11 cops vs. teen with a knife. You know where this is going.

[Formaldehyde]

At what rate of deadly does this become necessary? Why do Canadian cops have guns when their homicide rate is quite similar to your own?

How do you even determine how deadly a country might happen to be?

Mortality rates per 1000 people:

82 United Kingdom 8.8
104 United States 8.1
130 Canada 7.3

 

[Antilogic]

The US isn't more violent than Europe, but it is more deadly. Hence the need for guns.

Wait, is this sarcasm? Like, you say "hence the need for" but we are supposed to read "actually because of" or something like that?

 

[Alassius]

At what rate of deadly does this become necessary? Why do Canadian cops have guns when their homicide rate is quite similar to your own?

How do you even determine how deadly a country might happen to be?

Mortality rates per 1000 people:

That's mortality rate, which includes natural deaths. You should look at homicide rates:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

US: 4.8
UK: 1.2
France: 1.1
Germany: 0.8
Canada: 1.6
Australia: 1.0

Canada's is higher but not high enough to explain different policies. I'm assuming it has more to do with the bad influence from the south.

Wait, is this sarcasm? Like, you say "hence the need for" but we are supposed to read "actually because of" or something like that?

It's both a cause and an effect. It's a vicious circle of arms race. I'm all for gun control, don't worry

That's true! But I'm not sure we really want to walk down those broad Texan killing field freeways of thought or London's dark, winding, and rape-y alleys of contemplation on this specific issue. Though, maybe, I suppose it is actually pretty interesting when you start comparing and trying to come up with value judgements between disparate things like murder rates as opposed to mugging rates as opposed to battery rates as opposed to rape rates(which country wins that ignoble prize fluctuates depending on who's parsing the data collection and what assumptions are made regarding unreported).

You can't compare rural areas to cities. I'd say I'll feel safer in London than in Detroit, or Dorset than in Texas.

Similar rape and mugging rates, but different murder rates would mean people are not nicer in the UK. They simply have less tools to kill.

 

[Farm Boy]

It's both a cause and an effect. It's a vicious circle of arms race. I'm all for gun control, don't worry

Of course you are. There's all that bad influence from the aristocratic past.

 

[Formaldehyde]

That's mortality rate, which includes natural deaths. You should look at homicide rates:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

US: 4.8
UK: 1.2
France: 1.1
Germany: 0.8
Canada: 1.6
Australia: 1.0

You said "deadly", not more homicidal.

So 3.6 more people out of 100,000 being killed is an excuse for having poorly trained armed killers lurking the streets directly generating their own homicides, and causing more criminals and even law-abiding citizens to carry firearms to protect themselves from them?

What about all those other countries which you just listed that all have armed cops? The UK is the sole exception. Some of the police in France even carry automatic weapons.

 

[Alassius]

You said "deadly", not more homicidal.

So 3.6 more people out of 100,000 being killed is an excuse for having poorly trained armed killers lurking the streets directly generating their own homicides, and causing more criminals and even law-abiding citizens to carry firearms to protect themselves from them?

What about all those other countries which you just listed that all have armed cops? The UK is the sole exception. Some of the police in France even carry automatic weapons.

Don't be silly, you know what "deadly" means here. I'm not trying to justify armed cops. I don't think it's a good thing. I think there is a real difference in danger, and that you can't unarm cops without mitigating the danger by massively reducing private weapons. That's pretty much what you said, no?

(Some police in London carry automatic weapons too. Maybe 2-3 MP5s show up in the Liverpool Street station every couple of months. I think it's pretty silly... I wonder if they'll shoot me if I stare at them for too long )

 

[Formaldehyde]

You can't very well only consider the intentional homicide rate in determining out "deadly" a particular area is, especially when the cops typically get a free pass in that regard.

Jean Charles de Menezes (pronounced [ʒeˈɐ̃ ˈʃahlis dʒi meˈnezis] in Brazilian Portuguese) 7 January 1978 – 22 July 2005 was a Brazilian man shot dead by the London Metropolitan police at Stockwell tube station on the London Underground after he was misidentified as one of the fugitives involved in the previous day's failed bombing attempts. These events took place two weeks after the London bombings of 7 July 2005, in which 52 people were killed.

Contemporaneous and later police and media accounts contradicted each other, specifically regarding Menezes's manner and clothing as he entered the station, and whether there had been any police warnings before they fired. The death sparked an intense public debate over a shoot-to-kill practice known as Operation Kratos. The codename was dropped in 2007, but the policy continues.

What was his crime? Walking while being slightly too dark-skinned?

 

[emzie]

Canada's is higher but not high enough to explain different policies. I'm assuming it has more to do with the bad influence from the south.

Homicide rate is a poor indicator of how often a police officer may need to (legitimately) draw or use his or her weapon. A low homicide rate doesn't translate to drug dealers who settle disputes by debating Adam Smith. Our gangs, while smaller and less violent, are still pretty well armed due to, well, yeah, the US. In big cities the overwhelming majority of guns involved in crime were smuggled in from the US. In Toronto, it's at least 70%

I dunno if I've ever met anyone in Canada who had issue with armed police. I'm sure some people do, but when bad shootings happen, it seems to a debate about police training, hiring, and procedure. No one stands up and says disarm the cops.

 

[shadowplay]

Well, here we are two and a half years later, and now the jury is deliberating:

In considering self-defence the jury will need to answer three questions, Then told the jury.

1. Did Officer Forcillo believe on reasonable grounds that force was being used or threatened against him or another person?

2. Did Officer Forcillo shoot Mr. Yatim for the purpose of defending himself or another person from the use or threat of force?

3. Was Officer Forcillo’s conduct reasonable in the circumstances?

Justice Then has told the jury that Forcillo was not aware of events that had happened prior to his confrontation with Yatim, and that only Forcillo’s state of mind — not Yatim’s — is relevant to their deliberations.

The defence has argued Forcillo believed Yatim was going to attack him with a knife when he fired, and that he used lethal force to save himself and others from death or serious bodily harm.

Forcillo said his belief came from Yatim’s aggressive body language — that he was unafraid, had a clenched jaw and took a deep breath as if preparing to “fight to the end” before moving forward.

The Crown has said it was not self-defence or self-preservation that motivated Forcillo to shoot Yatim, but anger that the teen violated the ultimatum he set: you take one step in this direction and I’ll shoot. The Crown argued that while Yatim was holding a knife, his behaviour as captured on the video was mocking not threatening.

They have argued Forcillo manufactured his testimony about Yatim’s threatening appearance and behaviour and that it is not corroborated by the video evidence.

source: http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/01/19/forcillo-trial-judge-lays-out-options-for-jury.html

My prediction: he'll be acquitted of murder and attempted murder, but be found guilty on at least one of the lesser counts, such as manslaughter. Whatever he's convicted of, he'll be given a suspended sentence and won't see any time in prison.

 

[warpus]

Canadian cops carry guns because there are a lot of guns in Canada, per capita. This is not true in the UK, I don't think, so cops there do not need guns.

I looked up some stats:

US: 112.6 guns per 100 people
Canada: 30.8 guns per 100 people
UK: 6.6 guns per 100 people

 

[FriendlyFire]

Maybe people shouldn't wave knives at cops and behave in a generally threatening manner while armed with a deadly weapon. Be Black Maybe then they wouldn't get killed. Maybe.

Fixed

He probably should not have provoke the police, making threats escalated the threat level he posed.
Though the police opening fire with guns wasnt warranted, if the guy had opened the door to get out that would have been different especially since he acted liked a crazed person

 

[Angst]

Canadian cops carry guns because there are a lot of guns in Canada, per capita. This is not true in the UK, I don't think, so cops there do not need guns.

I looked up some stats:

US: 112.6 guns per 100 people
Canada: 30.8 guns per 100 people
UK: 6.6 guns per 100 people

Jesus Christ. This completely punctures the anti-regulatory argument that a) since guns aren't regulated* in Canada and b) since the homicide rate is relatively low in Canada, it should be OK having no gun regulations in the US. 112.6 guns per 100 people contra 30.8 guns per 100 people. The two situations are ridiculously different.

... Well of course looking into the numbers may save the argument. How are these 112.6 guns distributed? How many are actually in the hands of people? How many are in the military? If USA's huge military component is ignored, (and Canada's military is ignored,) are the actual stats then closer to Canada's?

*Although I've heard that there is a relatively significant amount of regulation in Canada, just that individuals in low pop density areas need hunting rifles to shoot bears and such, so guns are actually needed there. And that it'd be more difficult for metropolitan citizens to carry guns. Or something like that? I don't remeber the specifics... If anyone has the facts, please enlighten me.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I think it's assumed that gun statistics don't include government employees, but it may be worth verifying when these numbers are cited. It may be different from one country to the next. I've heard/read that many guns in Switzerland are held by citizens who compose a kind of ol' fashioned militia. Meanwhile, here in the US, we have strict controls on the military acting within our borders which frequently means that our soldiers are unarmed. In the 2009 attack on Fort Hood, in which 45 soldiers were shot by a single attacker, it was two civilian police officers who ultimately stopped him.

Also, while we have about 1 gun per person here, only about a third of Americans own even 1 gun. At least some of the proponents of gun ownership rights are collectors and enthusiasts who have several guns, just because they like them.

 

[shadowplay]

Constable Forcillo has been found guilty of attempted murder, but was acquitted of the charges of murder and manslaughter.

Link: http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...charged-in-shooting-death-of-sammy-yatim.html