London Underground shut down

[throdgrain]

Not arguing about that...I just think that 7 shots to the head is a little...OTT. 1 bullet is usually adequate, 2 bullets will do the job for sure but 7?

Sorry, I just saw this, and have to answer. The police are using low velocity - i assume sub-sonic - bullets in thier guns. This is so that there is much less danger of a ricochet killing a nearby traveller on the tube, or indeed of a bullet going straight through a bad guy and into the aforementioned innocent.
It does have the drawback however that it is less powerful than a conventional bullet, and the answer is to keep shooting until the target stops moving.

 

[Tom]

I'm proud to be English. The queen is superb IMO (face it, would you rather have someone like Chirac or Bush?).

I like the fact that to be British should mean to be well mannered, polite, respectful. I like the fact that people say hello and goodbye in phone calls. I like how people do the same in corner shops. Its cool how people thank the bus driver for just doing his/her job.

I always thought that Enoch Powell dared to say what many people secretly suspected, and was vilified by the left-wingers. The man made sense, particularly when asked about racism "Whats wrong with Racism? Racism is how we define our nationalities".

 

[throdgrain]

I find myself quite confused by it to be honest Tom. Im almost building ideas in my head, that are a long way from the anarchist ( ) hippy biker of my early twenties. Im beginning to wonder if we havent gone too far down the road this country is travelling along of late. However I havent come to a conclusion yet, so a lot is best left unsaid

 

[nath]

I guess what I have a problem with is nationalism, and people often claim their nationalism to be patriotism. This is what I have a beef with, and so often (seemingly particularly in America if the what we see of the media over there is to be believed) patriotism either becomes or is already disguised nationalism.

e.g. People claiming it's un-patriotic to criticise the president. That's nationalism right there, and it's a bad bad thing!


NationalismPatriotismNationalismPatriotism RAAAAH

 

[Furr]

Slightly back on subject on the person who was shot running from the police , I think we should remember that as a human that person would make the fight/flight decision when he saw people chasing after him (not bringing in the factor of how clear they made out they are policeman or not).
It seems to me that he did an unfortunate natural split second choice and decided to run. Trouble is where do you draw the line? Hypothetically as example if an asian looking man decides to run from the police because he has cannabis on him do the police have the right to shoot him because they suspect him of being more dangerous? I personally feel that less lethal methods of stopping an individual should be phased in (ie tasers) even if they are less effective the balance is that killing a suspect under most occasions will more often than not be counter productive as caught terrorist is more useful than a dead one.

 

[throdgrain]

Oh do behave.
The bloke is running from the police onto a tube, hes come from the a place suspected of having suicide bombers, you think they should try to wrestle him to the ground? All he has to do is push the button and bang thye 're all dead.
refer to my previous post for my opinion

 

[Damini]

Tasers can't be used on suspected suicide bombers, as the electrical charge can set off a bomb. Tear gas doesn't incapacitate fast enough, rubber bullets/bean bags are just meant to bring a man down, not completely imobilise them... You need to bring a man down INSTANTLY, and have him out cold IMMEDIATELY, whilst also not doing anything that could inadvertently detonate a bomb.

Put this the other way round. A guy from a block of flats under survaillance after its address was found in an unexploded suicide bomb is seen leaving home in unusually warm clothing. He makes his way on a bus (and we don't know how odd his behaviour was on this bus) before heading towards a train station. When police demands he stops, he flees, vaulting the gateway, before charging onto a train full of people. He then detonated a bomb he was wearing, killing about 9 people, including two police officers in pursuit.

You would be demanding their heads on a stick for not doing whatever was necessary to bring that guy down when they realised he was charging on to a packed train.

When I was 16 I had a gun pulled on me. It turns out, afterwards, that this gun had its firing pin removed, so couldn't work. However, the only way to know this when it is being pointed at you is for the guy to pull the trigger, which is, by all accounts, a pretty dangerous way to realise.

There was an asian guy arrested outside Whitehall, wearing a backpack. He put his arms in the air, and did everything the officers said. They didn't shoot him repeatedly, and now that guy has gone free. In a climate like this, if you run from armed police, especially ONTO A PACKED TRAIN, it is absolutely right that you get shot. Police cannot afford to be hesitant in this.

 

[Calaen]

Slightly back on subject on the person who was shot running from the police , I think we should remember that as a human that person would make the fight/flight decision when he saw people chasing after him (not bringing in the factor of how clear they made out they are policeman or not).
It seems to me that he did an unfortunate natural split second choice and decided to run. Trouble is where do you draw the line? Hypothetically as example if an asian looking man decides to run from the police because he has cannabis on him do the police have the right to shoot him because they suspect him of being more dangerous? I personally feel that less lethal methods of stopping an individual should be phased in (ie tasers) even if they are less effective the balance is that killing a suspect under most occasions will more often than not be counter productive as caught terrorist is more useful than a dead one.

Fair enough if we could torture the bastards to get the information, but they would rather die than give anything up.

I feel for the family of the Brazilian I really do but he had been living here for 3 years working full time as an electrician, he must have have decent understanding of the language. so he had to have known to a certain extent what the hell was going on in London the past couple of weeks. He chose to run and jump on a train. I dont think for one moment he was shot just because some officer was trigger happy.

 

[Deebs]

To be honest, they should take the heat and stop.

Would rather be slapped for having some weed on me than deciding to run from armed police.

Same as the illegal immigrant syndrome. Dont fucking run, face deportation, you have no right here. God this pisses me off bigtime.

If you have nothing to hide then you don't need to run. Now tho, you know that if you run, you could get shot.

Slightly back on subject on the person who was shot running from the police , I think we should remember that as a human that person would make the fight/flight decision when he saw people chasing after him (not bringing in the factor of how clear they made out they are policeman or not).
It seems to me that he did an unfortunate natural split second choice and decided to run. Trouble is where do you draw the line? Hypothetically as example if an asian looking man decides to run from the police because he has cannabis on him do the police have the right to shoot him because they suspect him of being more dangerous? I personally feel that less lethal methods of stopping an individual should be phased in (ie tasers) even if they are less effective the balance is that killing a suspect under most occasions will more often than not be counter productive as caught terrorist is more useful than a dead one.

 

[Louster]

Folks, how many times does it need to be pointed out that none of us are in any position to make total moral judgements about this? Do I really need to point out, AGAIN, the fallacy of assumption? I feel like I'm thumping my head against a brick wall here.

It is obviously evident that the police are not infallible. (This discussion would not even exist if they were.) Assuming that they must have acted correctly/ideally/rationally/responsibly/lawfully, and ignoring the possibility that they didn't, is crazy. Every single argument bases itself upon descriptions of events which have not been verified. The mere fact that the number of shots fired, which was originally counted as low as three by one eyewitness, and is now being said to be 8 (7 in the head and 1 in the shoulder) is entirely apt testament to this.

So quit with the ridiculous self-righteousness, and please don't blindly hop on the media-hype bandwagons. The point of the inquiries is to figure out these things.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) will investigate the shooting.

Nick Hardwick, head of the IPCC, said the commission needs to find out the truth of what happened "to ensure it can never happen again".

He said that "if people haven't acted in accordance with the law and their training" they would be held accountable.

 

[Damini]

Yes, thats all very sensible, but honestly, do you not have an opinion on things until you have every single fact bundled into a report for you? Its human nature to ponder on these things, and to change your opinion as new things are revealed, rather than blank slate it up until the final second.

 

[Louster]

To be honest, my opinion is pretty much just a reaction to everyone else's. I'd disagree about human nature being to "change your opinion as new things are revealed" really, though. I'd say it's human nature to decide on your point of view immediately and stick with it as long as you can, which is why I'm arguing that any moralistic pronouncements on this incident are somewhat out of rational bounds.

 

[throdgrain]

Nar, not for me anyway, I can modify my opinion as new facts are presented to me, no bother.
Take the Iraq war for a start ....

 

[old.user4556]

Same as the illegal immigrant syndrome. Dont fucking run, face deportation, you have no right here. God this pisses me off bigtime.

Quite right.

It's about time we started policing properly, but surely two bullets to the head would have done it?

Maybe he lagged.

 

[Sissyfoo]

There are about 3 pages of explanations regarding the amount of bullets used.

 

[Deebs]

Quite right.

It's about time we started policing properly, but surely two bullets to the head would have done it?

Maybe he lagged.

These bullets they are firing aint armour piercing rounds but sub light soft bullets.

 

[old.user4556]

I know they are low velocity bullets, but wasn't it point blank?

It just sounds excessive considering the proximity, whatever the technology. I guess they made sure he was dead.

 

[~Yuckfou~]

if he was dead with 2 shots, why not add another 5. They are not gonna make him deader.

Exactly.
You don't shoot someone in the head to injure them.
Imo the guy deserved what he got for being a cock and running. I'm in London for a couple of days, and I will be very suspect of any arab types carrying large bags or wearing big coats, fact.

 

[nath]

Imo the guy deserved what he got for being a cock and running.

You're a fucking ****. A guy deserves to die because he (we assume, based on what the media has told us) made a silly, but understandable, mistake?

Say it was a member of your family - I very much doubt you'd be saying the same thing. You'd be far more understanding and far less vitriolic. You're a ****.

 

[DaGaffer]

Exactly.
You don't shoot someone in the head to injure them.
Imo the guy deserved what he got for being a cock and running. I'm in London for a couple of days, and I will be very suspect of any arab types carrying large bags or wearing big coats, fact.

The Brazilian guy looked quite 'white'. The ones they're hunting right now are black (African) rather than 'arab types', as was one of the ones on 7/7. None of this is clear-cut. I guess big coats and large bags is more of an issue, but right now the weather's lousy so big coats look less suspect and I'd guess it wouldn't be hard to swap a rucksack for a shopping bag; would you get suspicious if it was say, an east Asian (Malay or Indonesian or Thai) person with a shopping bag with a PlayStation box in it? Its just as plausable.

Point is, you can be 'vigilant' but ultimately we're stuck with a kind of lottery; no point getting paranoid about it.

 

[old.user4556]

Imo the guy deserved what he got for being a cock and running. I'm in London for a couple of days, and I will be very suspect of any arab types carrying large bags or wearing big coats, fact.

Harsh Yuck, but I essentially agree (and i said it before) that anyone running into a tube station that was bombed less that 24 hours previously and didn't stop when challenged is asking for serious trouble.

If anyone does it again, I would hope they shoot them too. The message is crystal clear now - don't run away from armed police when asked to stop.

 

[~Yuckfou~]

You're a fucking ****. A guy deserves to die because he (we assume, based on what the media has told us) made a silly, but understandable, mistake?

Say it was a member of your family - I very much doubt you'd be saying the same thing. You'd be far more understanding and far less vitriolic. You're a ****.

I would still feel that the police were fully justified.

How would the police have explained to the families of more victims had he been a bomber? That's a rhetorical question, as I can see no reason for giving a fuck what you think. I did feel I should respond to your personal attack though.

The Brazilian guy looked quite 'white'.

True(ish), but he wasn't a bomber. The actual bombers are Arab/North African looking.

Point is, you can be 'vigilant' but ultimately we're stuck with a kind of lottery; no point getting paranoid about it.

Agreed, but increasing the odds in my favour appeals to me

 

[~Yuckfou~]

Harsh Yuck, but I essentially agree (and i said it before) that anyone running into a tube station that was bombed less that 24 hours previously and didn't stop when challenged is asking for serious trouble.

If anyone does it again, I would hope they shoot them too. The message is crystal clear now - don't run away from armed police when asked to stop.

I'm not one to mince words, it's pointless

 

[nath]

Yes, I given what small amount of information we have - I feel the police were justified. That doesn't mean he deserved it.

 

[old.user4556]

Definitely up for a Darwin Award I feel.

 

[nath]

Oh the compassion, it's overwhelming.

 

[old.user4556]

I don't think there is any point sitting about dwelling about it.

The guy is dead for the wrong reasons; bad timing, paranoid situation, same tube station, a bloke that didn't stop for armed police in a moment of bad decision making.

Move along.

 

[nath]

Yes I agree, however Yuck is saying he deserved it and you're saying he's up for a Darwin Award - that's not moving on, that's being a tosser.

 

[Ormorof]

I don't think there is any point sitting about dwelling about it.

The guy is dead for the wrong reasons; bad timing, paranoid situation, same tube station, a bloke that didn't stop for armed police in a moment of bad decision making.

Move along.

werent they armed plain clothes police?

(if so then i dont blame him! i would have legged it too if some thug looking guy comes waving a gun at me )

 

[dysfunction]

werent they armed plain clothes police?

(if so then i dont blame him! i would have legged it too if some thug looking guy comes waving a gun at me )

They did put on their "Police" Caps before running after him though...aparantly.