The New Zealand Police should be disarmed.

For reasons of public safety.

These pricks are just plain too crappy marksmen to be permitted to run round in public. “Up to a dozen rounds” at one dog and you can’t hit it at virtaul point blank range?

Then having heard the shots from TV1’s footage my professional assesment would be more than one shooter and the better part of a couple of mags going down range. Of course it wasn’t ON a range, it was in a public street. The police claim that there was “no danger to the public” is just utter utter bullshit. Without having templated and surveyed the area you have no glue where those rounds are going and given your obvious inability to hit what you’re aiming at the chance of smacking off something you didn’t know was there increase with every jerk of the trigger. And there was clearly a lot of trigger jerking going on.

The technical name for the sort shooting I heard was a “yippie”.

And to that the number of stories I have from friends who were or are cops about UD’s in the changing rooms and various other “incidents” I say we should no more be giving cops firearms than we should over sugared hyperactive ten year olds.

From observation almost the same thing.

You guys suck.

In my world we hit what we aim at, its called being a professional. But then in the army we didn’t collect taxes for Cullen so we had time to train.


7 Responses to The New Zealand Police should be disarmed.

  1. krm says:

    After working on some police discipline cases, I started to be a bit nervous about the folks who got to carry a gun and a badge. Although I am still more scared about the ones who keep trying to get on the job but don’t pass the psychological exams.

  2. George says:


    Looks like the boys in blue need to take courses on instinctive shooting and unsubscribe to the theory that ‘while there’s lead in the air, there’s hope.’

  3. krm says:

    I recall a huge Chicago police shoot out with some gang leader stoped on one of the city’s expressways. The guy ended up underneath his var and the police fired hundreds of rounds at him (yes, several hundreds – literally) and the guy lived to go to trial.

  4. nih777 says:

    I absolutely agree. Overall levels of violence have increased in other countries as a result of introducing more guns into the equation.

    Criminals have armed themselves as a direct response to police being armed.

    I’m honestly not even comfortable with tasers being available to our police. Although we’re not at the stage where they’re used to enforce compliance, I shudder to think of it ever reaching that point here.

    As many others have said, particularly in the media, police in NZ no longer do good old police work any more. They don’t talk to people and try to calm them down.

    In the latest shooting, I have to ask why the police didn’t retreat until tasers or more staff could arrived. Who fucking cares if property is being damaged, when you have the very likely outcome of killing someone when you shoot them?

    Police should not be armed. It’s that simple.

  5. WebWrat says:

    Why were they shooting at the dog anyway … they said it was because the owner sooled it onto them … but it was running away.

    The cops chasing the dog and shooting at it were also shooting towards another cop and the cameraman. What a bunch of trigger-happy twats!

    On the video I reckoned I could see a couple of shots ricochet off the tar-seal.

  6. Murray says:

    Yes I rather think you may have totally missed my direction there nih.

    My isssue is not that they HAVE firearms but that they are not competent with them.

    On this particular issue I don’t think they should have been trying to shoot the dog at all and unless given some pretty convincing evidence as to why they made the attempt I would fire the scene commander.

    On the other recent shooting matter I think anyone who attacks a police officer with a weapon should be shot without being second guesses by every cubical rat with an axe to grind.

    Given that the NZ Police have only shot 21 people in the last 60 years is a testement to their tollerence for assholes.

    This defult setting of liberals that police should “back off” whenever it gets slightly hairy is utter crap. You are simply creating a situation where criminals are told that if they make a situation dangerous enough they will be permitted to get away.

    They message should be give up or die.

    That works a lot better for brain damaged lowlifes who seem to have everyone worrying about their rights but not giving a crap about the actual victims.

  7. krm says:

    I’m with you Murray. The Police should be armed. They should also be required to be fully competent – even talented – in forearms use. They are there to deal with miscreants, violently if neccesary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: