You want to test it? 
It might make the evening news but you will be dead.
Noe wrote:
That said, I think the UK has the best gun policy!
Maybe but I remember Spanish student shot dead in London underground for carrying backpack and running away from police.
Do we have to carry other stuff than a PLB and life jackets when crossing channel these days?
I don’t think wearing a 10kg bulletproof vest is a good idea for water ditching 
Maybe but I remember Spanish student shot dead in London underground for carrying backpack and running away from police.
Yes; in general police will shoot if you run away (resist arrest); that is absolutely standard. Otherwise no point in carrying a gun; it would be usable only in self defence, or when attending a crime scene with specific rules of engagement.
That is why I refused to obey ATC taxi directions here.
We are perhaps digressing from the topic, and this is controversial across cultures/countries because most/all except the UK do carry guns so a non-Brit is liable to take this as a criticism of his country – obviously this is not intended! But it will take balls made of solid steel to argue with any border official who insists you broke some rule. I bet you anything that not one single person here would even dream of doing anything to upset the guy, no matter what they say about civil liberties etc
Even with (unarmed) UK police, nobody with a brain would argue, or try to run away. Once I landed at Shoreham, from Jersey. I didn’t file a GAR because an erroneous statement in the GAR form notes said that I did not need to (basically it said Shoreham is “designated” but failed to mention it is not designated for Terrorism; one other airport had the same mistake). The police were waiting and we got a 2-3hr session. They were completely and totally uninterested in the official (but wrong) notes on the GAR form. If I was a police officer I would want to crawl into a hole afterwards, having seen basically intelligent law obiding people treated in such an arrogant way. But this is the professional culture there… And I reckon the Brit police are among the most polite; actually they rarely step into any kind of legal limbo.
So we do need clarity in this area. IMHO, the AIP is good enough (except for Cherbourg ) because, IME, even if they disagree they are unlikely to bust you.
Peter wrote:
That is why I refused to obey ATC taxi directions here.
I think you were just unlucky in Avignon, probably they were searching for long time trying to find the pilot of that TB20 parked over there?
Next time just land, leave aircraft door/boot wide open with your phone number on the screen and go to lunch, preferably with a view of the apron
I guarantee you will not get bothered when you depart while not talking to anyone
Peter wrote:
es; in general police will shoot if you run away (resist arrest); that is absolutely standard.
In the countries I’ve lived in (Portugal / France), police will get in real trouble if they shoot someone running away (→ in the back). Unlike the US 1, (where they need to assume the person is wearing a gun, because everyone can, and statistics make it likely they do), they are not going to assume the person is likely to be an immediate danger to the public. If you try to force a police barage, sure, but see how otherwise people doesn’t shoot: stolen scooters etc – police has explicit instructions not do even do anything dangerous to the public.
Peter wrote:
Even with (unarmed) UK police, nobody with a brain would argue, or try to run away
Exactly, the gun is not doing much there – sure, it will make a difference if you try to beat the officer, or threaten him with a gun, but not much othersiwise
Peter wrote:
non-Brit is liable to take this as a criticism of his country
Not taking as a criticism of any country – I think the UK has the only sensible system, and it feels great to live in such a system!
Peter wrote:
But it will take balls made of solid steel to argue with any border official who insists you broke some rule
I’ve had a few issues with GARs before (inclusing with a Lebanese passenger, of all), but as you say, the police here (UK) is probably the most polite, and a friendly conversation always solved things up (quickly).
Generally, in this sort of argument, the policeman is presented with a fait accompli, so there is no longer anything much he can stop you doing – He also has zero interest in shooting you / taking you to jail – the paperwork alone is a turn off!. Acknowledging them (even if you are right) will likely defuse any situation, and the less you argue (about you being right and them wrong), the quicker the situation will be resolved – I’ve had a couple of these (aviation and non-aviation), and that’s how things go. 5-10 minutes, ideally smiling, and situation is clarified, everyone goes their own way. They have no incentive to bust your balls, and will likely only do so if you try to tickle theirs too much
1 Sorry, generally don’t diss the US, but I think I feel as strongly about 2nd amendment fanatics as Peter does about people turning off their transponder.
One small point: far from everyone in the US can carry one.
Police everywhere (in the 1st World) will get into trouble for shooting someone in the back, but that is no consolation to the person
Sure, but the difference is that In the US there are so many the police has to assume anyone DOES carry one (Even if not allowed) because there are so many, getting an illegal is cheap. Getting one in the secondary market with no checks is easy too… there is a reason the amount of people killed by the police (normalised by country population) in the US at least an order of magnitude above any other first world country, and I have a hard time to believe that all their policemen are sadists or that it’s the inflow of “rapists and murderers” (not my words obviously) they get from the south. No, it’s just the stupid obcession with guns in the name of “civil liberties”.
People are not fundamentally different in the UK from the US, yet we get about 300x less killings by law enforcement, all while not having more violence than they have. One of us must be doing things right…
Noe, firearms per capita is very high in Finland (32 per 100 people), for example, and very small amount of police shootings, so, debatable.
I think it is abour attitude and training. I heard from quite a few ex-military people that in the US police are trained to shoot first.
In most other countries they are trained to defuse the situation first.
The number of people shot dead (per year) by Swedish police has increased dramatically (several times) compared to 10 year or so ago. Apparently this is because the police are now trained to shoot quickly to kill instead of shooting if absolutely necessary to disable which was the case before. Also, the police have switched to expanding bullets. (Which are prohibited to the military according to international law, go figure…) The reason, of course, being terrorism. I guess this could be the case in other countries as well.
There have been several cases of mentally ill people having being shot in the back — so far without any legal repercussions but one such case is making its way to the courts right now.
