Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site vu44.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!mcvax!vu44!jack
From: jack@vu44.UUCP (Jack Jansen)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: handgun control
Message-ID: <548@vu44.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 1-Jan-85 17:16:20 EST
Article-I.D.: vu44.548
Posted: Tue Jan  1 17:16:20 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 4-Jan-85 04:44:36 EST
References: <168@ttidcc.UUCP> <631@whuxlm.UUCP>
Organization: The Retarded Programmers Home, VU, Amsterdam
Lines: 24

What struck me in the gun-death statics was (besides,of course,
the ridiculously high number of victims in the US :-( ) was
the low death-rate in England, even in comparison to the rest
of Europe.
I was wondering wether this has anything to do with the British
police not being armed with guns.
In would be very interested in seeing those statistics split in
'people killed by the police' and 'people killed by ordinary citizens'.
If these statistics show that in coutries where the police is not
carrying guns around, the number of people killed by ordinary
citizens (also including criminals, in this case) is substantially
lower, this might be a very strong reason to have unarmed
policemen (even for their *own* safety).
I've always been in favour of policemen without arms, since I think
that if you're known to be carrying a gun, you've also a much
bigger chance that the other guy doesn't take chances and shoots
you outright.
I think that the above-mentioned statistics could make my point
stronger (or, of course, it could make me change my mind :-).

-- 
	Jack Jansen, {seismo|philabs|decvax}!mcvax!vu44!jack
	or				       ...!vu44!htsa!jack
If *this* is my opinion, I wasn't sober at the time.