> John Atkinson wrote:
> >9mm ain't that bad. But, as far as I know, criminals can and do use
> out with assault rifles?
The *percentage* is pretty irrelevant IMO - the actual numbers are.
There have been at least three bank robberies in the Stockholm area where the
criminals used assault guns so far this year; there was an... incident
some years back when a madman took an AK-4 and fired straight into a
queue waiting to get into a night club some years back, the MC gangs in
the south of Sweden seem to favour AT-4 anti-tank weapons or SMGs, but
have used assault guns as well, and so on.
Don't try telling me those crimes are myths. Criminals, at least in
Sweden, *do* use anything from zipguns to assault rifles and anti-tank
weapons. Of course these crimes make up a very small percentage of the
*total* criminality, when there's one heavily-armed incident every
two-three months or so and a few thousand minor crimes a day, but that
doesn't make the bad ones a "myth".
> It's either that or give them an assault rifle. Which cannot be
> calm down the situation, which is a police officer's first priority in
> almost all cases. When "Push comes to shove" then additional
> can be brought in.
This is very true. When the push comes to shove, the chances are unfortunately
rather small that the police will have time enough to bring
the heavy stuff in in time to stop it - MC gangs are pretty mobile,
like.
Regards,
> You wrote:
> Myth. Ever checked the percentages of crime which is actually
There >have been at least three bank robberies in the Stockholm area
> queue waiting to get into a night club some years back, the MC gangs
The common perception is that this is business as usual for criminals.
That is a myth. The fact is that it is incredibly rare--I recall a
policeman telling me the most common weapon used in murders he's been involved
with is a.22 pistol. Murder, like child abuse, is primarily a crime committed
by family members. The majority of gang murders are done at short range with
automatic pistols. At anything longer than point blank, typically they can't
hit whatever they are aiming at, which is where we get dead innocent
bystanders.
> This is very true. When the push comes to shove, the chances are
No--but you can get it there in time to catch them--no outfit is more
mobile than a radio wave. (Except space pirates, of course, and then only
using FTL).
> On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> the south of Sweden seem to favour AT-4 anti-tank weapons or SMGs, but
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are these WWII German models (Stugs?) or are these just the Swedish
S-tanks? heh, heh.
Seriously though, I had no idea that Sweden actually has crimes like these.
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
weapons or SMGs, but have used assault guns as well, and so on.
And to think my Swedish aquaintances are always complaining about American
violence... BTW, what the heck is an MC gang?
> On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> criminals used assault guns so far this year; there was an... incident
You neglected to mention that the said madman was an army officer, and he used
his army issue rifle. Hardly your typical criminal.
> the MC gangs in
...stolen from the Swedish army... as always, criminals don't seem to be
affected by gun control laws.
> Don't try telling me those crimes are myths. Criminals, at least in
Depends on what you think the myth is. I think the myth is that every petty
criminal has an Uzi in his glove compartment and uses it in daily business.
This is simply not true.
I do think the percentage is important. Media coverage of crimes involving so
called "assault weapons" is totally out of proportion. It appears to me people
don't realize that while every "Uzi crime" hits the headlines, countless
"regular" murders go unreported or buried in a small paragraph. The myth is
that countless "Uzi murders" go similarly unnoticed (at least in Scandinavia).
No they don't. They're all on the front page of Expressen (or whatever).
Yes, if you have a couple of incidents per year, it's often enough to justify
some preparation for the next one. But frankly, it's no grounds for
overreaction.
E.g. A man was killed by a bear this summer in Finland. It's the first
such incident in 100 years -- but now we have people who want to
basically kill all the bears to prevent it happening ever again. This is what
I'd call a reaction out of proportion.
> On Tue, 22 Sep 1998, Jonathan Jarrard wrote:
> And to think my Swedish aquaintances are always complaining about
Hell's Angels and the like. They had a real shooting war with Bandidos a
couple of years back, but there's truce now, I believe.