It's absolute stupidity lowing and I can safely guarantee you that it is not the general view of the average Brit. In my blue collar days as a worker in a shitty restaurant the boss always instructed us to leave the till open at night because the float in the till was not worth as much as the till itself, now it It sounds to me like some tool on the council in question here has tried applied this logic to the scenario involving these sheds... the only problem being that doing so is completely idiotic, you can't just leave the fucking doors unlocked. The council is trying to save a buck or two at the expense of those unfortunate enough to keep anything of value in the sheds.lowing wrote:
Yeah it is an appeasement mentality as well as a stupidity one.Braddock wrote:
This is not an appeasement problem lowing, it is a stupidity problem.lowing wrote:
Yeah you do not appease Islam and now I suppose you are not appeasing criminals here
http://www.dailyindia.com/show/275313.php
you guessed it folks, in GB, they are tired of the criminals FORCING themselves into their buildings, so they urge everyone to NOT lock them so the thieves do not do any damage when they break in.
Neh, GB does not have an appeasement mentality at all do they?
Leaving something unlocked would invalidate most insurance policies, this is complete nonsense. I'll wager the numbnuts who suggested this policy is having their botty spanked as we speak.
The notion that leaving something unlocked to make it easier for a criminal commit his crime s ohe doesn't have to bother with breaking evan a lock, is about as appeasing as you can get.
Sorry Mr. Thief, let me take that lock off for you, I wouldn't want you to have any trouble stealing my shit from me.
Wait a sec, you tell me it is not a Brit mentality then you procede to give another example of this logic being implemented?Braddock wrote:
It's absolute stupidity lowing and I can safely guarantee you that it is not the general view of the average Brit. In my blue collar days as a worker in a shitty restaurant the boss always instructed us to leave the till open at night because the float in the till was not worth as much as the till itself, now it It sounds to me like some tool on the council in question here has tried applied this logic to the scenario involving these sheds... the only problem being that doing so is completely idiotic, you can't just leave the fucking doors unlocked. The council is trying to save a buck or two at the expense of those unfortunate enough to keep anything of value in the sheds.lowing wrote:
Yeah it is an appeasement mentality as well as a stupidity one.Braddock wrote:
This is not an appeasement problem lowing, it is a stupidity problem.
Leaving something unlocked would invalidate most insurance policies, this is complete nonsense. I'll wager the numbnuts who suggested this policy is having their botty spanked as we speak.
The notion that leaving something unlocked to make it easier for a criminal commit his crime s ohe doesn't have to bother with breaking evan a lock, is about as appeasing as you can get.
Sorry Mr. Thief, let me take that lock off for you, I wouldn't want you to have any trouble stealing my shit from me.
Well... no comment on your comment, changed my mind I agree with your statement.usmarine wrote:
everyone? me thinks nottopal63 wrote:
^^^ Go to a Canadian neighborhood where basically, or almost, everyone leaves the front door to their house un-locked. Please report back on: fear, crime rates, etc...
Anyways I was being colloquial meaning many or even a majority and even in some neighborhoods you'll find this is true. That almost all the doors are unlocked. Does that apply to everywhere in Canada - no.
k...but that happens in the US also, just not in the big cities.topal63 wrote:
Well... no comment on your comment, changed my mind I agree with your statement.usmarine wrote:
everyone? me thinks nottopal63 wrote:
^^^ Go to a Canadian neighborhood where basically, or almost, everyone leaves the front door to their house un-locked. Please report back on: fear, crime rates, etc...
Anyways I was being colloquial meaning many or even a majority and even in some neighborhoods you'll find this is true. That almost all the doors are unlocked. Does that apply to everywhere in Canada - no.
True enough.usmarine wrote:
k...but that happens in the US also, just not in the big cities.topal63 wrote:
Well... no comment on your comment, changed my mind I agree with your statement.usmarine wrote:
everyone? me thinks not
Anyways I was being colloquial meaning many or even a majority and even in some neighborhoods you'll find this is true. That almost all the doors are unlocked. Does that apply to everywhere in Canada - no.
I lived on a street called Bonnie Brook when I was a kid, isn't that fucking cute(!), did we lock our doors in the burbs north of Chicago - no.
Last edited by topal63 (2008-10-02 17:18:23)
I remember my apartment near downtown LA getting robbed twice in a week when I was 3 or 4
not LA? no wai!God Save the Queen wrote:
I remember my apartment near downtown LA getting robbed twice in a week when I was 3 or 4
Lowing probably thinks giving each shed owner a shotgun and ammo would solve the problem 100%
I dunno, we have a very low crime rate here and the cops are excellent but home invasions/robbery are still quite prevalant. There was actually a case of two happening a few towns down. Guess how they got in? The windows were unlocked and the guys cut through the screens.usmarine wrote:
k...but that happens in the US also, just not in the big cities.topal63 wrote:
Well... no comment on your comment, changed my mind I agree with your statement.usmarine wrote:
everyone? me thinks not
Anyways I was being colloquial meaning many or even a majority and even in some neighborhoods you'll find this is true. That almost all the doors are unlocked. Does that apply to everywhere in Canada - no.
I used to sleep with my window open - now I refuse to. Not taking any chances.
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti … id=6380961
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti … id=5328612
First one is one town over from where my mom lives (where I reside) and the other one is one town over from where my dad lives. Scary shit.
Do you not have the windows that open about an inch or so but still lock, most homes over here do, they're really good if you're worried about having unlocked windows but it's hot in the summer etc.Poseidon wrote:
I dunno, we have a very low crime rate here and the cops are excellent but home invasions/robbery are still quite prevalant. There was actually a case of two happening a few towns down. Guess how they got in? The windows were unlocked and the guys cut through the screens.usmarine wrote:
k...but that happens in the US also, just not in the big cities.topal63 wrote:
Well... no comment on your comment, changed my mind I agree with your statement.
Anyways I was being colloquial meaning many or even a majority and even in some neighborhoods you'll find this is true. That almost all the doors are unlocked. Does that apply to everywhere in Canada - no.
I used to sleep with my window open - now I refuse to. Not taking any chances.
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti … id=6380961
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti … id=5328612
First one is one town over from where my mom lives (where I reside) and the other one is one town over from where my dad lives. Scary shit.
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably thinks giving each shed owner a shotgun and ammo would solve the problem 100%
Pretty much everyone uses the example of the till being left open lowing because it just makes sense... the till costs more than the average float, that's a simple fact. They don't leave the doors to the premises open and the alarm off. The reasoning being that if they've got as far as the till you are as well cutting your losses and keeping your till intact... but up to that point lock that mutha down as good as you can!lowing wrote:
Wait a sec, you tell me it is not a Brit mentality then you procede to give another example of this logic being implemented?Braddock wrote:
It's absolute stupidity lowing and I can safely guarantee you that it is not the general view of the average Brit. In my blue collar days as a worker in a shitty restaurant the boss always instructed us to leave the till open at night because the float in the till was not worth as much as the till itself, now it It sounds to me like some tool on the council in question here has tried applied this logic to the scenario involving these sheds... the only problem being that doing so is completely idiotic, you can't just leave the fucking doors unlocked. The council is trying to save a buck or two at the expense of those unfortunate enough to keep anything of value in the sheds.lowing wrote:
Yeah it is an appeasement mentality as well as a stupidity one.
The notion that leaving something unlocked to make it easier for a criminal commit his crime s ohe doesn't have to bother with breaking evan a lock, is about as appeasing as you can get.
Sorry Mr. Thief, let me take that lock off for you, I wouldn't want you to have any trouble stealing my shit from me.
The same principle doesn't hold true if you have a shed full of expensive tools and a shitty lock that the council don't want to bother fixing time and time again.
OKay, forget the 100%.lowing wrote:
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably thinks giving each shed owner a shotgun and ammo would solve the problem 100%
You think that arming them would solve the problem?
An armed citizen is also a potential armed robber lowing.lowing wrote:
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably thinks giving each shed owner a shotgun and ammo would solve the problem 100%
But I'm not going to get into a huge debate over that with you because we both know there's no point... especially when Sarah Palin is gunna be gettin her cute ass out onstage soon!
Nope. Our house is pretty old. My mother bought it in '05 and it was built in '69. Plus, we don't really plan to stay here long, so we're not going to do any renovations like that (adding in those types of windows).The Sheriff wrote:
Do you not have the windows that open about an inch or so but still lock, most homes over here do, they're really good if you're worried about having unlocked windows but it's hot in the summer etc.Poseidon wrote:
I dunno, we have a very low crime rate here and the cops are excellent but home invasions/robbery are still quite prevalant. There was actually a case of two happening a few towns down. Guess how they got in? The windows were unlocked and the guys cut through the screens.usmarine wrote:
k...but that happens in the US also, just not in the big cities.
I used to sleep with my window open - now I refuse to. Not taking any chances.
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti … id=6380961
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti … id=5328612
First one is one town over from where my mom lives (where I reside) and the other one is one town over from where my dad lives. Scary shit.
We'll be moving into an apartment soon anyways for a variety of reasons, so we'll see if they have them. I'd assume most well-kept apartments around here have something along the lines of that, because it gets beyond fucking hot here in the summer. I mean, we ARE on an island ffs.
Nehhhh, all thieves who know they would probably get their asses shot off if they attempted to rob an armed citizen would still go for it, I am sure you are right.TheAussieReaper wrote:
OKay, forget the 100%.lowing wrote:
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably thinks giving each shed owner a shotgun and ammo would solve the problem 100%
You think that arming them would solve the problem?
That would be fine Braddock as long as you recognize that by using the word "potential" you have included everyone on the planet in your statement, not just law abiding gun owners. We all have the "potential" to do just about anything.Braddock wrote:
An armed citizen is also a potential armed robber lowing.lowing wrote:
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Lowing probably thinks giving each shed owner a shotgun and ammo would solve the problem 100%
But I'm not going to get into a huge debate over that with you because we both know there's no point... especially when Sarah Palin is gunna be gettin her cute ass out onstage soon!
Are you saying nobody attempts robberies or home invasions in the US?lowing wrote:
Nehhhh, all thieves who know they would probably get their asses shot off if they attempted to rob an armed citizen would still go for it, I am sure you are right.TheAussieReaper wrote:
OKay, forget the 100%.lowing wrote:
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.
You think that arming them would solve the problem?
Not if we don't have heavy firepower at our disposal!lowing wrote:
That would be fine Braddock as long as you recognize that by using the word "potential" you have included everyone on the planet in your statement, not just law abiding gun owners. We all have the "potential" to do just about anything.Braddock wrote:
An armed citizen is also a potential armed robber lowing.lowing wrote:
I notice you had to throw in the "100%" to validate your statement since you obviously know that an armed citizen is a protected citizen.
But I'm not going to get into a huge debate over that with you because we both know there's no point... especially when Sarah Palin is gunna be gettin her cute ass out onstage soon!
...Honestly lowing, there's no point in us getting into this debate again! We sit firmly on either side of the argument.
Sure they do, but those that do it do so at their own risk. Unlike the UK where they know no one owns a gun and will apparently leave their houses unlocked so you do not fuck up their door when you rob them.Braddock wrote:
Are you saying nobody attempts robberies or home invasions in the US?lowing wrote:
Nehhhh, all thieves who know they would probably get their asses shot off if they attempted to rob an armed citizen would still go for it, I am sure you are right.TheAussieReaper wrote:
OKay, forget the 100%.
You think that arming them would solve the problem?
No, you cause more harm than good. Like, for every "accidental shooting" when little Johnny jumps over the fence to get back his frisbee and some nut thinks he's out in the yard to break into the tool shed so unloads into the kid with a 12 gauge.lowing wrote:
Nehhhh, all thieves who know they would probably get their asses shot off if they attempted to rob an armed citizen would still go for it, I am sure you are right.
But not arming citizens is probably some form of appeasement I'm just not noticing.
Yer right Braddock, all law abiding citizens do is run around town shootin' up the place until they get locked up.Braddock wrote:
Not if we don't have heavy firepower at our disposal!lowing wrote:
That would be fine Braddock as long as you recognize that by using the word "potential" you have included everyone on the planet in your statement, not just law abiding gun owners. We all have the "potential" to do just about anything.Braddock wrote:
An armed citizen is also a potential armed robber lowing.
But I'm not going to get into a huge debate over that with you because we both know there's no point... especially when Sarah Palin is gunna be gettin her cute ass out onstage soon!
...Honestly lowing, there's no point in us getting into this debate again! We sit firmly on either side of the argument.
So what you are saying is that in America the same thing happens as in the UK except there is a higher risk of both parties being seriously injured or killed? Cool, I'll stick with our approach thanks.lowing wrote:
Sure they do, but those that do it do so at their own risk. Unlike the UK where they know no one owns a gun and will apparently leave their houses unlocked so you do not fuck up their door when you rob them.Braddock wrote:
Are you saying nobody attempts robberies or home invasions in the US?lowing wrote:
Nehhhh, all thieves who know they would probably get their asses shot off if they attempted to rob an armed citizen would still go for it, I am sure you are right.
...and people don't leave their doors unlocked lowing. I don't know how things are in America but in Europe not everyone does exactly what their Goverments, councils and local authorities tell them to.
This is true, I have lost count as to how many kids I have shot over the past year coming into my yard to get their frisbees.TheAussieReaper wrote:
No, you cause more harm than good. Like, for every "accidental shooting" when little Johnny jumps over the fence to get back his frisbee and some nut thinks he's out in the yard to break into the tool shed so unloads into the kid with a 12 gauge.lowing wrote:
Nehhhh, all thieves who know they would probably get their asses shot off if they attempted to rob an armed citizen would still go for it, I am sure you are right.
But not arming citizens is probably some form of appeasement I'm just not noticing.
It would seem that a lot of them do lowing... enough for me to be happy with our gun policies over here.lowing wrote:
Yer right Braddock, all law abiding citizens do is run around town shootin' up the place until they get locked up.Braddock wrote:
Not if we don't have heavy firepower at our disposal!lowing wrote:
That would be fine Braddock as long as you recognize that by using the word "potential" you have included everyone on the planet in your statement, not just law abiding gun owners. We all have the "potential" to do just about anything.
...Honestly lowing, there's no point in us getting into this debate again! We sit firmly on either side of the argument.