Anti-Terrorist Tactics from England 1909

[Deaf Smith]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article5299010.ece

Times Online
From The Sunday Times

December 7, 2008 by Richard Munday


Think tank: If each of us carried a gun . . .

"In January 1909 two such anarchists, lately come from an attempt to blow up the president of France, tried to commit a robbery in north London, armed with automatic pistols. Edwardian Londoners, however, shot back – and the anarchists were pursued through the streets by a spontaneous hue-and-cry. The police, who could not find the key to their own gun cupboard, borrowed at least four pistols from passers-by, while other citizens armed with revolvers and shotguns preferred to use their weapons themselves to bring the assailants down."

---
Man times sure to change in good old England.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye, that surely is so. I have become convinced, in no small part by my interaction with the good folks here at MT, that there is no more safe or better conducted citizenry than one which is armed.

It may be a little barbaric in some ways but it has, it seems, ever been the case that the most polite societies have been those within which abusive behaviour earned you the appropriate equivalent of an "axe in the skull".

 

[Tez3]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article5299010.ece

Times Online
From The Sunday Times

December 7, 2008 by Richard Munday


Think tank: If each of us carried a gun . . .

"In January 1909 two such anarchists, lately come from an attempt to blow up the president of France, tried to commit a robbery in north London, armed with automatic pistols. Edwardian Londoners, however, shot back – and the anarchists were pursued through the streets by a spontaneous hue-and-cry. The police, who could not find the key to their own gun cupboard, borrowed at least four pistols from passers-by, while other citizens armed with revolvers and shotguns preferred to use their weapons themselves to bring the assailants down."

---
Man times sure to change in good old England.

Yes now we have MCDonalds, Starbucks, Burger King, KFC and much else, will Americans be finally satisfied when we've turned into a clone of the USA? The way things are done in the States isn't necessarily the way the rest of the world wants things done. Whats right there doesn't make the rest of us wrong.

 

[GBlues]

Yes now we have MCDonalds, Starbucks, Burger King, KFC and much else, will Americans be finally satisfied when we've turned into a clone of the USA? The way things are done in the States isn't necessarily the way the rest of the world wants things done. Whats right there doesn't make the rest of us wrong.

Very true. That is a fact. However, in the United States, in states where the common citizenry are allowed to carry weapons if they choose the crime rate is lower in those areas. Here's the deal, a law abiding citizen does not need a gun, unless, he is accosted by a criminal that has a gun, in which case most criminals generally want one thing your stuff. If it means they have to work for it, they probably won't do it, especially if someone is gambling with there lives. Now you can put your trust in the fact that the law is and LEO's can get to your home, or in the middle of an attack a good citizen will call and they will come and protect you. Except, your cops don't even carry guns. Point in case. THe big, jewelry heist they had in london, just the other day. A street beat cop, would have got killed had he walked in on that, cause he don't have a gun.

Anyways, that's my piece on the gun thing. Secondly most Americans I feel, really don't care what other nations do, so long as they leave us alone. At least I feel that way. I don't want you to be like us. Then what would make America so great? So unique? If everybody was like us, then they would feel entitled to the same rights and laws that we have, and revolt against there country, and then how would we be so special anymore? Nah, you guys can keep things just the way you have them, I'll take this over any other nation, any day. Although I have often talked about moving to japan. But that is for my own selfish reasons. I still, wouldn't have permanent residence any place else but the Good old, USA!

 

[Tez3]

Very true. That is a fact. However, in the United States, in states where the common citizenry are allowed to carry weapons if they choose the crime rate is lower in those areas. Here's the deal, a law abiding citizen does not need a gun, unless, he is accosted by a criminal that has a gun, in which case most criminals generally want one thing your stuff. If it means they have to work for it, they probably won't do it, especially if someone is gambling with there lives. Now you can put your trust in the fact that the law is and LEO's can get to your home, or in the middle of an attack a good citizen will call and they will come and protect you. Except, your cops don't even carry guns. Point in case. THe big, jewelry heist they had in london, just the other day. A street beat cop, would have got killed had he walked in on that, cause he don't have a gun.

Anyways, that's my piece on the gun thing. Secondly most Americans I feel, really don't care what other nations do, so long as they leave us alone. At least I feel that way. I don't want you to be like us. Then what would make America so great? So unique? If everybody was like us, then they would feel entitled to the same rights and laws that we have, and revolt against there country, and then how would we be so special anymore? Nah, you guys can keep things just the way you have them, I'll take this over any other nation, any day. Although I have often talked about moving to japan. But that is for my own selfish reasons. I still, wouldn't have permanent residence any place else but the Good old, USA!

I'm glad you feel like that!! if everyone felt like that perhaps we'd stop having posts that tell us we need to have guns!!
We manage things our way and only if the British public don't like it will things change, the fact that one American poster on MT thinks we are wrong will change nothing!
Things work differently here and it's our perogative to moan about them not citizens from other countries. I don't post up thinking that America should disarm everyone, I believe thats your business not mine.
If the citizens arm here it will be because they want to, as we haven't yet and there's no clamour to I guess we won't be anytime soon.

Everytime one of these 'ARM BRITAIN' threads comes up I sigh and think 'here we go again', why does it bother some people SO much?

 

[Tez3]

The self defence laws here allow far more than any I've seen posted up from the States, we are allowed to defend ourselves reasonable and we are allowed to use weapons to do that, that includes guns if you have them. All you have to do is prove you were in fear of your life and you acted with reasonable force, you are even allowed to strike first if you feel you are in danger. Living in the country most of my neighbours and myself have shotguns, used for supplementing dinner and shooting the peasants lol. There's plenty of gun clubs here and plenty of people who know how to use weapons.
The people here that are being killed by guns are young people shot by other young people, it's gangs. The average criminal here doesn't carry guns, we don't have the very violent home invasions, we do have muggings and bank robberies, having a weapon in any of these situations doesn't guarantee your safety. We don't have the accidental shooting of children because they've got hold of their parents guns, we don't have people shooting someone who knocks at their door!

You can pick up any weapon in this country to defend yourself with, yes a sword, cricket bat, hammer whatever no one has to lie down and die rather than defend themselves.



Facts & figures

• <LI minmax_bound="true">The number of overall offences involving firearms fell by 13% in 2006/07 compared to the previous year. <LI minmax_bound="true">Firearms were involved in 566 serious or fatal injuries in 2006/07, compared to 645 the previous year - a drop of 12%. <LI minmax_bound="true">The number of armed robberies involving guns dropped by 3% <LI minmax_bound="true">There were 13% fewer serious and fatal injuries related to gun crimes in 2006/07. <LI minmax_bound="true">The number of reported crimes involving imitation guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07.
• The number of reported crimes involving air guns dropped by 15% in 2006/07 over 2005/06.

(Source: Crime in England and Wales 2006/07; Homicide, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2006-07.)

The population of the Uk is 60,776,238 and gun deaths/fatal injuries are in three figures. Those figures include suicides by shooting ie fatal shootings. it also includes the figures for Northern Ireland where sectarian shootings still occur.


Facts & figures

• <LI minmax_bound="true">The number of domestic burglaries fell by 11% between 2006-07 and 2007-08, <LI minmax_bound="true">Other household thefts fell by 12%
• Reports of criminal damage fell by 13%

(Source: Crime in England and Wales 2007/08 report)


The most worring crime in the UK is that which is alcohol related. binge drinking, under age drinking and violence is on the increase, fighting and violence on the streets by drunks youths is becoming a very big problem and one that arming the population will not help. Can you imagine all these drunk people out for a fight being armed?
Crime figures have recently shown an increase in rape especially 'date rape', it's generally believed this rate has always been high but is now being recorded because more people are willing to go to the police also it is being recorded as rape whereas before it would be logged as a domestic crime.
Street mugging has also been recorded as being higher, this coincides with the increase of Eastern Europeans who are predominantly knife carrying and carrying a gun I'm afraid unless you carry it out in your hand all the time will do litttle to help you. practical self defence techniques of awareness, not walking down dark alleys etc is the advice there as I believe it is in America. UInless you're Crocodile Dundee of course lol!

 

[Cryozombie]

I'm glad you feel like that!! if everyone felt like that perhaps we'd stop having posts that tell us we need to have guns!!

Everytime one of these 'ARM BRITAIN' threads comes up I sigh and think 'here we go again', why does it bother some people SO much?

*Shrug* Maybe we get sick of hearing the "Woe is us, two cockney anarchists shot up a Tube station and ruined my Lager and now its not safe to go for fish and chips, whatever shall we do? Football! Oi Oi Oi"

LOL.

Yes, Tez, that was a joke. Reeeeeelax.

 

[Cryozombie]

Crime figures have recently shown an increase in rape especially 'date rape', it's generally believed this rate has always been high but is now being recorded because more people are willing to go to the police also it is being recorded as rape whereas before it would be logged as a domestic crime.

hey! We started that with awareness programs and taking things like that seriously instead of making them minor offenses...

So stop trying to be like us.

 

[Tez3]

hey! We started that with awareness programs and taking things like that seriously instead of making them minor offenses...

So stop trying to be like us.

I was looking for a smiley that stuck it's tongue out lol!

Rape just wasn't reported because of the way it was dealt with, the victim was interrogated and rarely believed by the courts, the defence barristers would rip them apart and getting a conviction was very difficult. these days attitudes have changed but a lot of women are still reluctant to come forward.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Yes now we have MCDonalds, Starbucks, Burger King, KFC and much else, will Americans be finally satisfied when we've turned into a clone of the USA? The way things are done in the States isn't necessarily the way the rest of the world wants things done. Whats right there doesn't make the rest of us wrong.

I have told my wife (from China) and a friend of mine's wife (from Japan) and co-worker (from Germany) this many times. The best way for America to take over the world is to get everyone to eat like us. No one else could survive on this crap...only Americans can eat this stuff and live :uhyeah:

Rather insidious of us here in the good ole US of A don&#8217;t you think :EG: :uhyeah:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article5299010.ece



Times Online

From The Sunday Times



December 7, 2008 by Richard Munday





Think tank: If each of us carried a gun . . .



"In January 1909 two such anarchists, lately come from an attempt to blow up the president of France, tried to commit a robbery in north London, armed with automatic pistols. Edwardian Londoners, however, shot back &#8211; and the anarchists were pursued through the streets by a spontaneous hue-and-cry. The police, who could not find the key to their own gun cupboard, borrowed at least four pistols from passers-by, while other citizens armed with revolvers and shotguns preferred to use their weapons themselves to bring the assailants down."



---

Man times sure to change in good old England.

As to the OP

I am not saying anything for or against gun ownership here but comparing anti-terrorism tactics of the early 1900 to now is like comparing trench warfare to a nuclear strike.

It really would have made no difference what-so-ever if every single man woman and child was armed in NYC on 9/11. It also would have made no difference during the Anthrax & Beltway Sniper Attacks either and it would make no difference in something like the Unabomber.

Terrorists are much better armed today, much better trained today and some are religious fanatics, but not all. And many are better trained because they study things like terrorism from 1909 or any other time that came before.

 

[Deaf Smith]

IIt really would have made no difference what-so-ever if every single man woman and child was armed in NYC on 9/11. It also would have made no difference during the Anthrax & Beltway Sniper Attacks either and it would make no difference in something like the Unabomber.

Uh, Xue, and on fight 93? If a few people, just a few, had been armed on the flights that were hijacked that day, THERE WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN AN 9/11!.

Simple as that.

Deaf

 

[Xue Sheng]

Uh, Xue, and on fight 93? If a few people, just a few, had been armed on the flights that were hijacked that day, THERE WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN AN 9/11!.

Simple as that.

Deaf

Although I am in awe of the bravery of the people of flight 93 none were armed and in most cases I doubt that most people even if armed would do anything at all. A gun in the hands of someone that is untrained is not necessarily a good thing or a guarantee that they could stop a thing. There are real big differences between holding a gun, firing a gun at a target, firing a gun at person, and firing a gun at a person at close proximity who has a gun that is pointing it at you. Do you honestly believe that just by a person having a gun on them that they will absolutely without hesitation under extreme duress and in fear of their life that they would have the presence of mind to aim and shoot and kill the hijacker? Military people, a police officer yes, possibly even an avid hunter but the average person who spends time at a shooting range doubtful. Someone who just bought a gun for protection, highly unlikely.

And let&#8217;s have a reality check here, what you honestly think are the chances of an airline ever letting every single passenger check in with a gun. Yes the terrorists got through with them and that was absolutely unforgivable that happened. But then this, on both our parts, is speculation at best and although the capitals, bolded and underlined is a nice yelling effect it is neither proof nor disproof of said yelling comment.

And you have only picked out one of my examples. Would having everyone armed have made a difference in the Anthrax & Beltway Sniper Attacks or the Unabomber?

Regardless of whatever your agenda is here suffice to say terrorism in the 21st century is much different than it was in England in 1909. Don't believe me I could suggest a few books on the history of it that might help.

 

[Empty Hands]

Uh, Xue, and on fight 93? If a few people, just a few, had been armed on the flights that were hijacked that day, THERE WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN AN 9/11!.

Simple as that.

Deaf

If the people on the planes had fought back, armed or not, there would not have been a 9/11. Boxcutters are hardly the epitome of deadly efficiency. Flight 93 showed us that, although they did have to pay with their lives to save others. The passengers on the three other flights were under the mistaken impression that a routine hijacking was going on. Firearms would have made little difference.

 

[Tez3]

Uh, Xue, and on fight 93? If a few people, just a few, had been armed on the flights that were hijacked that day, THERE WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN AN 9/11!.

Simple as that.

Deaf

In Northern Ireland at the height of the 'troubles' every police officer was armed, every soldier was armed and a good many of the citizens had at least one weapon illegal or legal ( many people in certain jobs were allowed to be armed) and still there were terrorist attacks, bombings and shootings. The terrorists ( who were from both sides of the divide) simply used their heads and planned well.

 

[Sukerkin]

Good points from EH and Tez for the, if you'll forgive me, I'll call it the 'Gun Control' view.

I do agree that in such circumstances an armed citizenry has less chance to make a difference. I do stand by what I said in post #2 above tho'. By this I mean that one of the reasons I think for the rise in general anti-social behaviour is the lack of consequences for it.

I'm not talking about terrorism here but the much more common criminal intimidation and general thuggery that goes on. If people were routinely armed, not necessarily with guns, then yes, I do think that there would be an increase in violence against the person in the short term. In the longer term tho', I think it would serve to curtail such behaviour. The rituals of polite interaction developed in violent times precisely to forestall getting a sword inserted where the sun don't shine and it's a lesson that's been forgotten I fear.

 

[Tez3]

To be honest, I don't believe arming people will make a difference for the good in the way a mjor reorganisation of the justice system would. The laws are fine however the sentencing is a joke. people are in prison for not paying their television licences or council tax yet others who commit GBH/Abh, criminal damge etc are given community service! Every prisoner who is banged up should be looked at and the need for them to be imprisoned questioned. We have no long term care for mentally ill people so they end up inprison, they should be released to hospitals as they aren't criminals. This will make room for criminals to be sentenced as they should, custodial sentences where appropriate.
Crimes against people should rate higher sentences than crimes against property or money. if you steal millions of pounds in computer fraud you will spend longer in prison than if you raped or murdered. that is clearly wrong. sentences must not only keep offenders out of the community they must act as a detterent.

We should not be arresting people for serious crimes for them to laugh knowing that they will only be sentenced to so many hours working in the community.

Proper sentencing would do far more to prevent much of the anti social behaviour we have now than being able to 'defend' ourselves. It would raise police morale, put back much of the faith in the justice system lost over the years of leniency. If we were to copy anything from America I'd like it to be that we appointed much younger judges who are totally in touch with moden life, the thoughts and feelings of this countries citizens.

 

[Sukerkin]

Good insight, tez.

 

[Empty Hands]

Good points from EH and Tez for the, if you'll forgive me, I'll call it the 'Gun Control' view.

Eh, I'm not really for gun control as most would probably understand it. I was just taking issue with that particular claim. Guns are useful tools, but they aren't a panacea. Like everything, there are pluses and minuses to a widely armed populace. Sadly, the end of terrorism and violent crime isn't really one of the pluses.

 

[Tez3]

Good insight, tez.

thank you! I can see from my spelling I need to get to bed lol, it's been a long day!

 

[Deaf Smith]

If the people on the planes had fought back, armed or not, there would not have been a 9/11. Boxcutters are hardly the epitome of deadly efficiency. Flight 93 showed us that, although they did have to pay with their lives to save others. The passengers on the three other flights were under the mistaken impression that a routine hijacking was going on. Firearms would have made little difference.

Yes but one Glock trumps boxcutters. Flight 93 would have ended up without the passengers and crew dead if even one person produced a gun and stopped the terrorist armed with box cutters.

Today we do have armed Marshals on SOME (abet a few) flights. There has been few cases where they have intervined to subdue passengers.

I have no doubt if one of them produced a box cutter the 'hijacker' would be dead and the everyone else alive.

In Northern Ireland at the height of the 'troubles' every police officer was armed, every soldier was armed and a good many of the citizens had at least one weapon illegal or legal ( many people in certain jobs were allowed to be armed) and still there were terrorist attacks, bombings and shootings. The terrorists ( who were from both sides of the divide) simply used their heads and planned well.

But the question is, if none of the police, soldier's and citizens had been armed, how many MORE terrorist attacks would there have been?

Do not think that the level of attacks stays the same, reguardless, of if anyone is armed. If that was the case, Israel would not have many people armed (and believe me, one heck of alot of them are armed, police, soldiiers, and civilians.) Just a while a go some civilans in Israel did stop some terrorist with pistol fire. Sometimes the good guys win.

Deaf