警員巡邏不應配帶槍械！

沒有人知道市民對警員帶槍的想法，因為從來沒有做過民意調查。本港的實際需要可從一些數字中看到，其使用次數僅為每年不多於十次，但其開支頗大(註一)。

其讓人想起的有：

2009年3月17日警員接投訴登何文田馬頭圍抽水站的山邊調查市民投訴一名尼泊爾男子在山邊面向民居撒尿，鐵騎近距離連轟兩槍將其擊斃。

2014年5月5日藍田康雅苑，凌晨一對已婚的年輕夫婦懷疑因為感情發生問題發生爭執，警察連開三槍擊斃21歲青年何世通。

五個國家不讓警員巡邏帶槍

外文報導，警員巡邏帶槍不是必然(註二)，美國警員濫用槍支曾觸發多次暴動。在英國，愛爾蘭，挪威，冰島和新西蘭，警員在巡邏時沒有武裝。 警察只在特殊情況下只配備槍支。

學者指出：“不少人認為讓警員帶槍，造成的槍支暴力比他們防止槍支暴力更多。” 在冰島，三分之一的公民都有槍支， 但警察大部分時間巡邏不帶槍。在英國，82％的警察不想帶槍。在新西蘭，一位教授認為，農民的職業比警察更危險。

2011年，挪威的一位極右翼的槍手安德斯貝林布雷維克襲擊一個夏令營，造成77人死亡。但挪威沒有改變其警員不帶槍巡邏的傳統。

16個太平洋島國中有12個不允許警察攜帶武器。他們認為：“一個沒有武裝的社會是一個文明的社會。”

後語

香港警員巡邏 時很多時要調停居民紛爭，他們由於攜帶武器所做成的不便遠比幫助為多，因此，香港警員不應在平常時間配帶槍械！

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

備註

註一

據立法會資料，過 去 5年，警務處在行動中 (包括在發生或即將發生可能危害警務人員或其他人士的人身安全或生命受到威脅時)使用「史密斯威森軍警型左輪手槍」的逐年次數分別為：2 、2 、7、4和 4；內地訪客在港干犯“藏有槍械及彈藥”刑事罪行被捕人數分別為2014 年 57次；      2015年71次和 2016 年54次；過去3年，非華裔人士因干犯藏有槍械及彈藥刑事罪行而被捕的人數為302 、295、 195  ，為其總被補人士的 4%。

而警務處運用分目603「機器、車輛及設備」的撥款購置及更換警隊機器及設備，以協助警務人員進行訓練、執法、部署行動(包括人群管理或大型公眾活動)等工作中，警總槍械訓練系統為 4,662,000元 ，佔其開支148,226,000元的  3%。

註二

5 countries where most police officers do not carry firearms — and it works well

By Rick Noack July 8, 2016 Email the author

A woman is escorted to her car by armed officers on Thursday, July 7 , 2016 in Dallas. Snipers opened fire on police officers in the heart of Dallas during protests over two recent fatal police shootings of black men. (Ashley Landis/The Dallas Morning News via AP)

LONDON — It has been another week of devastating gun violence in the United States: 37-year-old Alton Sterling and 32-year-old Philando Castile were both fatally shot by police officers in separate incidents which sparked outrage across the nation.

When protesters rallied against the shootings Thursday night in Dallas, at least one gunman opened fire on 12 officers,  killing five of them.

Shortly after the shootings, U.S. and foreign commentators put a renewed spotlight on what they think has been one of the origins of most of the recent violence: gun control laws. But some experts say that a successful disarmament of the United States would have to be more extensive than many believe: Citizens and law enforcement personnel would have to hand over their weapons in the long term to make the U.S. a safer country.

It's a strategy that seems to work surprisingly well for other countries: In Britain, Ireland, Norway, Iceland and New Zealand, officers are unarmed when they are on patrol. Police are only equipped with firearms in special circumstances.

Police officers there have saved lives — exactly because they were unable to shoot.

"The practice is rooted in tradition and the belief that arming the police with guns engenders more gun violence than it prevents," Guðmundur Oddsson, an assistant professor of sociology at Northern Michigan University, told The Washington Post.

As the U.S.  debates gun control and better policing, these five nations could teach some crucial lessons.

In Iceland, one third of all citizens are armed — but police officers are not most of the time

When police shot a man in Iceland in 2013, it was the first time police had used their firearms and killed a person in the history of this country, according to the Christian Science Monitor. Granted, Iceland is a tiny country with only 300,000 inhabitants.

However, one third of the country's population is armed with rifles and shotguns for hunting, making it the 15th most armed country per capita in the world. Despite this, crime is extremely rare.

 A demonstrator challenges a policeman during a protest outside parliament, in Reykjavik, Iceland Thursday, Jan. 22, 2009. Police used tear gas to break up an angry protest outside Iceland's parliament early Thursday, and two officers were hospitalized after being hit by rocks, the force said. It was the first time the country's police had used tear gas in more than half a century, and came as demonstrators mount increasingly violent protests against a government they blame for leading once-prosperous Iceland into economic ruin. (AP Photo/Brynjar Gauti ) ** ICELAND OUT ** A demonstrator challenges a police officer outside parliament in Reykjavik, Iceland, in 2009. (Brynjar Gauti/AP)

Are Icelanders simply more peaceful than Americans? "Iceland's low crime rates are rooted in the country's small, homogeneous, egalitarian and tightly knit society," sociologist Oddsson said.

When asked what struck him most about crime in Iceland, Richard Wright, a criminology professor at Georgia State University, said: "Once, during a presentation, an Icelandic police officer kept referring to 'poor people with problems' — and it took me a while before I realized that she was talking about offenders. She considered every citizen precious because 'we are so few and there is so much to do,' she said."

Wright also thinks that the powerful standing of women in Iceland's politics, as well as within the police force, has helped to maintain low crime rates. Both Oddsson and Wright agree that low inequality and a strong welfare system have contributed to Iceland's success in sustaining its unarmed police.

Most of Ireland's officers are not even trained in using firearms

Ireland has gone a step further: There, most police officers would not even know how to use a gun if they were threatened. According to the U.N.-sponsored research site GunPolicy.org, only 20 to 25 percent of Irish police officers are qualified to use firearms. Despite that, Ireland has much lower crime rates than the United States.

In Britain, 82 percent of police do not want to be armed

"Sadly we know from the experience in America and other countries that having armed officers certainly does not mean, sadly, that police officers do not end up getting shot," Greater Manchester Chief Constable Sir Peter Fahy was quoted as saying by British media outlets in 2012, after two of his officers were fatally shot.

The practice of walking unarmed patrols is an established fact of police life everywhere in the U.K. apart from Northern Ireland: Since the 19th century, British officers on patrol have considered themselves to be guardians of citizens, who should be easily approachable. There are far fewer incidents of deadly clashes between police and suspected criminals. While there were 461 “justifiable homicides” committed by U.S. police in 2013, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, there was not a single one in the United Kingdom the same year.

In a 2004 survey, 82 percent of Britain's Police Federation members said that they did not want to be routinely armed on duty, according to the BBC. At least one third of British police officers have feared for their lives while being on duty, but remained opposed to carrying firearms.

In New Zealand, a professor argued that it's more dangerous to be a farmer than an unarmed police officer

 In an essay, Auckland Technical University Senior Criminology Lecturer John Buttle calculated that it is in fact safer for police officers not to carry weapons. "[In New Zealand], it is more dangerous being a farmer than it is a police officer," he wrote in a paper, published 2010. Arming the police would inevitably lead to an arms race with criminals and a spike in casualties.

"Only a dozen or so senior police officers nationwide are rostered to wear a handgun on any given shift," said Philip Alpers, associate professor at the Sydney School of Public Health.

Norway has stuck to the tradition — despite a shock in 2011

In 2011, Norway suffered through a tragedy which exposed the dangers of unarmed law enforcement authorities. Back then, far-right gunman Anders Behring Breivik attacked a Norwegian summer camp and killed 77 people.

Murders are extremely rare in this Scandinavian country — but many blamed a delayed and flawed police response for the horrifying carnage Breivik was able to inflict. So far, though, the tradition of unarmed police officers has proven to be stronger than the fear of terrorism.

Twelve of 16 Pacific island nations, for instance, do not allow police officers to carry weapons. "Their regional bumper sticker now reads: An unarmed society is a polite society," says Alpers of the Sydney School of Public Health.

Most experts agree, however, that it would be counterproductive to suddenly disarm U.S. police officers without addressing the origins of crime. "Any attempts to roll back the militarization of the American police would need to be accompanied by policies that increase economic and racial equality and legitimate opportunity for advancement for the poor," sociologist Oddsson said.

This post was first published in February 2015. It was updated on  July 8, 2016.

Rick Noack is a foreign affairs reporter based in Berlin. Previously, he worked for The Post from Washington as an Arthur F. Burns Fellow and from London. 

也談補選地區得票率

今次補選後，傳媒大做文章的主要為：一，打破六四黃金比；二，指責民協。其為首的是明報所做的所謂數據分析。九龍西立法會選區分為油尖旺、深水埗和九龍城三大版圖。本文只討論九龍西立法會選區。

正如美國的傻佬總統的口頭襌，假新聞，CNN偏袒，香港傳媒染紅比美國更為嚴重。那個網媒更找出香港的傻佬陳云根加把勁。其目的彰顯，是分化泛民。

以數字說明一切

筆者以2016年換屆選舉的71個投票站得票，計出泛民相對于總得票，算出泛民在每區的支持度，再以2018補選中的找出姚從炎對鄭泳舜得票作比較。下列的數字是2016年換屆泛民支持度對2018年補選泛民支持度的比例。

其結果是：

第一，泛民支持度與2016年相比，全面跌了兩成；

第二，油尖旺區整體跌16%，深水埗區跌19%，九龍城區跌18%；

第三，跌得最勁的，從7成到8成的，油尖旺只有一區，深水埗有11區，九龍城有9區。

由此看到，民協有意整蠱的說法不成立。

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15ffr5Ri8axBcNs1cueHesL_gIxmDrPemuYQpFdqw4oE/edit?usp=sharing

焦土派等意見

網絡革命軍的說法基本上可歸納為抵死，香港人不配有民主，由於其太幼稚，無法與其辯論，筆者在以下回應其老祖宗陳云根的意見。

陳云根在投票前夕表示：“泛民是 greater evil　沒有泛民政府就作不了惡”，其理由只有一個，就是“如果姚松炎反對國歌法的立法，反對學校赤化香港兒童，是可以得票多一些的，但他沒有這樣做。因為如果他這樣做，就對不住港共政府開閘給這條犬進入跑道。”其意思是選了姚松炎都冇用，因為他做不了什麼，也不想做。

議員可做的事有限，這是所有擁有一般智慧的人都明白的。這怎能在立法會選擇中，民主與建制的博奕中，投下一票呢？由此可見，這些焦土大老爺們志在以歪理收編傻仔。

結語

駡戰不是本文目的。筆者從新做的資料顯示，泛民無法應付非單對單的補選。更為迫切的不是馬嶽教授所說的：“這種情況下助長了建制，你DQ四席原來可以執返兩席！政權更可能會因此進一步進迫，到推23條時，市民也會逆來順受。”

其意義遠超過市民是否認同DQ，而是民主派的支持度下滑比想像中急劇！

文翠珊就神經毒劑殺人事件作國會發言

3月11日，謝爾蓋∙斯克里帕爾與其女兒在英國索爾茲伯里市的Zizzi餐廳被下毒，他是俄軍總參謀部情報總局前上校，在2010年俄美互換情報人員時被移交回俄，後在英國獲得庇護。

俄羅斯外交部發言人扎哈羅娃就英國首相梅12日有關斯克里帕爾中毒案的聲明發表評論："這是英國議會里上演的一出馬戲表演。結論很明確，又是一次基於挑釁的政治宣傳。"

發言

12 March 2018Volume 637               5.06 pm

The Prime Minister (Mrs Theresa May)

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to update the House on the incident in Salisbury and the steps we are taking to investigate what happened and to respond to this reckless and despicable act.

2018年3月12日      下午5時06分     下議院 

首相（文翠珊夫人）：

下議院議長先生：得  閣下許可，我想對魯莽卑鄙的索爾茲伯里事件為作出交代，並向下議院滙報最新情況。

Last week, my right hon. Friends the Foreign and Home Secretaries set out the details of events as they unfolded on Sunday 4 March. I am sure that the whole House will want to pay tribute again to the bravery and professionalism of our emergency services and armed forces in responding to this incident, as well as the doctors and nurses who are now treating those affected. In particular, our thoughts are with Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who remains in a serious but stable condition. In responding to this incident, he exemplified the duty and courage that define our emergency services and in which our whole nation takes the greatest pride.

上週， 3月4日星期天，外交和內政部秘書向下議院交代了事件細節。我相信，全體國會向我們的軍隊的勇敢和專業精神，以及正在治療受影響的人士的醫生和護士們表示敬意。

特別是，我們的警長尼克貝利仍然處於嚴重但穩定的狀態。他是我們國家的驕傲。

I want to pay tribute to the fortitude and calmness with which people in Salisbury have responded to these events and to thank all those who have come forward to assist the police with their investigation. The incident has, of course, caused considerable concern across the community. Following the discovery of traces of nerve agent in a Zizzi restaurant and the Mill pub, the chief medical officer issued further precautionary advice, but, as Public Health England has made clear, the risk to public health is low.

我在此表揚國民對這些事件做出回應時的剛毅和冷靜，並感謝他們協助警方進行調查。當然，這個事件在整個社區引起了相當大的關注。在Zizzi餐廳和Mill酒吧發現了神經毒劑痕蹟之後，首席醫務官發布了進一步的預防性建議，但是，正如英格蘭公共衛生部門已經明確指出的那樣，公共衛生風險很低。

I share the impatience of the House and the country at large to bring those responsible to justice and to take the full range of appropriate responses against those who would act against our country in this way. But as a nation that believes in justice and the rule of law, it is essential that we proceed in the right way, led not by speculation but by the evidence. That is why we have given the police the space and time to carry out their investigation properly. Hundreds of officers have been working around the clock, together with experts from our armed forces, to sift and assess all the available evidence, to identify crime scenes and decontamination sites and to follow every possible lead to find those responsible. That investigation continues and we must allow the police to continue with their work.

我注意到下議院和國民的焦慮情緒，盡快將這些涉事人繩之以法，並採取全面的適當對策來對付那些以這種方式對我國的人。但是作為一個相信公義和法治的國家，我們必須以正確的方式進行，而不是由猜測而是由證據引導。這就是為什麼我們給了警方足夠的空間和時間進行調查。數百名警員與我們的專家一起24小時工作，篩選和評估所有可用的證據，確定犯罪現場和淨化場地，並追踪每一個可能的線索。調查仍在繼續，我們必須讓警方繼續他們的工作。

This morning, I chaired a meeting of the National Security Council in which we considered the information available so far. As is normal, the council was updated on the assessment and intelligence picture, as well as on the state of the investigation. It is now clear that Mr Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a military-grade nerve agent of a type developed by Russia. It is part of a group of nerve agents known as Novichok.

今天上午，我主持了國家安全委員會的一次會議，我們在會上審議了迄今為止提供的所有信息。正常情況下，理事會對評估和情報圖片以及調查情況進行了更新。現在很清楚，斯克里帕爾先生和他的女兒被俄羅斯研製的軍用級神經毒劑毒害。它是一組稱為Novichok的神經藥物。

Based on the positive identification of this chemical agent by world-leading experts at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down, our knowledge that Russia has previously produced this agent and would still be capable of doing so, Russia’s record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations and our assessment that Russia views some defectors as legitimate targets for assassinations, the Government have concluded that it is highly likely that Russia was responsible for the act against Sergei and Yulia Skripal. There are, therefore, only two plausible explanations for what happened in Salisbury on 4 March: either this was a direct act by the Russian state against our country; or the Russian Government lost control of their potentially catastrophically damaging nerve agent and allowed it to get into the hands of others.

根據波登唐國防科學技術實驗室的世界級專家對這種化學試劑的鑑定，我們知道俄羅斯此前已經生產過這種試劑並且仍然這樣做。根據俄羅斯的的暗殺記錄和我們對俄羅斯認為暗殺叛逃者是合法目標的評估，我國政府認為俄羅斯很有可能對這次暗殺行為負責。因此，對於3月4日在索爾茲伯里發生的事情，只有兩個解釋：這是俄羅斯對我國的直接行為；或者俄羅斯政府失去了對其神經毒劑的控制權，並讓它進入其他人手中。

This afternoon, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has summoned the Russian ambassador to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and asked him to explain which of the two possibilities it is and to account for how this Russian-produced nerve agent could have been deployed in Salisbury against Mr Skripal and his daughter. My right hon. Friend has stated to the ambassador that the Russian Federation must immediately provide full and complete disclosure of the Novichok programme to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, and he has requested the Russian Government’s response by the end of tomorrow.

今天下午，外交大臣已經召見了俄羅斯駐大使，並要求他解釋這是兩種可能性中的哪一種，並解釋這種俄羅斯產神經毒劑如何能夠被部署到斯克里帕爾先生和他的女兒身上。外交大臣向俄羅斯大使表示，俄羅斯聯邦必須立即向“禁止化學武器組織”披露諾維切克計劃，並要求俄羅斯政府在明天之前做出回應。

This action has happened against a backdrop of a well-established pattern of Russian state aggression. Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea was the first time since the second world war that one sovereign nation has forcibly taken territory from another in Europe. Russia has fomented conflict in the Donbass, repeatedly violated the national airspace of several European countries and mounted a sustained campaign of cyber-espionage and disruption, which has included meddling in elections and hacking the Danish Ministry of Defence and the Bundestag, among many others.

今天事件是在俄羅斯的以往的侵略模式下發生的。第二次世界大戰以來，俄羅斯非法吞併克里米亞，一個主權國家在歐洲被強行奪取領土。俄羅斯在頓巴斯煽動衝突，多次侵犯了歐洲一些國家的領空，並進行了一場持續的網絡間諜活動，其中包括干涉選舉和黑客攻擊丹麥國防部和聯邦議會等等。

During his recent state of the union address, President Putin showed video graphics of missile launches, flight trajectories and explosions, including the modelling of attacks on the United States with a series of warheads impacting in Florida. The extra-judicial killing of terrorists and dissidents outside Russia was given legal sanction by the Russian Parliament in 2006, and, of course, Russia used radiological substances in its barbaric assault on Mr Litvinenko. We saw promises to assist the investigation then, but they resulted in denial and obfuscation and the stifling of due process and the rule of law.

在最近的國情咨文演講中，普京總統展示了導彈發射，飛行軌跡和爆炸的視頻圖像，其中包括用一系列的對美國佛羅里達州的彈頭模擬襲擊。 俄羅斯議會在2006年對俄羅斯境外的恐怖分子和持不同政見者進行了司法外追殺。當然，俄羅斯還用放射性物質對“利特維年科”進行野蠻襲擊。 當時我們看到了俄羅斯承諾協助調查，但他們事後否認和蓄意混淆，窒息了應該進行的正當程序和法治。

Following Mr Litvinenko’s death, we expelled Russian diplomats, suspended security co-operation, broke off bilateral plans on visas, froze the assets of the suspects and put them on international extradition lists, and those measures remain in place. Furthermore, our commitment to collective defence and security through NATO remains as strong as ever in the face of Russian behaviour. Indeed, our armed forces have a leading role in NATO’s enhanced forward presence, with British troops leading a multinational battlegroup in Estonia. We have led the way in securing tough sanctions against the Russian economy, and we have at all stages worked closely with our allies and will continue to do so. We must now stand ready to take much more extensive measures.

在“利特維年科”先生去世後，我們驅逐了俄羅斯外交官，暫停安全合作，中止雙邊簽證計劃，凍結了嫌疑的資產並將其列入國際引渡名單，這些措施依然有效。 此外，在面對俄羅斯的上述行為，我們承諾加強與北約合作。 事實上，我們的軍隊在北約加強前沿的主導作用，英國軍隊在愛沙尼亞領導了一個多國戰鬥群。 我們率先對俄羅斯經濟制裁，我們在各個階段都與我們的盟友緊密合作，並將繼續這樣做。 我們現在必須隨時準備採取更加廣泛的措施。

On Wednesday, we will consider in detail the response from the Russian state. Should there be no credible response, we will conclude that this action amounts to an unlawful use of force by the Russian state against the United Kingdom, and I will come back to this House to set out the full range of measures that we will take in response.

在下來的星期三，我們將詳細考慮俄羅斯國家的回應。 如果沒有合理的答覆，我們會得出這樣的結論：今次刺殺行動相當於俄羅斯對英國使用武力，我將回到這議院提出我們將會採取的一系列措施的建議。

---------------完-----------

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@