civilian population to possess such firepower - and then expect the police to be able to read their minds every time there's a confrontation"

A hysterical member of the public, someone very much like yourself maybe, reported a gun offence.

The same thing that happened in Brisbane not so long ago where public hysteria about guns resulted in a report that a soldier was 'running amok' with a firearm.

In Brisbane the police obliged and the unfortunate young man in his military dress was held to the ground with a police gun aimed at his head. Police side arms always have one up the spout and do not need to be coscked, only grasped to be ready to go, no safety. The side arm must be that way for reasons that would not be obvious nor justifiable to the breathless Poirot's of the world.

Despite the very low incidence of firearm crime in Australia and such crime trending down for years (and before Howard) the public are led by the tabloid media and 'gun control' lobbyists likely sponsored by overseas interests to believe otherwise.

Similarly in the US where there is going on 300 million people in a multicultural society with social problems that are very largely black on black and drugs and gang related, despite the fact that gun crime dropped and levelled out, there are politicians and other interests with a vested interest, particularly for cynical electoral advantage, of convincing the population otherwise.

It has already emerged that the original leftist claims that 'white' police prejudice was behind a deliberate shooting of a black, it has an accident. An accident caused by;

1. A wrong report of a serious gun crime by a member/members of the public; and,

2. Poor communication among police, where one of the officers who had to go for long arms had aimed to incapacitate the correct (as reported) 'offender', but a bullet injured the supposed victim instead. Murphy's Law - but luckily poor shooting on this occasion.

The claims of police prejudice against blacks has been laid to rest. Or have they? The leftists know that another big lie and distrust of the police and US social institutions and democracy have been nailed once again and thanks to manipulation of social and mainstream tabloid media.

Now to swing it for 'gun control' bans and compulsory confiscation of the property of legally licensed, non-offending citizens - but NOT criminals and their illegal guns - as desired by the Soros outfit (with Ford Foundation and other very wealthy interests), instead of effective firearms regulation based on evidence and professional risk analysis.

Soros
http://seeker401.wordpress.com/2016/01/30/soros-invested-in-firearm-companies-while-backing-gun-control-groups/

and,

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-30/george-soros-s-tax-bill

and,

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/05/16/panama-papers-reveal-george-soros-deep-money-ties-to-secretive-weapons-intel-firm.html

Morning to you POIROT...

I feel it necessary that I offer you my most profound apology for the disgusting insult hurled at you yesterday, by another contributor on The Forum. I believe it was down to me alone, who precipitated the argument initially, that unintentionally dragged you into the melee. Thus setting you up as it were, to receive this disparaging and offensive 'sledging' from this immature fellow in the first place !

Again, I'm so very sorry POIROT for pulling you into this tedious mess that was never of your making !

o sung wu,

No need for you to apologise. It was my decision to get involved and make a comment.

I'm not backward in coming forward on this forum as you know, however, that poster tends to hit bellow the belt often. I'm mindful that you are a particularly courteous poster on OLO and I suppose that prompted my intervention.

Again, no need for you to apolgise (and I can't say I was surprised by his reaction)

Cheers : )

Hi there POIROT...

We've disagreed in the past, and I'm sure we'll disagree in the future.

With all that; the one thing that I do know - 'You've got real elegance POIROT' !

BTT

It is such a shame that RObert's post lies buried. An excerpt,

" An abstract for some interesting experimental research at http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11292-012-9163-y

"Objective
Advance the methodological techniques used to examine the influence of suspect race and ethnicity on participant decisions to shoot in an experimental setting.

Results

..In sum, this research found that participants displayed significant bias favoring Black suspects in their decisions to shoot."

That appears to match with findings I've seen which suggest that in the real world US police are more likely to shoot whites than blacks when involvement in violent crime is factored into the numbers."

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7377&page=18