As if the recent spree-killings in gun-control-paradise England weren't bad enough on their own, it appears their police had actually cornered the killer fairly early in the event. Their unarmed police. All it took for him to escape and continue killing was pointing his gun at them.
As AztecRed points out here, why even have police when all they have to stop a sociopathic killer is strong language?
An American who'd been a police officer in Texas before moving to the UK was appalled at what he was told by his instructors while training to be a British police officer:
Even just one person with the tools, skills, and will can end a public killing spree.
I hope the panty-wetters in power accept responsibility for the blood on their hands resulting from their creation and enforcement of an utterly depraved public policy of defenselessness. They won't, though. They will undoubtedly use it as an excuse to clamp down even more on inanimate objects instead of their dystopian society that promotes violence by rewarding the violent with job safety and security. Ban weapons for the law-abiding, criminalize defending yourself in any way at all, then train the police to run away from danger? And they wonder why violent crime increases rather than decreases?
Insanity is doing the same unsuccessful thing over and over, expecting a different outcome. And welcome to the blogroll, Barack's Gun Lies.