oldcopper

Resident Members
  • Content count

    3,866
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    107

oldcopper last won the day on June 12

oldcopper had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,510 Excellent

About oldcopper

  • Rank
    Star Trekker

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,907 profile views
  1. This is so true and it appears to me that if a political party or an individual politician tells the truth about the potential economic situation we face in the future they are doomed to failure. All parties seem to win elections by promising the earth to the electorate in the form of low taxation or increased benefits of one sort another which involves more spending. I would like to see a cross-party group of politicians, assisted by the most reputable of economists and bankers lay out to the electorate exactly what will happen to our economy if we continue spending at the rate we have been doing for some time now. I doubt if many members of the Labour Party would be willing to participate in such a venture because all they seem to do is make promises about what they intend doing without identifying where the money will come from. It should be made abundantly plain to all that governments have no money other than that which they receive from us in the form of taxes or by borrowing. And even the borrowed money has to be paid back by the taxpayer.
  2. I fail to understand why HMG did not call in the Army to coordinate and assist with this incident. The military have been used in various other types of disaster such as flooding etc. and I think their involvement would have been invaluable in this instance.
  3. I suspect your estimate of 5 years is not too far out. I also agree that the funding could, and probably should, come from the Foreign Aid Budget. However, no matter which party is in power that particular source of cash appears to be sacrosanct.
  4. Where do you think the money to pay for the end of so-called austerity is going to come from? This country already has large deficit and if we continue spending at our current levels this can only get worse and lead to even more tremendous economic problems in the future. All political parties wish to remain in power so they bribe the electorate with cash and other benefits to elect them and when it becomes apparent reductions in public expenditure are required they are either afraid of losing power and surrender to those who care nothing for the Country's economic future or they bite the bullet, do the correct thing and suffer the opprobrium of the public at large. I actually allow myself a wry smile when I hear talk of austerity. I am old enough to remember the 1950s quite well and austerity really did exist then. Most of the people who think we are living in a time of austerity don't really know what they are talking about.
  5. Sorry for the typo. It should have read 30 years servicde but I think you knew that.
  6. So true as regards Sturgeon and Salmond and I was also pleased to see Angus Robertson, the odious and unctuous leader of the SNP group at Westminster, losing his seat along with various others in the SNP gang. I agree about Corbyn and his bribery offer to sudents in England and Wales. I read that the annual cost of this would be £12billion and wonder that many young people are so gullible that they would believe Corbyn or accept that such expenditure is sustainable. Again we have talk of profligate spending emanting from the mouths of scocialist politicians who labour (no pun intended) under the misapprehension that money grows on trees. Sadly, it falls easliy on the ears of those who believe what they want to hear. It is the same with all those other issues such as care for the elderly, and the universal payment of Winter Fuel Allowance etc. They are all unsustainable in the long term but few politicians have the courage to tackle them head-on or even make reference to them. Theresa May did so in her manifesto and that honesty was part of the reason for the situation she finds herself in today. Perhaps the lesson is that, if you possess even a modicum of integrity or realism, don't enter politics.
  7. I s[pent all my police service in areas where the Labour Party were politically dominant and with very few exceptions can state that they, and other on the Left, were rarely great fans of the police. I don't think things would change when a current Labour win would have resulted in some if its leadership being people who once wished for the abolition of Special Branch and the disarming of the Police.
  8. I remember those days well and it was only because I was unmarried that I was not in the same situation as your father. Things only changed because of Edmund-Davies which came about largely because of a difficulty to recruit and the further problem of retained those who did join. Of my intake of 20 only 2 of us completed 10 years service and only 2 of us completed the 30 years necessary to qualify for a pension. We owe much to those who voted with their feet and resigned. Most had gone within the first 5/6 years, as predicted by the Sgt who took us through our first week at training school.
  9. Labour may not be a lost cause but I could never bring myself to vote for a party whose leader has been so connected to anti-British terrorist organisations such as PIRA and Hamas. Furthermore, I am old enough to remember previous Labour governments and their profligate spending which caused us great economic harm. Corbyn seems exactly in the same mould. I hope I shall never see another Labour government in this country.
  10. No matter what other attributes TM possesses, campaigning is clearly not one of them. Part of her problem is that I think she lacked the guile necessary in a politician when announcing in the Conservative Manifesto her Party's intentions regarding the Triple Lock and Social Care for the Elderly. It must have been obvious that these issues would be anathema to many Conservative Party core voters, even though they represent the correct way to go with regard to the long term position regarding the increasing number of elderly people and the resultant cost to the economy.
  11. All governments will endeavor to achieve policing on the cheap. Policing is an expensive business and as the Police Service does not normally enjoy the popularity it currently does, due to the recent terrorist events, it is quite easy to make cuts in police budgets. The Police are a fairly easy target. The reality of the situation is, that as a country, we are spending money we don't have and cuts in public expenditure have to be made somewhere. Having said that, I think that governments of all political hues over the past few years have forgotten what their principal duty and function is, and that is the protection the Realm and its inhabitants. That being the case, HM Forces, the Police Service, Prison Service, Border Force, MI5 and MI6 and the general Criminal Justice system should receive much more from the public purse that has been the case for many years. This should be done even it is means moving money from the Foreign Aid Budget, NHS etc. none of which HMG has a duty to fund. Of course, this would cause uproar especially when it comes to the NHS, but many countries such as the Republic of Ireland and New Zealand do not have a NHS and although I do not advocate disbanding the NHS I think HMG should get its priorities right.
  12. A very valid question to which I would be interested to know the answer. What do they do in countries where the police are routinely armed when they have to deal with public order situations? Years ago I spoke to an armed RUC officer who said he had never encountered any problem with this issue and stated he had recently dealt with a large scale disturbance at a dance hall where he ended up struggling on the ground with a prisoner. He told me he knew of only one instance where a police officer had been cornered and forcibly deprived of his firearm. I also knew a retired Royal Hong Police officer who told me of several instances where criminals had `mugged' patrolling constables with the intention of robbing them of their routinely armed firearm. It is a difficult issue and I can think of many public order incidents where I was attacked by a hostile crowd while making arrests and could have had a firearm taken from me. However, whatever the situation I think much of the solution is down to individual officers who volunteer to carry firearms. Are they really made fully aware of the highly possible consequences which face them if things go wrong? Are they willing to accept these consequences and the long term effect they may have on them and their families?.
  13. To an extent I agree with you and I suspect the day is fast approaching when all police officers will have to be armed. I carried a firearm while still serving but never had to use it. I can recollect 2 occasions during my service when officers shot and killed armed criminals and another occasion when one of them wounded an armed man. They had to go through a period of uncertainty while waiting to be informed if they would be prosecuted and were given little support from the force during that period, despite the fact that the circumstances were patently clear and there was no great public or political outcry for heads to roll. However, the position has changed and in several instances in recent years where officers have shot criminals there has been little support for them and if I was serving nowadays, fear of prosecution etc. would make me wary about volunteering to carry a firearm. The current wave of support for the police in the wake of recent terrorist events in the UK may well be short-lived: the public are very fickle. r
  14. Interesting point. What happens to police officers in an armed police force in a foreign country, such as USA or France, where all police officers are routinely armed if they fail their periodic firearms qualification?
  15. They are also lying. What they are now saying is completely at variance with what they have said in the past and I am of the opinion that are only saying things like hiring extra police etc. in the hope of hoodwinking the electorate. Sadly, some are gullible enough to fall for such perfidy.