Don't you think the authorities have thought about this? What does that statement actually mean? Any response must be measured or we confirm in the minds of these susceptible individuals that they are correct in their thinking with regard to the western world, and democracy in general.Time & time again this happens & will continue to do so unfortunately.
Until we take a no nonsense, we're not taking thisanymore & adopt a proper hardline zero tolerance approach.
Something seriously needs to be done. I'm so angry with the current state of affairs in this country. We're far to PC for our own good, can't say this, can't say that, can't do this or that in case we you or I offend another religion.
I'd say it's a bit late for that if I'm honest. Terrible terrible state of affairs![]()
Has he got a view against shoot to kill? - seeing the moderate (by comparison to lots of media outlets) put it's hands up for inaccurately reporting he was against shoot to kill.Thoughts are with all involved. Well done to the firearms lads that dealt with these scum. I wonder in election week if Mr Corbyn will have changed his views on shoot to kill with regards to these animals.
7m 50secs too long IMHO Graeme.8 minutes for the police to get there and shoot the :f: :bow:
Please direct me to any reliable source which indicates that is JC's position.Thoughts are with all involved. Well done to the firearms lads that dealt with these scum. I wonder in election week if Mr Corbyn will have changed his views on shoot to kill with regards to these animals.
Perhaps you didn't listen to what was actually said. He did not say he was against shoot to kill, but was unhappy with a shoot to kill policy. He said he wanted to avoid a war on the streets, which I suggest we all want to avoid.There you go.
If people are going around stabbing people or what ever what do you suggest.............. I'm rational and I say shot to kill the ****s. The liberal limp wristed approach is not what we need right now.Perhaps you didn't listen to what was actually said. He did not say he was against shoot to kill, but was unhappy with a shoot to kill policy. He said he wanted to avoid a war on the streets, which I suggest we all want to avoid.
He has continuously stated his position on this and reiterated the need to try to address the problem at its root. I believe this is what resulted in the resolution in Northern Ireland.
Yes he was not in favour of shoot to kill as a policy, but I think most rational people would not be in favour of such a policy. Last night a member of the public was shot in the mayhem. With a shoot to kill policy we would have more of those terrible mistakes.
Another point to note about this attack is that they wanted to be shot by fooling the police and bystanders into believing they had suicide vests. In this case they were undeterred by the thought that they could be shot.
I don't know how we resolve this threat, but I do think that simply shooting people would not be the answer.
8 mins did seem a long time to me also in central London but without knowing the logistics of the situation it's hard to say.7m 50secs too long IMHO Graeme.
IMHO these response times are a consequence of decades of running down the police service and other services (fire/NHS/Care etc)in the UK.
Whilst I don't personally like the idea of armed police on patrol, however, maybe it has come to that now for British citizens?
without sufficient police officers on the streets of our major cities we will have to accept poor response times to situations such as this, some might say 8 minutes is good, but if one of your family were a victim would people still say that?
Unfortunately I don't see anything changing, the election rhetoric is exactly that, rhetoric, some will jump on the bandwagon of this & the Manchester attack and then do sweat F.A.