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.