Insurance Fraud Outside My Home

looney2ns said:
Our swat team members, are not just setting at home awaiting a call, they are out patrolling like all the other officers, but are ready at a moments notice to respond to a swat situation.
Click to expand...




This is precisely what I wanted to indicate is the case in Canada in my experience. Tactical, and containment team members are 'mobile' out on patrol. Dispatch centres (tech), as well as training helps direct the assets quickly - 'unit xxxx, we're starting to take calls of a man with a knife, in the general area of c st & d st, if you can start heading that way..'. This one single detail, in my experience gets us 'there' much faster than a dispatcher dicking around trying to get 'all' the details, or a precise location. It's like an early warning system .. a bull horn screaming 'over here!'. Every available officer listening, or actively dispatched races to that area, and enroute all the other details become available, including a more precise location, descriptions, weapons and on and on.

But, having said that, when we watch some of the active shooters incidents play out, and autopsy them afterwards we realize that it's usually beat cops that are first on scene. And unfortunately for them, they're it for a while and need to be on their game, alone (likely) until other units arrive. We cannot rely on specialized teams to save the day...
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns and sebastiantombs
looney2ns said:
What is the definition of "Fast Response" in your mind?
We have a saying that may apply to your regular police officer's, "when seconds count, the police are minutes away".
In your case "when seconds count, my backup with guns are minutes away.

Most violent encounters are over in 55 seconds on average.

Our swat team members, are not just setting at home awaiting a call, they are out patrolling like all the other officers, but are ready at a moments notice to respond to a swat situation.
Click to expand...


A recent terrorist incident in London was all over in 8 minutes start to finish will all terrorists dead.



In the UK Home Invasion is all but unheard of. Over here we get burglaries but 99% of the time it's when the home owner is out and the burglars will flee if confronted. I've lived here for quite a few decades in a large city and never been burgled, my cars never been broken into, I've never had anything stolen. I've never been mugged or threatened with being mugged. I know 1 person who has, years ago. The only crime to ever affect me at home was some graffiti in an adjacent footpath - 1st incidence in 50 years, now removed by the Local Authority.

Knife crime is a problem in inner cities, but it's mostly gang / drug related. If you don't go in those circles, you're very unlucky to get caught up in it. The innocent ones stabbed in London are usually mistaken identity or gang initiation. It's very rare outside London and it's very rare for anyone not in a gang to get stabbed except maybe in a mugging gone wrong.

As for the gun vs ban graph above, doesn't tell the whole story as handgun crime fell sharply in the years beyodn that graph although it's climbing again. Usually put down to increased forensic techniques rather than the ban. although that depends on whether you talk to the anti or pro gun lobby .
 
CCTVCam said:
A recent terrorist incident in London was all over in 8 minutes start to finish will all terrorists dead.



In the UK Home Invasion is all but unheard of. Over here we get burglaries but 99% of the time it's when the home owner is out and the burglars will flee if confronted. I've lived here for quite a few decades in a large city and never been burgled, my cars never been broken into, I've never had anything stolen. I've never been mugged or threatened with being mugged. I know 1 person who has, years ago. The only crime to ever affect me at home was some graffiti in an adjacent footpath - 1st incidence in 50 years, now removed by the Local Authority.

Knife crime is a problem in inner cities, but it's mostly gang / drug related. If you don't go in those circles, you're very unlucky to get caught up in it. The innocent ones stabbed in London are usually mistaken identity or gang initiation. It's very rare outside London and it's very rare for anyone not in a gang to get stabbed except maybe in a mugging gone wrong.

As for the gun vs ban graph above, doesn't tell the whole story as handgun crime fell sharply in the years beyodn that graph although it's climbing again. Usually put down to increased forensic techniques rather than the ban. although that depends on whether you talk to the anti or pro gun lobby .
Click to expand...


wwwait .. what happened to the whole UK police are not armed with firearms .. and now they are carrying machine guns ... ( ok, well an Assault Rifle if selective fire or Semi-auto Rifle .. )

1634162611231.png

oh, wait .. yes.. submachine guns it appears.. mp5 on these ..

1634162780564.png


1634161986774.png

ah .. so the UK Police used to not carry firearms .. clearly the police carrying firearms is a response to all the citizens who are armed with firearms and knives .. wait .. the UK made firearms highly regulated and restricted ... and YET the bobby's have resorted to carrying firearms ... and still they are attempting to ban knives .. so clearly the police being armed have little to do with citizens who are legally armed ... hmm ... reduce citizens with arms, give more arms to police ..

somehow I would think Orwell would have something to say about this ..

btw - since this is about "London" and terrorists .. well, you can bet the response around NYC by the financial district would be quick.

when we are discussing police response, we are not talking about their response time in zones which they are on frequently active patrol.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
Matt I explained above. The Police aren't armed. In a city there will be 2 or 3 "Area Cars" on patrol in different areas of the city, more inside London. Inside these cars are 2 or 3 officers trained to US SWAT level tactics and armed with handguns and MP5 sub machine guns. In addition, there are undercover armed officers deployed for special operations such as watching terror suspects or bank robbery etc. These can be deployed on foot as seen above where they took the terrorist down in the street. However, 99.9% of the British Police force are armed only with a baton, CS and a few have X2 Tasers.

Sorry to the OP for the detour off topic although the safety of reporting aspect means it's kind of sort of on topic.

As for general Police response times, will depend on the priority of your call, how busy they are and whether there's any units in your area, whcih probably means in low crime areas a response may take longer than in a high crime area because there are probably no police in the area. However, in the UK it's rarely an issue as crime is generally low and we don't have home invasion which means most crime is against property not people. The overall levels of violent crime are low comapred to the US. We can go decades without a mass shooting and I can only ever think of 1 school incident in over 50 years.
 
@mat200

its better that they not use guns ... :lmao:
after al qaida attack 2005 in london they were allowed to carry guns... one person was running to get his train and someone just give him a headshot from behind.
uk police is not trained for anything. but its not only uk... any european police is not trained for real crime like US where seconds count to survive (except france).
also no one stand behind you if you kill an attacker. they will always blame you for killing harmless innocent asylum seeker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
user8963 said:
@mat200

its better that they not use guns ... :lmao:
after al qaida attack 2005 in london they were allowed to carry guns... one person was running to get his train and someone just give him a headshot from behind.
uk police is not trained for anything. but its not only uk... any european police is not trained for real crime like US where seconds count to survive (except france).
also no one stand behind you if you kill an attacker. they will always blame you for killing harmless innocent asylum seeker.
Click to expand...

You are mistaken. I believe this is the incident you're referring to. It was an undercover special operations unit like the one in the street above. The Police believed he was a known terrorist, followed him onto a train and then believing he was about to detonate a suicide vest, shot him in the head. As I said, our Police don't mess around when push comes to shove and allegedly had a shoot to kill policy on terrorists due to the recent use of suicide vests:

Full story here (subject to any inaccuracies in the Wiki):

en.wikipedia.org

Killing of Jean Charles de Menezes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
CCTVCam said:
You are mistaken. I believe this is the incident you're referring to. The Police believed he was a known terrorist, followed him onto a train and then believing he was about to detonate a suicide vest, shot him in the head. As I said, our Police don't mess around when push comes to shove and allegedly had a shoot to kill policy on terrorists due to the recent use of suicide vests:

en.wikipedia.org

Killing of Jean Charles de Menezes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...

the question is... the only country with more cctv is china, how can they make such a mistake?
and why did they shoot him 7 times in head? :screwy:

as i remember, it was the only time where all uk police were allowed to carry a gun and he was not shot by a special unit.
 
user8963 said:
the question is... the only country with more cctv is china, how can they make such a mistake?
and why did they shoot him 7 times in head? :screwy:
Click to expand...


I guess he looked like the guy. Mistakes happen, this one wa fatal. They shot him 7 times presambly because there was still movement. They believe he was wearing a suicide vest.

As for CCTV, yes cameras everywhere. However, unlike China our's don't have facial recognition, at least yet...
 
The interesting thing, to me anyway, is that even with all the guns in the US legally in the hands of citizens plus all the ones illegally in the hands of criminals, knives and blunt force murders far outnumber firearm murders. To me that means there isn't truly a direct relationship between firearms and murders.

To put response time in perspective from my viewpoint and location, if I call 911 for an intruder it will take ten to 15 minutes for an officer to get here. That's a best case scenario. It may take 20 to 30 minutes if there is no patrol unit in the general area. I'm in NJ which is considered a "metropolitan" area but there is a lot of open space in NJ once you're south of the Raritan River. UK has an advantage of being smaller in size compared to the US so it is far more likely that a patrol unit, either foot or motor, will be much closer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CCTVCam, SouthernYankee and looney2ns
CCTVCam said:
Oh well. That's bows, hammers and hatchets banned in the UK.
Click to expand...

better buy them now before they are out or banned...



they are still coming.. even if your country break in half and prices for everyrhing increase daily.

i still have no idea if i can fly to london next week. only if you are vaxxed twice and fill out a ton of papers. maybe i should take a boat. seems easier.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Sphinxicus and sebastiantombs
CCTVCam said:
A recent terrorist incident in London was all over in 8 minutes start to finish will all terrorists dead.



In the UK Home Invasion is all but unheard of. Over here we get burglaries but 99% of the time it's when the home owner is out and the burglars will flee if confronted. I've lived here for quite a few decades in a large city and never been burgled, my cars never been broken into, I've never had anything stolen. I've never been mugged or threatened with being mugged. I know 1 person who has, years ago. The only crime to ever affect me at home was some graffiti in an adjacent footpath - 1st incidence in 50 years, now removed by the Local Authority.

Knife crime is a problem in inner cities, but it's mostly gang / drug related. If you don't go in those circles, you're very unlucky to get caught up in it. The innocent ones stabbed in London are usually mistaken identity or gang initiation. It's very rare outside London and it's very rare for anyone not in a gang to get stabbed except maybe in a mugging gone wrong.

As for the gun vs ban graph above, doesn't tell the whole story as handgun crime fell sharply in the years beyodn that graph although it's climbing again. Usually put down to increased forensic techniques rather than the ban. although that depends on whether you talk to the anti or pro gun lobby .
Click to expand...

You still didn't answer the question.
 
CCTVCam said:
As for general Police response times, will depend on the priority of your call, how busy they are and whether there's any units in your area, whcih probably means in low crime areas a response may take longer than in a high crime area because there are probably no police in the area. However, in the UK it's rarely an issue as crime is generally low and we don't have home invasion which means most crime is against property not people. The overall levels of violent crime are low comapred to the US. We can go decades without a mass shooting and I can only ever think of 1 school incident in over 50 years.
Click to expand...
 
54 percent of counties in the US experience zero gun deaths. 50 percent of the murders occur in only 2 percent of the counties. Seeing a common thread? Legal ownership is linked to less crime in study after study. Millions of crimes are prevented each year by legal gun owners, and in most cases the weapon is not fired. Setting these stats as well as our second amendment aside, anyone who advocates against another human being having the god given right to defend themselves from murder, assaults, rape or even property theft is a fucking moron that needs a mental exam. Mass shootings are completely irrelevant statistically. "mass shooting" is a political propaganda term. Who cares about the total number of deaths that occur at one time. Is 100 deaths in one day worse than 1000 over a year? When weighing the lives saved, rapes, assaults and other serious crimes prevented by legal gun ownership its not even close. Only a complete fool who has not dont basic research would advocate for gun control - which is ineffective and does not work. You now what works? Keeping thugs in jail, stop and frisk, gang units who are allowed to do their jobs.
Gun control is racist as it disproportionally puts minorities who live in crime infested neighborhoods are much greater risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EMPIRETECANDY, TonyR, looney2ns and 7 others
fenderman said:
54 percent of counties in the US experience zero gun deaths. 50 percent of the murders occur in only 2 percent of the counties. Seeing a common thread? Legal ownership is linked to less crime in study after study. Millions of crimes are prevented each year by legal gun owners, and in most cases the weapon is not fired. Setting these stats as well as our second amendment aside, anyone who advocates against another human being having the god given right to defend themselves from murder, assaults, rape or even property theft is a fucking moron that needs a mental exam. Mass shootings are completely irrelevant statistically. "mass shooting" is a political propaganda term. Who cares about the total number of deaths that occur at one time. Is 100 deaths in one day worse than 1000 over a year? When weighing the lives saved, rapes, assaults and other serious crimes prevented by legal gun ownership its not even close. Only a complete fool who has not dont basic research would advocate for gun control - which is ineffective and does not work. You now what works? Keeping thugs in jail, stop and frisk, gang units who are allowed to do their jobs.
Gun control is racist as it disproportionally puts minorities who live in crime infested neighborhoods are much greater risk.
Click to expand...

Just one example of what fenderman states above, and the interesting thing is how the MMD downplays the legitimate and lawful use of firearms, in this case catching a cop killer.

Quick synopsis:

Felon released from prison in December after serving time for child molestation.

This week police were notified of suspicious activity and eventually secured a warrant for the felon on charges of parole violation.

Felon captured by police. While moving felon into a holding cell, the felon attacked a Sheriff's Deputy, who later died.

Felon fled in a police vehicle.

Later that same day police were notified of a shooting. A homeowner had engaged in a gun battle with the felon.

Police soon recovered the felon/cop-killer who is now in serious condition in the hospital awaiting charges and legal filings.

ktar.com

Suspect who assaulted Sheriff's Deputy in critical condition after gunshot

A suspect who injured a deputy is in critical condition after he was shot by a civilian in Tonopah on Saturday night.
ktar.com ktar.com

Why is it that media outlets constantly trumpet any issue of gun violence EXCEPT when it really is a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun? (Rhetorical question)
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: CCTVCam, TonyR, lulu5kamz and 6 others
Seems this thread went a bit far afield and I stopped reading but did anyone suggest that the fellow with the cameras contact his local TV news "investigative reporter"? They like that sort of thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom