Some simple Q & A's...

Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
robbery?
A: Because the government has taken them from us.

Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.

Q: Where were the police when they were needed?
A: As usual, not there.

Q: What is the average police response time?
A: Eight minutes.

Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun?
A: Within seconds.

Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here?
A: No.


===========================================================

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6014623/Jewel-heist-Graff-robbers-sent-gems-abroad.html
http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3

Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad'
Robbers who carried out Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40
million worth of jewels from Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved
their haul abroad within hours, an expert said.


Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009

Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in central
London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice during their
getaway.

Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one
was injured.

Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
"Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier for
them to be transported abroad.

"Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up and
they would have been flown abroad immediately.

"When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands very
quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out the
initial robbery.

"Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the
high profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.

"Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have
dispersed and gone abroad."

The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with
almost 1,500 individual diamonds.

The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the
staff, briefly taking a woman employee hostage.

Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most
precious items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped
across the capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at
least two warning shots as they made their getaway

Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to be
a £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.

Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
always less than their market value.

"Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
though there are several ways they can be sold on.

"The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down -
the gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.

"Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.

"New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be
lasered off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems
from the nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well
connected.

"They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just
an opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.

"Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made
against such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so
people don't realise the items are stolen.

"Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not
careful to carry out the checks of legitimacy.

"However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for
someone's private collection is something we have never proved true -
it's a Hollywood myth.

"Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people
tend to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things
and this can be used as a way to trade for other items."

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:

> Some simple Q & A's...
> 

Q. whats probability of two biggest ever uk jewel robberies (both at 
least 2-3, (maybe even 10 times with this last one) times the real 
present value of swag/haul of great train robbery) taking place at same 
shop graffs within 6 years... and them getting away with it both times?

anyone smell fish? 

> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> robbery?
> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
> 
> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us? A: Because we're not to be
> trusted with them.
> 
> Q: Where were the police when they were needed? A: As usual, not there.
> 
> Q: What is the average police response time? A: Eight minutes.
> 
> Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun? A: Within
> seconds.
> 
> Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here? A: No.
> 
> 
> ===========================================================
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6014623/
Jewel-heist-Graff-robbers-sent-gems-abroad.html
> http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3
> 
> Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad' Robbers who carried out
> Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40 million worth of jewels from
> Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved their haul abroad within hours,
> an expert said.
> 
> 
> Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009
> 
> Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in central
> London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice during their
> getaway.
> 
> Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one
> was injured.
> 
> Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
> "Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier for
> them to be transported abroad.
> 
> "Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up and
> they would have been flown abroad immediately.
> 
> "When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands very
> quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out the
> initial robbery.
> 
> "Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
> items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the high
> profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.
> 
> "Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have dispersed
> and gone abroad."
> 
> The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
> worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with almost
> 1,500 individual diamonds.
> 
> The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
> strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the staff,
> briefly taking a woman employee hostage.
> 
> Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most precious
> items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped across the
> capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at least two
> warning shots as they made their getaway
> 
> Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to be a
> £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.
> 
> Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
> always less than their market value.
> 
> "Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
> though there are several ways they can be sold on.
> 
> "The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down -
> the gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.
> 
> "Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
> different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.
> 
> "New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be lasered
> off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems from the
> nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well connected.
> 
> "They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just an
> opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.
> 
> "Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
> robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made
> against such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so people
> don't realise the items are stolen.
> 
> "Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not careful
> to carry out the checks of legitimacy.
> 
> "However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for someone's
> private collection is something we have never proved true - it's a
> Hollywood myth.
> 
> "Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people
> tend to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things
> and this can be used as a way to trade for other items."

On Aug 12, 7:55 pm, FrereTuck  wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:
> > Some simple Q & A's...
>
> Q. whats probability of two biggest ever uk jewel robberies (both at
> least 2-3, (maybe even 10 times with this last one) times the real
> present value of swag/haul of great train robbery) taking place at same
> shop graffs within 6 years... and them getting away with it both times?
>
> anyone smell fish?
>
>
>
> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> > robbery?
> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>
> > Q: Why has the government taken guns from us? A: Because we're not to be
> > trusted with them.
>
> > Q: Where were the police when they were needed? A: As usual, not there.
>
> > Q: What is the average police response time? A: Eight minutes.
>
> > Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun? A: Within
> > seconds.
>
> > Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here? A: No> > ===========================================================
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6014623/
>
> Jewel-heist-Graff-robbers-sent-gems-abroad.html
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3
>
> > Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad' Robbers who carried out
> > Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40 million worth of jewels from
> > Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved their haul abroad within hours> > an expert said.
>
> > Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009
>
> > Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in central
> > London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice during their
> > getaway.
>
> > Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one
> > was injured.
>
> > Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
> > "Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier for
> > them to be transported abroad.
>
> > "Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up and
> > they would have been flown abroad immediately.
>
> > "When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands very
> > quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out the
> > initial robbery.
>
> > "Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
> > items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the high
> > profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.
>
> > "Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have dispersed
> > and gone abroad."
>
> > The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
> > worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with almost
> > 1,500 individual diamonds.
>
> > The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
> > strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the staff,
> > briefly taking a woman employee hostage.
>
> > Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most precious
> > items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped across the
> > capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at least two
> > warning shots as they made their getaway
>
> > Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to be a
> > £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.
>
> > Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
> > always less than their market value.
>
> > "Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
> > though there are several ways they can be sold on.
>
> > "The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down -
> > the gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.
>
> > "Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
> > different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.
>
> > "New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be lasered
> > off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems from the
> > nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well connected.
>
> > "They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just an
> > opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.
>
> > "Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
> > robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made
> > against such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so people
> > don't realise the items are stolen.
>
> > "Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not careful
> > to carry out the checks of legitimacy.
>
> > "However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for someone's
> > private collection is something we have never proved true - it's a
> > Hollywood myth.
>
> > "Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people
> > tend to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things
> > and this can be used as a way to trade for other items."

Inside job?

"AgitProp"  wrote in message 
news:5f687d74-88a9-4469-89a0-509a4a8748c0@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 12, 7:55 pm, FrereTuck  wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:
> > Some simple Q & A's...
>
> Q. whats probability of two biggest ever uk jewel robberies (both at
> least 2-3, (maybe even 10 times with this last one) times the real
> present value of swag/haul of great train robbery) taking place at same
> shop graffs within 6 years... and them getting away with it both times?
>
> anyone smell fish?
>
>
>
> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> > robbery?
> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>
> > Q: Why has the government taken guns from us? A: Because we're not to be
> > trusted with them.
>
> > Q: Where were the police when they were needed? A: As usual, not there.
>
> > Q: What is the average police response time? A: Eight minutes.
>
> > Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun? A: Within
> > seconds.
>
> > Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here? A: No.
>
> > ===========================================================
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6014623/
>
> Jewel-heist-Graff-robbers-sent-gems-abroad.html
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3
>
> > Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad' Robbers who carried out
> > Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40 million worth of jewels from
> > Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved their haul abroad within hours,
> > an expert said.
>
> > Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009
>
> > Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in central
> > London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice during their
> > getaway.
>
> > Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one
> > was injured.
>
> > Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
> > "Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier for
> > them to be transported abroad.
>
> > "Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up and
> > they would have been flown abroad immediately.
>
> > "When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands very
> > quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out the
> > initial robbery.
>
> > "Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
> > items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the high
> > profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.
>
> > "Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have dispersed
> > and gone abroad."
>
> > The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
> > worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with almost
> > 1,500 individual diamonds.
>
> > The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
> > strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the staff,
> > briefly taking a woman employee hostage.
>
> > Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most precious
> > items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped across the
> > capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at least two
> > warning shots as they made their getaway
>
> > Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to be a
> > £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.
>
> > Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
> > always less than their market value.
>
> > "Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
> > though there are several ways they can be sold on.
>
> > "The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down -
> > the gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.
>
> > "Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
> > different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.
>
> > "New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be lasered
> > off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems from the
> > nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well connected.
>
> > "They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just an
> > opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.
>
> > "Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
> > robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made
> > against such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so people
> > don't realise the items are stolen.
>
> > "Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not careful
> > to carry out the checks of legitimacy.
>
> > "However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for someone's
> > private collection is something we have never proved true - it's a
> > Hollywood myth.
>
> > "Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people
> > tend to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things
> > and this can be used as a way to trade for other items."
>
> Inside job?

I should think FrereTuck imagines the heist was an 
Illuminati-Freemason-Bilderberg job, with a side order of Joo.

On Aug 12, 10:41 am, November 5 
wrote:
> Some simple Q & A's...
>
> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> robbery?
> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>
> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
> A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
>
> Q: Where were the police when they were needed?
> A: As usual, not there.
>
> Q: What is the average police response time?
> A: Eight minutes.
>
> Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun?
> A: Within seconds.
>
> Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here?
> A: No.
>

http://www.candgnews.com/Homepage-Articles/2009/8-5-09/Armed-suspect-at-large.asp

Q: Why didn't the bank security and passer-bys have guns to halt the
robbery?

Q: If handguns were illegal in the US, would there have been any
difference in outcome?

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/northeast/view/20090804friend_of_nh_cop_killer_loses_court_appeal/srvc=home&position=recent

Q: Why were these people not shot over the course of several armed
robberies in an open carry state

On 12 Aug, 10:41, November 5  wrote:
> Some simple Q & A's...
>
> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> robbery?
> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>
> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
> A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
>
> Q: Where were the police when they were needed?
> A: As usual, not there.
>
> Q: What is the average police response time?
> A: Eight minutes.
>
> Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun?
> A: Within seconds.
>
> Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here?
> A: No.
>
> ===========================================================
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/60146...http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3
>
> Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad'
> Robbers who carried out Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40
> million worth of jewels from Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved
> their haul abroad within hours, an expert said.
>
> Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009
>
> Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in central
> London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice during their
> getaway.
>
> Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one
> was injured.
>
> Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
> "Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier for
> them to be transported abroad.
>
> "Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up and
> they would have been flown abroad immediately.
>
> "When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands very
> quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out the
> initial robbery.
>
> "Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
> items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the
> high profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.
>
> "Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have
> dispersed and gone abroad."
>
> The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
> worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with
> almost 1,500 individual diamonds.
>
> The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
> strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the
> staff, briefly taking a woman employee hostage.
>
> Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most
> precious items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped
> across the capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at
> least two warning shots as they made their getaway
>
> Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to be
> a £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.
>
> Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
> always less than their market value.
>
> "Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
> though there are several ways they can be sold on.
>
> "The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down -
> the gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.
>
> "Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
> different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.
>
> "New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be
> lasered off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems
> from the nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well
> connected.
>
> "They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just
> an opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.
>
> "Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
> robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made
> against such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so
> people don't realise the items are stolen.
>
> "Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not
> careful to carry out the checks of legitimacy.
>
> "However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for
> someone's private collection is something we have never proved true -
> it's a Hollywood myth.
>
> "Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people
> tend to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things
> and this can be used as a way to trade for other items."

I am surprised that robbers were not sprayed with smart water when
leaving shop.

M James Hunt wrote:
> On Aug 12, 10:41 am, November 5 
> wrote:
> > Some simple Q & A's...
> >
> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> > robbery?
> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
> >
> > Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
> > A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
> >
> > Q: Where were the police when they were needed?
> > A: As usual, not there.
> >
> > Q: What is the average police response time?
> > A: Eight minutes.
> >
> > Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun?
> > A: Within seconds.
> >
> > Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here?
> > A: No.
> >
>
> http://www.candgnews.com/Homepage-Articles/2009/8-5-09/Armed-suspect-at-large.asp
>
> Q: Why didn't the bank security and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> robbery?
>
> Q: If handguns were illegal in the US, would there have been any
> difference in outcome?
>
> http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/northeast/view/20090804friend_of_nh_cop_killer_loses_court_appeal/srvc=home&position=recent
>
> Q: Why were these people not shot over the course of several armed
> robberies in an open carry state

Quote as many exceptions as you may, the bottom line is that any
predator prefers softer, weaker and preferably defenceless prey.

This holds true from petty crime to robberies to terrorism and even
full scale war. It even holds true in the animal kingdom.

If you can not see this for yourself then any further discussion with
you is futile.

N5

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:06:49 +0100, DVH wrote:

> "AgitProp"  wrote in message
> news:5f687d74-88a9-4469-89a0-509a4a8748c0@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 12, 7:55 pm, FrereTuck  wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:
>> > Some simple Q & A's...
>>
>> Q. whats probability of two biggest ever uk jewel robberies (both at
>> least 2-3, (maybe even 10 times with this last one) times the real
>> present value of swag/haul of great train robbery) taking place at same
>> shop graffs within 6 years... and them getting away with it both times?
>>
>> anyone smell fish?
>>
>>
>>
>> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>> > robbery?
>> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>>
>> > Q: Why has the government taken guns from us? A: Because we're not to
>> > be trusted with them.
>>
>> > Q: Where were the police when they were needed? A: As usual, not
>> > there.
>>
>> > Q: What is the average police response time? A: Eight minutes.
>>
>> > Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun? A: Within
>> > seconds.
>>
>> > Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here? A:
>> > No.
>>
>> > ===========================================================
>>
>> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/
lawandorder/6014623/
>>
>> Jewel-heist-Graff-robbers-sent-gems-abroad.html
>>
>> >http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3
>>
>> > Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad' Robbers who carried out
>> > Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40 million worth of jewels
>> > from Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved their haul abroad
>> > within hours, an expert said.
>>
>> > Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009
>>
>> > Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in
>> > central London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice
>> > during their getaway.
>>
>> > Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one
>> > was injured.
>>
>> > Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
>> > "Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier
>> > for them to be transported abroad.
>>
>> > "Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up
>> > and they would have been flown abroad immediately.
>>
>> > "When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands
>> > very quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out
>> > the initial robbery.
>>
>> > "Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
>> > items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the
>> > high profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.
>>
>> > "Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have
>> > dispersed and gone abroad."
>>
>> > The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
>> > worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with
>> > almost 1,500 individual diamonds.
>>
>> > The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
>> > strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the
>> > staff, briefly taking a woman employee hostage.
>>
>> > Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most
>> > precious items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped
>> > across the capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at
>> > least two warning shots as they made their getaway
>>
>> > Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to
>> > be a £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.
>>
>> > Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is
>> > obviously always less than their market value.
>>
>> > "Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market
>> > price, though there are several ways they can be sold on.
>>
>> > "The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down -
>> > the gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.
>>
>> > "Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
>> > different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.
>>
>> > "New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be
>> > lasered off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems
>> > from the nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well
>> > connected.
>>
>> > "They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just
>> > an opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.
>>
>> > "Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
>> > robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made
>> > against such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so
>> > people don't realise the items are stolen.
>>
>> > "Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not
>> > careful to carry out the checks of legitimacy.
>>
>> > "However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for
>> > someone's private collection is something we have never proved true -
>> > it's a Hollywood myth.
>>
>> > "Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people
>> > tend to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things
>> > and this can be used as a way to trade for other items."
>>
>> Inside job?
> 
> I should think FrereTuck imagines the heist was an
> Illuminati-Freemason-Bilderberg job, with a side order of Joo.

ah you always like to drag the Jews into it eh DVH, using your silly 
spelling, I have no idea why you do, I said nothing of the kind.  If only 
people using the anti-semite slur were as reviled as those they try to 
tar as anti-semite.

That it was an inside job seems a reasonably high probability to me.  Or 
that they were very slack in their security arrangements. and as N5 said, 
in this or the last graffs heist, if the police did not exist would it 
have made any difference?

that you may make some statistical observation about the strata of the 
diamond/gold trade as you may the banking trade is more science surely?

I don't dislike people who may be Jewish by ancestry or religion just 
because they are Jews.  Any more than I dislike people because they are 
Freemasons just because they are Freemasons, though i do not like what I 
think they as a corporate occult entity stand for.  I also realise an 
individuals or subset-cabals actions (i.e. say for example 33 33rd degree 
freemasons in high places and their loyal (or perhaps more "programmed") 
agents) can as much be outside the spirit of the whole as them not being 
part of the same whole in the first place, and just conveniently using 
the shelter and loyalty rules of the 'whole' for a suitable cover.

so please take your anti-semite conspiracy-theorist slur and jam it up 
your spout...  (and if you need any help with doing that, just let me 
know ;) )

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:

> Q: What is the average police response time?

perhaps it depends whats showing on their wall of 'magic bullet' thirty-
three-thousand-times-more-than-china (as measured on a per person basis) 
cameras, at the time...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1205607/Shock-figures-reveal-
Britain-CCTV-camera-14-people--China.html

maybe a particularly good piece of pornographic street video they were 
all clustered around watching... ;)  wonder what the zoom facility is 
like ;)

best place for dogging in the city... sub-contract corporate camera 
control centre ;)

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700 (PDT), November 5
 wrote:

>Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
>always less than their market value.
>
>"Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
>though there are several ways they can be sold on.

But the insurance payout will no doubt be for the full value ...

-- 
Cynic

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:


Gun rights for joe public would be much more effective in those cases
where a nutcase goes on the rampage in a school. A school in Texas? has
only very recently got permission to have some of it's teachers carry.
Certainly in the cases in the US many have commented how an arnmed teacher
or student could have stopped an attack dead in its tracks where as the
establishment seems happy with allowing 30 minutes and more of carnage
before the police show up and the shooter commits hari kari.




> Some simple Q & A's...
> 
> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> robbery?
> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
> 
> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us? A: Because we're not to be
> trusted with them.
> 
> Q: Where were the police when they were needed? A: As usual, not there.
> 
> Q: What is the average police response time? A: Eight minutes.
> 
> Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun? A: Within
> seconds.
> 
> Q: If the police never existed, would they have been missed here? A: No.
> 
> 
> ===========================================================
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6014623/Jewel-heist-Graff-robbers-sent-gems-abroad.html
> http://tinyurl.com/ppymh3
> 
> Jewel heist: Graff robbers 'sent gems abroad' Robbers who carried out
> Britain's biggest gems heist, seizing £40 million worth of jewels from
> Graff in Mayfair, almost certainly moved their haul abroad within hours,
> an expert said.
> 
> 
> Published: 9:17AM BST 12 Aug 2009
> 
> Two men staged the raid at the jewellers in New Bond Street in central
> London last Thursday before switching cars at least twice during their
> getaway.
> 
> Two shots were fired and a woman staff member seized, although no one was
> injured.
> 
> Antonia Kimbell, from the Art Loss Register's recovery unit, said:
> "Inevitably these items are highly portable, which makes it easier for
> them to be transported abroad.
> 
> "Often they are gone within hours. A flight would have been set up and
> they would have been flown abroad immediately.
> 
> "When the jewellery leaves it will pass through a number of hands very
> quickly to disassociate itself with the people who carried out the initial
> robbery.
> 
> "Then the items will disappear, using various other people. Sometimes
> items can be hidden and remain in the country, but I think with the high
> profile nature of this robbery that seems unlikely.
> 
> "Also, the people who carried out the raid are likely to have dispersed
> and gone abroad."
> 
> The armed robbers posed as businessmen in suits to steal £40 million
> worth of rings, bracelets, necklaces and watches - encrusted with almost
> 1,500 individual diamonds.
> 
> The suspects were dropped off at Graff Diamonds in a black taxicab,
> strolling past a security guard and then turning handguns on the staff,
> briefly taking a woman employee hostage.
> 
> Within minutes they had carefully chosen 43 of the store's most precious
> items, which were placed into a bag, before they escaped across the
> capital in a relay of three different cars. They fired at least two
> warning shots as they made their getaway
> 
> Britain’s previous biggest diamond jewellery robbery is believed to be a
> £23 million raid, which also took place at Graff's, in 2003.
> 
> Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
> always less than their market value.
> 
> "Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
> though there are several ways they can be sold on.
> 
> "The police have come across warehouses where items are melted down - the
> gold is melted and the gems are sold separately.
> 
> "Sometimes items are altered in a more minor way, just so they look
> different - especially if they are unique - before being traded.
> 
> "New jewellery is often laser marked, but that sometimes can be lasered
> off, depending on how sophisticated the robbers are. It seems from the
> nature of the robbery that these men are pretty well connected.
> 
> "They had a lot of cars, a lot of back-up and support. It wasn't just an
> opportunistic heist - they are sophisticated.
> 
> "Sometimes the jewellery can be sold on to people unchanged. If the
> robbers are very, very quick they can be ahead of the checks made against
> such sales, for example, if they sell on the same day, so people don't
> realise the items are stolen.
> 
> "Or they can sell to an unscrupulous buyer or someone who is not careful
> to carry out the checks of legitimacy.
> 
> "However, the idea that jewellery might be stolen to order for someone's
> private collection is something we have never proved true - it's a
> Hollywood myth.
> 
> "Another use for the jewellery can be as a trading tool. These people tend
> to be associated closely with drugs or arms or other such things and this
> can be used as a way to trade for other items."

On Aug 12, 12:11 pm, November 5 
wrote:
>
> Quote as many exceptions as you may, the bottom line is that any
> predator prefers softer, weaker and preferably defenceless prey.

Surely the exceptions throw doubt on this assertion.

Or perhaps they simply demonstrate that the implied solution (i.e.
reduced restrictions on firearms ownership) wouldn't actually do
anything to make the "prey" stronger.

November 5 wrote:
> Some simple Q & A's...
>
> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> robbery?
> A: Because the government has taken them from us.

You're American, aren't you?

>
> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
> A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.

In Britain it is exceedingly rare for ordinary members of the public (not 
already involved in drugs or gun crime) to be threatened with guns or killed 
with guns. In America, it is exceedingly common.

Why? Because America allows everyone to have a gun, and inevitably a lot of 
the good, law abiding folk have a few crises in their lives, a few stresses 
and problems, and lo and behold they turn into ba-a-a-a-d people.

Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health 
Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The main 
cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply wouldn't 
get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/11/chicago-children-murders
http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/12/insanity-defense-takes-center-stage/
http://www.ktvu.com/news/20364196/detail.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/04/pennsylvania.gym.shooting/index.html

Cynic wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700 (PDT), November 5
>  wrote:
>
> >Ms Kimbell said: "The value of items when they are stolen is obviously
> >always less than their market value.
> >
> >"Typically, they might be traded for ten per cent of the market price,
> >though there are several ways they can be sold on.

A friend of mine works as a manager in a place like Graffs and tells
me such a markup is quite normal for the jewelry industry.

> But the insurance payout will no doubt be for the full value ...

Not that I am one to allege things without evidence, but times of late
have been most fraught for the jewelry business.

N5

Dead Paul wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:
>
>
> Gun rights for joe public would be much more effective in those cases
> where a nutcase goes on the rampage in a school. A school in Texas? has
> only very recently got permission to have some of it's teachers carry.
> Certainly in the cases in the US many have commented how an arnmed teacher
> or student could have stopped an attack dead in its tracks where as the
> establishment seems happy with allowing 30 minutes and more of carnage
> before the police show up and the shooter commits hari kari.

Indeed it has been noted that the reason why gun rampages occur in
schools is not because there is a gun on campus, it is because there
is only one gun on campus.

I found it most curious how the pedestrians and passer-bys in footage
of the robbery fled like squawking headless chickens the moment a
gunshot was fired. It is almost as if fear of power was well and truly
indoctrinated into them.

If I was there unarmed I would have sought cover but I still would
have kept my eyes on the gunman.

N5

The Todal wrote:
> November 5 wrote:
> > Some simple Q & A's...
> >
> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> > robbery?
> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>
> You're American, aren't you?

Keep guessing. But if it helps you box me into a neat little category
for you, you are welcome to think of me as "American".

It is most curious how a champion of anti-bigotry like yourself can
quite as easily apply bigotry to Yanks across the pond.

> >
> > Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
> > A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
>
> In Britain it is exceedingly rare for ordinary members of the public (not
> already involved in drugs or gun crime) to be threatened with guns or killed
> with guns. In America, it is exceedingly common.

You're an arts graduate, aren't you?

You are clearly incapable of appreciating the fact that you are trying
to make a like-for-like comparison when there are so many differences
between the US/UK that such comparisons are futile.

To assist you in grasping this fact, I'd say you are comparing a
donkey to a bloodhound on a race track.

Possible explanations for the higher homicide rates in the US include:
lower IQ of its population (US = 98, UK = 100), culture, a history of
racial tension, etc.

> Why? Because America allows everyone to have a gun, and inevitably a lot of
> the good, law abiding folk have a few crises in their lives, a few stresses
> and problems, and lo and behold they turn into ba-a-a-a-d people.

That's called natural selection...although Americans started off with
some bad gene stock and allowed various dross to pollute their gene
pool.

> Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health
> Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The main
> cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply wouldn't
> get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/11/chicago-children-murders
> http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/12/insanity-defense-takes-center-stage/
> http://www.ktvu.com/news/20364196/detail.html
> http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/04/pennsylvania.gym.shooting/index.html

Yes you would. It would be done by cops, jewelry store robbers,
gangsters, black hoodies, etc. instead.

Don't complain when natural selection acts on a population. You may
get sampling errors but in general if it is allowed to reign free, the
ensuing population would be intelligent, of hardy constitution, with
quick reflexes and generally not the meddlesome type.

You are misguided to think you can reduce suffering by introducing
more control and regulation into a system. For example, even if the
authorities are not corrupted, what you gain in reducing short term
suffering (such as by having Communist "universal" healthcare) you pay
for in long term suffering (expensive, poor, overstretched service for
everyone else when the resource leeches could just be allowed to die).

N5

"The Todal"  wrote in message 
news:7eg4mhF2g9ghqU1@mid.individual.net...
> November 5 wrote:
>> Some simple Q & A's...
>>
>> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>> robbery?
>> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>
> You're American, aren't you?
>
>>
>> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
>> A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
>
> In Britain it is exceedingly rare for ordinary members of the public (not 
> already involved in drugs or gun crime) to be threatened with guns or 
> killed with guns. In America, it is exceedingly common.
>
> Why? Because America allows everyone to have a gun, and inevitably a lot 
> of the good, law abiding folk have a few crises in their lives, a few 
> stresses and problems, and lo and behold they turn into ba-a-a-a-d people.
>
> Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health 
> Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The 
> main cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply 
> wouldn't get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:

Switzerland is proof that the above is nonsense.

"DVH"  wrote in message 
news:4a82e54f$0$31040$bed64819@news.gradwell.net...
>
> "The Todal"  wrote in message 
> news:7eg4mhF2g9ghqU1@mid.individual.net...
>> November 5 wrote:
>>> Some simple Q & A's...
>>>
>>> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>>> robbery?
>>> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>>
>> You're American, aren't you?
>>
>>>
>>> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
>>> A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
>>
>> In Britain it is exceedingly rare for ordinary members of the public (not 
>> already involved in drugs or gun crime) to be threatened with guns or 
>> killed with guns. In America, it is exceedingly common.
>>
>> Why? Because America allows everyone to have a gun, and inevitably a lot 
>> of the good, law abiding folk have a few crises in their lives, a few 
>> stresses and problems, and lo and behold they turn into ba-a-a-a-d 
>> people.
>>
>> Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health 
>> Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The 
>> main cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply 
>> wouldn't get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:
>
> Switzerland is proof that the above is nonsense.

The North Pole is proof that you are talking out of your anus.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:17:19 +0100, The Todal wrote:

> November 5 wrote:
>> Some simple Q & A's...
>>
>> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>> robbery?
>> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
> 
> You're American, aren't you?
> 
> 
>> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us? A: Because we're not to be
>> trusted with them.
> 
> In Britain it is exceedingly rare for ordinary members of the public (not
> already involved in drugs or gun crime) to be threatened with guns or
> killed with guns. In America, it is exceedingly common.
> 
> Why? Because America allows everyone to have a gun, and inevitably a lot
> of the good, law abiding folk have a few crises in their lives, a few
> stresses and problems, and lo and behold they turn into ba-a-a-a-d people.
> 
> Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health
> Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The
> main cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply
> wouldn't get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/11/chicago-children-murders
> http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/12/insanity-defense-takes-center-stage/
> http://www.ktvu.com/news/20364196/detail.html
> http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/08/04/pennsylvania.gym.shooting/index.html

The US is a harder country, if you are "down on your luck" in the USA
there aren't the safety nets that you might look for that we have here.
It's much more dog eat dog when you are at the bottom. That's why there is
more crime.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:09:18 -0700, M James Hunt wrote:

> On Aug 12, 12:11 pm, November 5 
> wrote:
>>
>> Quote as many exceptions as you may, the bottom line is that any
>> predator prefers softer, weaker and preferably defenceless prey.
> 
> Surely the exceptions throw doubt on this assertion.
> 
> Or perhaps they simply demonstrate that the implied solution (i.e.
> reduced restrictions on firearms ownership) wouldn't actually do
> anything to make the "prey" stronger.

example of the exception?

OK, if they are very hungry a predator may go after a harder target...

but as a general rule I'd say, observing pussy cats... they like a soft 
target... and the sneak attack...

"November 5"  wrote in message 
news:232b902d-e697-4316-9c2a-ae3c540d09c0@f37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> The Todal wrote:
>> November 5 wrote:
>> > Some simple Q & A's...
>> >
>> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>> > robbery?
>> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>>
>> You're American, aren't you?
>
> Keep guessing. But if it helps you box me into a neat little category
> for you, you are welcome to think of me as "American".

I think of you as American, or alternatively you have been influenced by 
American attitudes.  For example, you go on to talk about communist 
universal healthcare, which is the sort of drivel that Republicans and 
employees of the billion dollar US healthcare insurers, like to spout.

Anyone who has lived for a long while in Britain knows that the National 
Health Service is a superb organisation. There are sometimes waiting lists 
for non-urgent complaints, there are sometimes whinges about the poor 
quality of some hospital food, about dust in wards, but anyone who loses a 
finger in an industrial accident gets it re-attached free of charge and at 
once. Anyone with a heart attack gets the best treatment. Anyone needing an 
organ transplant gets one as of right, provided they are physically able to 
benefit from the treatment.

In America, healthcare depends on wealth. If you are very poor, you get a 
minimal standard of healthcare - emergency treatment, and if you've lost a 
finger in an industrial accident they will put it in the trash can for you. 
If you are employed, you will usually have health insurance - once you 
retire, which usually coincides with all sorts of ill-health that elderly 
people succumb to, then you're on your own and may have to sell your house 
to pay for the treatment you need.

And a large number of Americans approve of this because they really hate the 
idea that unemployed people and trailer-trash might get the same access to 
medical treatment as people in employment.  They'd rather everyone had to 
pay huge fees or had to manage without treatment.

To help them win the argument, the health insurers have been broadcasting 
advertisements which tell lies about the British National Health Service. 
The American people deserve to know the truth.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/11/nhs-sick-healthcare-reform

DVH wrote:

>> Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health 
>> Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The 
>> main cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply 
>> wouldn't get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:
> 
> Switzerland is proof that the above is nonsense. 
> 

That'll be why the Swiss are busy taking the guns back,  and have 
already taken the ammunition back...

> 


-- 
William Black

The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing.
If you can fake that, you've got it made.

FrereTuck wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700, November 5 wrote:
> 
>> Some simple Q & A's...
>>
> 
> Q. whats probability of two biggest ever uk jewel robberies (both at 
> least 2-3, (maybe even 10 times with this last one) times the real 
> present value of swag/haul of great train robbery) taking place at same 
> shop graffs within 6 years... and them getting away with it both times?
> 
> anyone smell fish? 

No masks,  guns everywhere,  nobody shot,  shop that specialises in 
selling expensive but tasteless jewellery to the now broke gliterati...

I imagine even the Met can smell fish...


-- 
William Black

The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing.
If you can fake that, you've got it made.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:16:01 +0000, FrereTuck wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:09:18 -0700, M James Hunt wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 12, 12:11 pm, November 5 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Quote as many exceptions as you may, the bottom line is that any
>>> predator prefers softer, weaker and preferably defenceless prey.
>> 
>> Surely the exceptions throw doubt on this assertion.
>> 
>> Or perhaps they simply demonstrate that the implied solution (i.e.
>> reduced restrictions on firearms ownership) wouldn't actually do
>> anything to make the "prey" stronger.
> 
> example of the exception?
> 
> OK, if they are very hungry a predator may go after a harder target...
> 

I dont know if youve seen a single lioness badly gored by a wildebeest or 
whatever... perhaps you prefer big brother to david attenborough?

and point is their probability of success probably goes from d10 to d100 
from soft to hard target and their probability of sustaining damage 
probably goes up by similar scale.

perhaps afghanistan is case in point... operation panthers claw seems 
blunted? no? (well not if you read the mi7 stories of glorious 
success ;) )

predator mcchrystal calling for even more troops to soften the ratio 
still further...  cos they cant hack it with predator to target hardness 
ratio at the moment...

> but as a general rule I'd say, observing pussy cats... they like a soft
> target... and the sneak attack...

"The Todal"  wrote in message 
news:7eg81hF2fnih2U1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "DVH"  wrote in message 
> news:4a82e54f$0$31040$bed64819@news.gradwell.net...
>>
>> "The Todal"  wrote in message 
>> news:7eg4mhF2g9ghqU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> November 5 wrote:
>>>> Some simple Q & A's...
>>>>
>>>> Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>>>> robbery?
>>>> A: Because the government has taken them from us.
>>>
>>> You're American, aren't you?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Q: Why has the government taken guns from us?
>>>> A: Because we're not to be trusted with them.
>>>
>>> In Britain it is exceedingly rare for ordinary members of the public 
>>> (not already involved in drugs or gun crime) to be threatened with guns 
>>> or killed with guns. In America, it is exceedingly common.
>>>
>>> Why? Because America allows everyone to have a gun, and inevitably a lot 
>>> of the good, law abiding folk have a few crises in their lives, a few 
>>> stresses and problems, and lo and behold they turn into ba-a-a-a-d 
>>> people.
>>>
>>> Just as America lies to its citizens about Britain's National Health 
>>> Service, so it lies to its citizens about the causes of gun crime. The 
>>> main cause of gun crime is that guns are so freely available. You simply 
>>> wouldn't get this sort of crime in countries with gun-control:
>>
>> Switzerland is proof that the above is nonsense.
>
> The North Pole is proof that you are talking out of your anus.

Aaw diddums, did I hurt your feelings?

The Todal wrote:

[ ... ]

> Anyone who has lived for a long while in Britain knows that the National 
> Health Service is a superb...

...idea.

But its operation is far from perfect.

Police should be armed and told to shoot to kill robbers.

The Todal wrote:
> "November 5"  wrote in message
> news:232b902d-e697-4316-9c2a-ae3c540d09c0@f37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> > The Todal wrote:
> >> November 5 wrote:
> >> > Some simple Q & A's...
> >> >
> >> > Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
> >> > robbery?
> >> > A: Because the government has taken them from us.
> >>
> >> You're American, aren't you?
> >
> > Keep guessing. But if it helps you box me into a neat little category
> > for you, you are welcome to think of me as "American".
>
> I think of you as American, or alternatively you have been influenced by
> American attitudes.  For example, you go on to talk about communist
> universal healthcare, which is the sort of drivel that Republicans and
> employees of the billion dollar US healthcare insurers, like to spout.

The American system is only slightly less Communist that the British
one. They have a high tax rate as well, which feeds an utterly bloated
and inefficient government.

You see, Toddy, the difference between you and me is that I can accept
that even with the best intentions, I will be a biased and ignorant
judge. You however, are so high up on your Moral High Horse and Ivory
Tower of Idealism you have no inkling that yourself, any judge,
policeman, lawmaker, juror and so on could be so biased.

As a result of me accepting the inherent biasness, corruption and
injustice of people put above us by force or peer judgement (IOW
democracy), I therefore think that anarchy is the fairest judge of
them all.

Try playing Russian Roulette (with blanks) sometime. You shall see the
gun doesn't give a damn about how rich or connected you are. Any
system without rules is the fairest possible arrangement.

> Anyone who has lived for a long while in Britain knows that the National
> Health Service is a superb organisation.

Have you ever been to a privately funded hospital? NHS hospitals are
dingy, dreary and mournful in comparison.

> There are sometimes waiting lists for non-urgent complaints,

LOL.

> there are sometimes whinges about the poor
> quality of some hospital food,

Yes, don't forget maggots in the ward and invalid people dying of
starvation in it, with food trays just feet from them.

> about dust in wards, but anyone who loses a
> finger in an industrial accident gets it re-attached free of charge and at
> once.

Do you by any chance believe money grows on trees? There is no such
thing as free treatment. His "free treatment" is because he will pay
on average, many times more than he would have as a private patient.

Who do you think pays for all the middlemen: taxmen, administrators,
managers and accountants between your NI payments and the healthcare
provider?

> Anyone with a heart attack gets the best treatment.

Or they might die of MRSA afterwards because cleanliness was
compromised as a result of over-stretched resources.

> Anyone needing an
> organ transplant gets one as of right, provided they are physically able to
> benefit from the treatment.

Psst! Google for "NHS organ waiting lists". Do you think the waiting
lists would be as long if they were decided on a meritocratic basis?

> In America, healthcare depends on wealth.

It is for our species' benefit that resources gravitate towards the
genetically superior. This includes wealth and healthcare. It is
essential that the genetically superior can claim their rightful
heritage from the inferior.

> If you are very poor, you get a
> minimal standard of healthcare - emergency treatment, and if you've lost a
> finger in an industrial accident they will put it in the trash can for you.

I think hospitals should be willing to treat on a "loan" basis, but
true to my anti-law proclivities, I won't say what is right until it
is tried and tested.

> If you are employed, you will usually have health insurance - once you
> retire, which usually coincides with all sorts of ill-health that elderly
> people succumb to, then you're on your own and may have to sell your house
> to pay for the treatment you need.

Natural selection.

> And a large number of Americans approve of this because they really hate the
> idea that unemployed people and trailer-trash might get the same access to
> medical treatment as people in employment.  They'd rather everyone had to
> pay huge fees or had to manage without treatment.

While I think we should be merciful to those down in the dumps, mercy
can not last forever or you will undermine justice.

Is it just that someone who doesn't contribute to the economy still
gets to drain resources from it?

Is it fair that someone who works hard has half his/her income taken
away from them to pay other people without even being able to opt in/
out of what they pay for?

> To help them win the argument, the health insurers have been broadcasting
> advertisements which tell lies about the British National Health Service.
> The American people deserve to know the truth.
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/aug/11/nhs-sick-healthcare-reform

Clearly you are a man of mercy, Todal. But do not forget justice in
your pursuit of mercy.

N5

President AfterIhadmyDinnerDad wrote:
> Police should be armed and told to shoot to kill robbers.
> 

Why?


-- 
William Black

The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing.
If you can fake that, you've got it made.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:08:48 -0700 (PDT), President
AfterIhadmyDinnerDad  wrote:

>Police should be armed and told to shoot to kill robbers.


Dont you think the police kill enough innocent people now?
God help anyone walking past a bank should the alarms go off.

"November 5"  wrote in message 
news:ae995a9b-8818-40e6-9820-ea449d0fe07c@g23g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>

>
> Have you ever been to a privately funded hospital? NHS hospitals are
> dingy, dreary and mournful in comparison.

Yes.  I have private health insurance through the UK's market-leading 
insurer, BUPA. If I want medical treatment I can either get it free from the 
NHS (which may involve waiting a few weeks for an appointment if my problem 
is non-urgent) or I can go straight to the luxurious private hospital and 
see the same consultant.  I have done that a few times, and I am able to 
make an informed comparison because my work involves me visiting NHS 
hospitals regularly.

The conclusion I have come to is that the private hospitals are not a place 
of safety.  The carpets, the fresh flowers and the choice of TV channels are 
no help to you if you are in severe pain, have developed medical 
complications from your operation and need the input of experienced nursing 
staff and teams of doctors covering all the relevant specialities.  I have 
been to about 4 different private hospitals. They are all loathesome.  They 
are a con.  They are hotels pretending to be hospitals.

>
>> There are sometimes waiting lists for non-urgent complaints,
>
> LOL.
>
>> there are sometimes whinges about the poor
>> quality of some hospital food,
>
> Yes, don't forget maggots in the ward and invalid people dying of
> starvation in it, with food trays just feet from them.

I visited a close relative who was recovering from a cancer op in a 
luxurious BUPA hospital. She was in constant pain, but the nursing staff 
visited infrequently, didn't seem interested in doing anything and were 
about as much use as Room Service.

>
>> about dust in wards, but anyone who loses a
>> finger in an industrial accident gets it re-attached free of charge and 
>> at
>> once.
>
> Do you by any chance believe money grows on trees? There is no such
> thing as free treatment. His "free treatment" is because he will pay
> on average, many times more than he would have as a private patient.

In your world, everyone would put money by so that they can pay for their 
future medical treatment (and of course their pension) but in the real world 
that doesn't happen.

>
> Who do you think pays for all the middlemen: taxmen, administrators,
> managers and accountants between your NI payments and the healthcare
> provider?

Why do you think I give a shit for your Tory-boy view of economics, your 
"I'm All Right Jack" view of your fellow men?

>
>> Anyone with a heart attack gets the best treatment.
>
> Or they might die of MRSA afterwards because cleanliness was
> compromised as a result of over-stretched resources.

You hope.

>
>> Anyone needing an
>> organ transplant gets one as of right, provided they are physically able 
>> to
>> benefit from the treatment.
>
> Psst! Google for "NHS organ waiting lists". Do you think the waiting
> lists would be as long if they were decided on a meritocratic basis?

You need to watch (or re-watch) Michael Moore's "Sicko".  And instead of 
jeering at it in the belief that it is a communist propaganda show, this 
time realise that it is the truth.

Ask your American healthcare insurer to fund your cancer treatment and 
they'll turn you down. Too expensive. Unnecessary. Experimental.

Every paid claim is regarded by the insurer as a "loss" and every claim that 
is turned down results in generous bonuses for the staff.  You like that, 
huh?   More money to pay for your treatment when you need it, because you'll 
present your case far more eloquently.

>
>> In America, healthcare depends on wealth.
>
> It is for our species' benefit that resources gravitate towards the
> genetically superior. This includes wealth and healthcare. It is
> essential that the genetically superior can claim their rightful
> heritage from the inferior.

You're a funny guy, you know that?

Howdy Steve,

The Todal wrote:
> "November 5"  wrote in message
> news:ae995a9b-8818-40e6-9820-ea449d0fe07c@g23g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
> >
>
> >
> > Have you ever been to a privately funded hospital? NHS hospitals are
> > dingy, dreary and mournful in comparison.
>
> Yes.  I have private health insurance through the UK's market-leading
> insurer, BUPA.

Why would you get private health insurance if the NHS is such a bed of
roses?

> If I want medical treatment I can either get it free from the
> NHS (which may involve waiting a few weeks for an appointment if my problem
> is non-urgent) or I can go straight to the luxurious private hospital and
> see the same consultant.

Sounds like the NHS just needs more money. You know you're in a
socialist system when the money you put in never seems to keep up with
the services. The NHS is a veritable black hole.

> I have done that a few times, and I am able to
> make an informed comparison because my work involves me visiting NHS
> hospitals regularly.

Personal injury solicitor? No wonder you're opposed to a legally
liberated society.

> The conclusion I have come to is that the private hospitals are not a place
> of safety.  The carpets, the fresh flowers and the choice of TV channels are
> no help to you if you are in severe pain, have developed medical
> complications from your operation and need the input of experienced nursing
> staff and teams of doctors covering all the relevant specialities.  I have
> been to about 4 different private hospitals. They are all loathesome.  They
> are a con.  They are hotels pretending to be hospitals.

Cause and effect. The NHS takes care of acute cases and therefore this
area is atrophied in the private sector. If healthcare was fully
privatised the private sector would have to pick up acute care
themselves.

>
> >
> >> There are sometimes waiting lists for non-urgent complaints,
> >
> > LOL.
> >
> >> there are sometimes whinges about the poor
> >> quality of some hospital food,
> >
> > Yes, don't forget maggots in the ward and invalid people dying of
> > starvation in it, with food trays just feet from them.
>
> I visited a close relative who was recovering from a cancer op in a
> luxurious BUPA hospital. She was in constant pain, but the nursing staff
> visited infrequently, didn't seem interested in doing anything and were
> about as much use as Room Service.

The isolated perspectives of single men, the bias of news and the
prejudice of juries/judges are why free-for-all competition must be
able to proceed without interference.

The system will reach an equilibrium where the best service providers
get the customers.

> >
> >> about dust in wards, but anyone who loses a
> >> finger in an industrial accident gets it re-attached free of charge and
> >> at
> >> once.
> >
> > Do you by any chance believe money grows on trees? There is no such
> > thing as free treatment. His "free treatment" is because he will pay
> > on average, many times more than he would have as a private patient.
>
> In your world, everyone would put money by so that they can pay for their
> future medical treatment (and of course their pension) but in the real world
> that doesn't happen.

Cause and effect again. If people knew they didn't have a safety net,
then they would put away money for themselves.

Otherwise, just think of it as yet another cull by Darwin.

> >
> > Who do you think pays for all the middlemen: taxmen, administrators,
> > managers and accountants between your NI payments and the healthcare
> > provider?
>
> Why do you think I give a shit for your Tory-boy view of economics, your
> "I'm All Right Jack" view of your fellow men?

And why do you think I give a shit for your Fabian-Communist view of
economics, with your rose tinted arrogant opinion that your ability to
fix the world gives you a right to meddle?

At the end of the day, you're just another bloody inconsequential
droid, swallowing the propaganda hook line and sinker. True freedom
terrifies you and no matter how swollen your ego puffs you up to be,
deep down you still know that when you die, the world will move on.

Out of curiosity have your various protests against Israeli bullying
given you some illusion of importance in your life?

> >
> >> Anyone with a heart attack gets the best treatment.
> >
> > Or they might die of MRSA afterwards because cleanliness was
> > compromised as a result of over-stretched resources.
>
> You hope.

It happens in the NHS. If it happened in a totally free society, the
hospital's custom would be affected, or its managers violently
replaced. As it should be.

> >
> >> Anyone needing an
> >> organ transplant gets one as of right, provided they are physically able
> >> to
> >> benefit from the treatment.
> >
> > Psst! Google for "NHS organ waiting lists". Do you think the waiting
> > lists would be as long if they were decided on a meritocratic basis?
>
> You need to watch (or re-watch) Michael Moore's "Sicko".  And instead of
> jeering at it in the belief that it is a communist propaganda show, this
> time realise that it is the truth.
>
> Ask your American healthcare insurer to fund your cancer treatment and
> they'll turn you down. Too expensive. Unnecessary. Experimental.

I don't believe in insurance. I believe in taking care of yourself and
saving your own funds to do so should the need arise.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense would say the odds are in their
favour that they will be better off with this arrangement as they
won't be paying the insurance company's payroll.

> Every paid claim is regarded by the insurer as a "loss" and every claim that
> is turned down results in generous bonuses for the staff.  You like that,
> huh?   More money to pay for your treatment when you need it, because you'll
> present your case far more eloquently.

I prefer to keep my money under my control.

Companies are entitled to their own business models. If is another
sign of your swollen arrogance to think you can come dictate terms on
what is a better way to do things.

If you are so confident your Communist way of doing things is better,
you should have no objection to competing on a level field against
such providers.

> >
> >> In America, healthcare depends on wealth.
> >
> > It is for our species' benefit that resources gravitate towards the
> > genetically superior. This includes wealth and healthcare. It is
> > essential that the genetically superior can claim their rightful
> > heritage from the inferior.
>
> You're a funny guy, you know that?

Yee-haw partner!

N5

On Aug 12, 5:16 pm, FrereTuck  wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:09:18 -0700, M James Hunt wrote:
> > On Aug 12, 12:11 pm, November 5 
> > wrote:
>
> >> Quote as many exceptions as you may, the bottom line is that any
> >> predator prefers softer, weaker and preferably defenceless prey.
>
> > Surely the exceptions throw doubt on this assertion.
>
> > Or perhaps they simply demonstrate that the implied solution (i.e.
> > reduced restrictions on firearms ownership) wouldn't actually do
> > anything to make the "prey" stronger.
>
> example of the exception?

A number of robberies of banks and jewellery stores in the US, where
gun ownership is legal, even in areas where gun ownership is
relatively common.

> OK, if they are very hungry a predator may go after a harder target...
>
> but as a general rule I'd say, observing pussy cats... they like a soft
> target... and the sneak attack...

Perhaps, but the fact that something applies to a pet cat doesn't
automatically mean it applies to human society.

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:41:26 +0000, FrereTuck wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:16:01 +0000, FrereTuck wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:09:18 -0700, M James Hunt wrote:
>> 
>>> On Aug 12, 12:11 pm, November 5 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Quote as many exceptions as you may, the bottom line is that any
>>>> predator prefers softer, weaker and preferably defenceless prey.
>>> 
>>> Surely the exceptions throw doubt on this assertion.
>>> 
>>> Or perhaps they simply demonstrate that the implied solution (i.e.
>>> reduced restrictions on firearms ownership) wouldn't actually do
>>> anything to make the "prey" stronger.
>> 
>> example of the exception?
>> 
>> OK, if they are very hungry a predator may go after a harder target...
>> 
>> 
> I dont know if youve seen a single lioness badly gored by a wildebeest
> or whatever... perhaps you prefer big brother to david attenborough?
> 
> and point is their probability of success probably goes from d10 to d100
> from soft to hard target and their probability of sustaining damage
> probably goes up by similar scale.
> 
> perhaps afghanistan is case in point... operation panthers claw seems
> blunted? no? (well not if you read the mi7 stories of glorious success
> ;) )
> 
> predator mcchrystal calling for even more troops to soften the ratio
> still further...  cos they cant hack it with predator to target hardness
> ratio at the moment...
> 

that is to say Afghanistan has always been a hard target... perhaps some 
of Alexander and Roxanne's offspring DNA circulating widely... ;) as well 
as the terrain. 

>> but as a general rule I'd say, observing pussy cats... they like a soft
>> target... and the sneak attack...

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 02:41:33 -0700 (PDT), November 5
 wrote:


>Q: Why didn't the store owners and passer-bys have guns to halt the
>robbery?
>A: Because the government has taken them from us.

>Q: How long does it take for a passer-by to draw a handgun?
>A: Within seconds.

The firearms issue aside, I'm curious as to how many people would be
interested in risking their own lives to protect the interests of a
shop which sells gaudy earrings at a million pounds a pair to very
rich people....


GSEJ