JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Says the globalist living in Australia.
What you say here, in a nutshell, encapsulates so much about why America is viewed the way it is by the rest of the world. Insular doesn't begin to describe it.
You carry on talking up your 'freedoms' about property (ie guns) rights and how dastardly unfair and unfree it is to have them taken away.
Our countries will carry on enjoying our campuses and malls that don't need armed police roaming them. We have a word for it.
Freedom.
I'm not sure what exactly makes me a globalist, as for my not my problem comment, I was half joking, there's also context to it...
The post I was replying to is this
Elsewhere in the world there would be such outrage if 20 school children were shot dead that change would happen. Instead America are so set in their 1950's hysteria that there is more moral outrage that they won't be able to hunt turkeys.
This to me is a demonstration of someone talking out of their ass about things they know little about. Hence my tone in my reply...
It has nothing to do with hunting turkeys, or 50s hysteria, and America isn't elsewhere in the world. I don't care about elsewhere in the world, that's elsewhere in the world's problem. You seem to have no idea why the situation is the way it is based on what you're saying.
Obviously I'm saying that since we are in fact talking ABOUT America specifically, drawing a comparison to unspecified other countries and their reaction, which in and of itself has a lot of complex subtleties to go over as well depending on country, is an irrelevant point to make on its own and thus not relevant to a straightforward discussion of American gun politics. In short, what happens in the unspecified rest of the world on such a vague point is not my problem. Or to be more politically correct, it's too broad for me to be interested in branching out the topic into. In addition to that context, I also intentionally amped up the cliche american aspect of it in an attempt to annoy the poster as they annoyed me, which I clearly made far too subtle.
Now as for your point... it's again a faulty comparison.
Not many countries have an unarmed police, and two that do have armed police include Australia and (to my knowledge) New Zealand. Both countries globally praised for low gun violence and supposedly good gun laws. As such, having armed or unarmed police does not seem to be relevant to this subject. You'd have to investigate into more specific elements of police statistics to make decisions on the relative merits. Oddly enough, New Zealand despite being pretty much the same in the statistics on the crime side, has far freer gun control than the UK and Australia.
And as for the UK..... your gunless cops may be coming to an end. My understanding is the London bombing made some people in power question the wisdom of an unarmed police force.