Good article Archangel M. just wish he would stop using "right wing." Left wing would be more accurate.
terrorism in norway
- Thread starter Twin Fist
- Start date
Every time there's a shooting somewhere we get posts saying it proves that all citizens should carry guns and that the police are always in the wrong.
Everytime someone says something is right wing and that something is bad Billcihak says it's not right wing it's left wing.
Both are predictable, wrong and boring.
Everytime someone says something is right wing and that something is bad Billcihak says it's not right wing it's left wing.
Both are predictable, wrong and boring.
Somehow, I get the feeling that what's being advocated for is to have Judge Dredd take over for Andy and Barney in Mayberry.
I kinda of get the feeling that wouldn't be seen as a win.
I kinda of get the feeling that wouldn't be seen as a win.
I'm sure the advice about arming police etc is made in good faith but I'm not sure if people are aware how patronising it comes over to non Americans? It ruffles feathers and comes across as sounding superior. We get that Americans are passionate about gun ownership and having their police armed to the gills but one shouldn't assume that they are bumpkins or naive about weapons in other countries.
The simple fact is that we don't have any facts about the hows, whys and wherefores of the police response in Norway. We do know that the killer timed the massacre with the bomb to draw as many police and rescue workers into Oslo, remember the authorities didn't know if there was one bomb or many, they had to react to what information they had at the time. If the off duty policeman was allowed to carry a weapon would he have worn it? We don't know, we don't know how many local police officers there were local to the island. There is simple so much we don't know so makingsnap judgements and saying the police should review all their procedures in light of this one totally unexpected, totally out of the Norwegian character events is assuming far too much.
The Norwegians will investigate, will assess and will judge their police procedures, it's not up to us to make judgements based on what happens in our countries. At the moment they say they would do the same again, we can't gainsay them, we don't know the facts but I guess that doesn't stop people pushing their own agendas anyway.
Billicihak, if the Norwegians say that the Norwegian killer is right wing are you going to tell them they are all wrong? I suggest you post on the Norwegian newspapers site, they speak good English, and peddle your 'left is bad' schtick. I would love to read the responses.
The simple fact is that we don't have any facts about the hows, whys and wherefores of the police response in Norway. We do know that the killer timed the massacre with the bomb to draw as many police and rescue workers into Oslo, remember the authorities didn't know if there was one bomb or many, they had to react to what information they had at the time. If the off duty policeman was allowed to carry a weapon would he have worn it? We don't know, we don't know how many local police officers there were local to the island. There is simple so much we don't know so makingsnap judgements and saying the police should review all their procedures in light of this one totally unexpected, totally out of the Norwegian character events is assuming far too much.
The Norwegians will investigate, will assess and will judge their police procedures, it's not up to us to make judgements based on what happens in our countries. At the moment they say they would do the same again, we can't gainsay them, we don't know the facts but I guess that doesn't stop people pushing their own agendas anyway.
Billicihak, if the Norwegians say that the Norwegian killer is right wing are you going to tell them they are all wrong? I suggest you post on the Norwegian newspapers site, they speak good English, and peddle your 'left is bad' schtick. I would love to read the responses.
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
No, whats being advocated is that you don't face TODAY'S threat with YESTERDAYS tactics. When an active shooter is killing people, Barney Fife has to go in and try and stop him. Not wait for a tactical unit to respond. BTW, when did cops/off-duty cops being allowed (and/or trusted) to carry firearms become a Judge Dredd scenario?
Last edited:
We don't actually know whether police officrs off duty are allowed to carry, in fact we know little about policing in Norway so to make any judgement is premature. We also don't know what tactics the police there use or what threats they are prepared for. What we do know is that the killer set off a large amount of explosives to make sure all police resources were focused on Oslo, perhpas the police were prepared and that is literally the fastest they could get there, that remains to be seen. Whether the police are trusted or not is up to the people there, we'd be better keeping our noses out, this plethora of advice on how to handle events is something that non Americans find intrusive, the constant need to prove that arming the populace and the police is the right thing to do, sure it's fine for the States but if Europeans decide they don't want the police and/or citizens armed what's it to you?
We know now there is a threat today, last week we didn't know. There's no point in jumping on the bandwagon of disapproval for Norwegian police until the investigations are finished. Everyone has 20/20 hindsight and can be scathing but we have to look at things at they occurred last week as they happened not could have been done if it were America, a country more used to mass shooting than Norway who's last mass shootings were by the Nazis during the occupation of their country. An occupation I might add that was gallently and bravely resisted by the Norwegians.....armed Norwegians.
Well, just to ask, if police in Norway are not allowed to carry on duty, why would they carry off duty?
You missed the bit then that said they carry weapons in their vehicles to use when and if needed then? It's a system that works, it's what we do.
It kind of reminds me of an episode of the Andy Griffith show where Andy explains to barney why they never really needed tear gas in Mayberry....
It just a different situation from let's say Germany: they carry big pistols and have a submachine gun handy...but then they have been in Hollywood worthy shootouts in the 1970s and lost a few people then during the hay day of the RAF terrorists (not the royal airforce...)
I was living in Germany when the Red army Faction was going strong, we were warned that if we were stopped by the German police we were to say were in the Royal Air Force not the RAF! The IRA were also in German and the Netherlands at the time, trying to target British military personnel and sites,
They killed an Royal Air Force corporal, Maheshkumar Islania and his 6-month-old daughter in October 1989, two gunmen opened fire on his car in a snack-bar parking lot outside RAF Wildenrath near the West Germany/Netherlands border. We were at RAF Laarbruch a few miles to the north of Wildenrath. In May 1990, the IRA shot two Australian tourists in Roermond, Netherlands after they mistook them for British soldiers. The 24-year-old lawyers were ambushed in the main square as they returned to their car after a meal in a restaurant.
that is relatively recent!
My mom was pulled over a lot...she had chosen BLOND as her hair color....
Which also reminds me that procedure in police matters varies vastly from country to country.
While German cops are heavily armed they are generally tight holstered. Also the way they pull you over is different.
They do share experience internationally, but where the rubber meets the road it's a very local matter. (and it's important to know when you travel) but I don't think one can judge it from the outside and say 'that is wrong'
While the officials say right now they are satisfied with the responding teams, you know everything will be put under the microscope and examined in detail. I am pretty sure changes will happen. Incidents of this magnitude always change things (and sadly never for the better).
Another bit of innocence lost....
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
I don't know if I buy the "innocence lost" excuse whan it comes to preparation. I see it bandied about all too often and see it as a head in sand rationalization for just "doing what we always did".
If Norwegians choose to give their police greater access to firearms after this incident, it won't be because a bunch of Americans twisted arms and tried to make everyone think that the way they do things is the only right way. If they choose to go that route it will be because its a better way of handling active shooters...and that has nothing to do with America at all.
I'm curious about Finland. They have had active shooters in their schools and I wonder how their society dealt with the issue?
Last edited:
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
Exactly Makala.
Debating the issue of "would the off-duty have carried if he was allowed too" is kind of moot when he wasn't ever allowed the option in the first place. And smacks as rationalization after the fact.
As to American LE being "armed to the gills"...by and large FAR MORE European police officers (that I have seen photos of at least) can be seen wandering their posts carrying submachine guns. Something that is rare in the US (and would be complained about) except in special circumstances. Most of US American LEO's have weapons AVAILABLE to us (rifles in our vehicles for example) and the freedom to deploy them when WE deem necessary...thats a big difference.
Debating the issue of "would the off-duty have carried if he was allowed too" is kind of moot when he wasn't ever allowed the option in the first place. And smacks as rationalization after the fact.
As to American LE being "armed to the gills"...by and large FAR MORE European police officers (that I have seen photos of at least) can be seen wandering their posts carrying submachine guns. Something that is rare in the US (and would be complained about) except in special circumstances. Most of US American LEO's have weapons AVAILABLE to us (rifles in our vehicles for example) and the freedom to deploy them when WE deem necessary...thats a big difference.
Well that puts a lie to your comment about Europeans police not being armed!
According to what I posted the Norwegian police also have weapons in their vehicles and the freedom to deploy when needed, it did say they were to try to get permission but this was overridden by the need to deploy them when needed, as decided by the police officers themselves. So very little different from you then!
The thing is that we don't know all the circumstances so criticism of police actions are pointless, basing criticism on how we would deal with situations on home ground when it's ground in fact that's alien to us is just criticising to make a noise.
