Jump to content

Armed policemen on Lordship Lane

dulwichgal

By dulwichgal
in General ED Issues / Gossip

 Share

Recommended Posts

peckham_ryu

peckham_ryu

Posted
Posted

I've heard that the Met's policy is for its firearms trained officers to carry their weapon when they are working, not just when they are on an 'armed response'. So it could be you just saw a copper doing cop stuff, and he happens to be one of the firearms officers.


It used to be that coppers concealed even their truncheons and cuffs, so as not to intimidate the public. I guess they have decided the public is less intimidated by the sight of weapons in the 21st Century.


Also sorry if this sounds pedantic, but "gunned" can't be used to mean "carrying a gun" in English.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

peckham_ryu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've heard that the Met's policy is for its

> firearms trained officers to carry their weapon

> when they are working, not just when they are on

> an 'armed response'. So it could be you just saw a

> copper doing cop stuff, and he happens to be one

> of the firearms officers.

>

> It used to be that coppers concealed even their

> truncheons and cuffs, so as not to intimidate the

> public. I guess they have decided the public is

> less intimidated by the sight of weapons in the

> 21st Century.

>

> Also sorry if this sounds pedantic, but "gunned"

> can't be used to mean "carrying a gun" in English.



It doesn't intimidate me - it sort of makes me give them a nice smile :)

Ruffler

Ruffler

Posted
Posted

peckham_ryu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Also sorry if this sounds pedantic, but "gunned"

> can't be used to mean "carrying a gun" in English.


^ ^ Totally agree. Maybe the OP should edit the title of his/her post? I assumed policemen had been shot when I first read it.

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > It doesn't intimidate me - it sort of makes me

> > give them a nice smile :)

>

> "Is that a gun in your pocket or are you just

> pleased to see me"


Pulls out huge Glock. "Oh OK then - it's a gun"

Penguin68

Penguin68

Posted
Posted
'Gun Down' is an active use of the noun gun as a verb - 'gunned' would be a passive use - indeed re-casting the noun gun into an adjectival form (as 'armed' is adjectival). As 'gun down' implies that someone has been shot, so does/ should the quasi adjectival use of 'gunned' (as in 'he was gunned down').
Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 'Gun Down' is an active use of the noun gun as a

> verb - 'gunned' would be a passive use - indeed

> re-casting the noun gun into an adjectival form

> (as 'armed' is adjectival). As 'gun down' implies

> that someone has been shot, so does/ should the

> quasi adjectival use of 'gunned' (as in 'he was

> gunned down').



Sorry now I had that second can of Stella, don't understand any of that :))

Sue

Sue

Posted
Posted

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Penguin68 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > 'Gun Down' is an active use of the noun gun as

> a

> > verb - 'gunned' would be a passive use - indeed

> > re-casting the noun gun into an adjectival form

> > (as 'armed' is adjectival). As 'gun down'

> implies

> > that someone has been shot, so does/ should the

> > quasi adjectival use of 'gunned' (as in 'he was

> > gunned down').

>

>

> Sorry now I had that second can of Stella, don't

> understand any of that :))




Completely sober and I still don't understand it :))

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Sue
      Advice on dealing with a solicitor who will not use modern means of communication

      By Sue · Posted

      How on earth can someone like this be allowed to continue as a solicitor? Can't be just be struck off, or the equivalent?
    • richard tudor
      Is the Choumert Road bus stop open yet following the ending of pavement works. Thanks

      By richard tudor · Posted

      There are no road works in front of Cod fellas and yesterday when I requested a stop there the driver went straight past and never stopped untill Avondale Riss. As cars have to stop because of the lights why can busses not do this? 1 minute Bloodly mindedness.
    • CPR Dave
      Where can you smell Wood Burning stoves in East Dulwich

      By CPR Dave · Posted

      These are the smokeless fuels you can burn on a open fireplace in Southwark: https://smokecontrol.defra.gov.uk/fuels-php/england/ https://www.southwark.gov.uk/planning-environment-and-building-control/environment/air-quality/reduce-air-pollution/reduce-smoke
    • malumbu
      Advice on dealing with a solicitor who will not use modern means of communication

      By malumbu · Posted

      Thanks all, our hope was (despite the diminishing estate) he would get on with it.  Progress is glacial, it's been two years since probate was granted, that's two cold and damp winters with no heating, and not surprisingly a pipe burst. He's blames the issues on the estate agent, who separately had a dispute with him, he had a wobbly when one of the beneficiaries spoke to the estate agent.  Separately he said it was the family's fault for letting the property get into a poor condition.  It was dated, but certainly not in poor condition. There are two five star reviews on Google, and five one star: ** WARNING** This solicitor firm has to be one of the worst I have encountered. The solicitor is prehistoric in his practices and will carry out work at his own snails pace, the fax machine he uses gets turned off at 2 pm and its near impossible to get him on the phone. STAY AWAY, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, check the solicitors ombudsman, this firm has previous bad practice recorded.   Disgusting under no circumstances use this solicitor.For over 10 years he has not carried out the terms of a Will he has not re-invested money but has retained it.  He writes letters which are pure "Flannel" excuses for doing nothing.  You have been warned   shocking experience, delayed the whole process, told other side solicitors to not contact him as he feels pressured etc. never use.   Not fit for 21st century. No website, no email address, no electronic transfer. Very slow, very little communication.   Was not a pleasant experience dealing with this firm    

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...