Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Don't run wearing a thick coat in London

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Cockney Corner.
    Sh*t happens. If he hadn't have run, he wouldn't have been slotted. One thing is certain however. The officer/s who shot him are going to be hung out to dry by the Job.
    From what i'm reading they may not be hung out to dry. That is wonderful!! I might need to work for British Metro. If I was that officer who shot him I would say one thing, "If he didnt run he would be alive." I respect Englands stance on this, lets be honest America would never have the balls to have a shoot to kill policy.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by GrayW4442
      From what i'm reading they may not be hung out to dry. That is wonderful!! I might need to work for British Metro. If I was that officer who shot him I would say one thing, "If he didnt run he would be alive." I respect Englands stance on this, lets be honest America would never have the balls to have a shoot to kill policy.
      So are you saying that the shooting was justified merely because he ran?
      Retired

      Comment


      • #18
        Gray

        First of all, let me make it clear that I do not believe the Police to be above the law. However, my rather flippant comment is coloured by the knowledge that two Metropolitan Police officers were recently arrested for murder after the fatal shooting of a man who they had been informed was armed with a shotgun concealed inside a bag, information which was not in fact correct. The actual shooting occurred in 1999 and there have been two inquests since.

        retired

        What should happen to the officers? Clearly this needs to be investigated and a decision made on the facts. What concerns me is that there isn't even a pretence of a level playing field where an officer is accused of an offence. The automatic presumption would appear to be that where an officer is involved, it will always be in the public interest to prosecute, and usually for the most serious offence the evidence can be stretched to fit.
        I'm a little bit waayy, a little bit wooah, a little bit woosh, I'm a geezer.

        Comment


        • #19
          I would hazard to guess, that these officers felt the suspect maybe armed with a bomb rigged to detonate on command. I would also assume that because of this they felt the need to shoot, and I am also assuming that the subject was uncooperative.

          Retired: It is in my opinion only a matter of time before something like the London attacks happen in this country. Use of deadly force rules may have to be changed to reflect that. In other words if the officers have a "reasonable" belief that the suspect is carrying a explosive device that deadly force is justified. I would also say that people have got to understand that in this day and age that failure to comply with orders from a Police Officer when he/she has a weapon pointed at you may result in more shootings.

          In Isreal it is very clear they will dump you in a heart beat if they think you have a bomb. I am not advocating going that far...but it is something to think about. I was shocked when that guy a few months ago at the U.S. capitol building didn't get dumped by a sniper.

          Talking to some fellow officers who just went through some training from Isreali (sp?) special forces and police, They (the Isrealis) are shocked beyond words that we just don't dump these yahoos...thats has been their policy for years.
          Happy to be here proud to serve

          "Well it appears this lock does not accept american express."

          Never trust fire fighters to point out a suspect.

          Comment


          • #20
            Obviously in a case like this there is far more behind the scenes than is released to the press who dont always get it right anyway. The distinction that was being made was that he was killed( possibly using very low velocity rounds to reduce the risk to passers by but work well striaght in the head from 2 feet away,) as he was a suspect inconnection with the suicide bombings two weeks before and was not one of the four that ran away the day before when their bombs failed to work. they are still looking for them and ddint want the public to think one had been shot and to only keep an eye out for three.
            No doubt he was trailed to the tube station as a pre determined suspect and they tried to stop him as soon as it was obvious he was going inside. I very much doubt it will turn out that he was deaf, late for work and jumped then ticket booths cos he forgot his travel card.
            Now the Police are guarding mosques to prevent reprisals, did you do that in the US after 9/11?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Cockney Corner.
              Sh*t happens. If he hadn't have run, he wouldn't have been slotted. One thing is certain however. The officer/s who shot him are going to be hung out to dry by the Job.

              You guys were in a virtual state of war scrambling to stop people from being blown up. The only greater tragedy than this man's death would have been if the police remained complacent and "hoped for the best" after he fled and disobeyed their orders.

              I hope the public rallies to their support.
              Disclaimer: The writer does not represent any organization, employer, entity or other individual. The first amendment protected views/commentary/opinions/satire expressed are those only of the writer. In the case of a sarcastic, facetious, nonsensical, stirring-the-pot, controversial or devil's advocate-type post, the views expressed may not even reflect those of the writer.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by retired
                So are you saying that the shooting was justified merely because he ran?
                No what I'm saying is at that time the police thought he was involved in the bombings, he had a large coat on in the summer time, and he ran when confronted. He ran onto a subway car where citizens were and they felt the need to protect them. The guy could have easily had a bomb strapped to him and was trying to get on the train to detonate it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Its a horrible situation for all concerned,however the suspect was challenged several times by armed officers,and DID NOT STOP!!!.He ran onto a tube train,and several witneses said he still ignored repeated commands to stop or halt.It was then finally he was shot,officers acting to defend the lives of passengers and themselves.Its very sad and the officers will be probably hung out to dry.....
                  "Well, I never had an invisible friend when I was young, but I'm sure that if I did, it would be Constable Smiley."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Mmmmm

                    Well it's started! The press were at first backing the Officers and Police! a couple of days later they are now saying 'Man shot as he attempted to board the Tube' What will it be next week? 'Police hit squads out to kill'
                    Carpe Jugulum

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Welcome to the land of "you're damned if you you're damned if you don't" all UK police should be armed. That being the case you all would have dealt with "the press" crapping on you many times for killing people that appeared to be an imminent threat. Goes with carrying a gun on duty in scary places and scary circumstances.
                      Trooperden, akman75, & azmichelle ignored

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by GrayW4442
                        No what I'm saying is at that time the police thought he was involved in the bombings, he had a large coat on in the summer time, and he ran when confronted. He ran onto a subway car where citizens were and they felt the need to protect them. The guy could have easily had a bomb strapped to him and was trying to get on the train to detonate it.
                        Don't you think that we as the police should have more information when we shoot someone than we "thought" they were involved in a bombing? Should we shoot anyone we "think" may have committed a murder?

                        I didn't read that he ran after he was confronted. I read that he exited an apartment complex where there were possible bomb suspects living. They then followed him and when he approached the underground he started running. He was being followed by plainclothes officers, who I'd bet he didn't know. From what I read he was not confronted as you say until he was on the floor of the subway and was shot. With the information available, I can't see where the shooting was justified based on nothing more than "I thought" he might be a terrorist. Is it a crime to run to the subway?

                        If you have additional information justifying the shooting, I would like to hear it.
                        Retired

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Eastside
                          Its a horrible situation for all concerned,however the suspect was challenged several times by armed officers,and DID NOT STOP!!!.He ran onto a tube train,and several witneses said he still ignored repeated commands to stop or halt.It was then finally he was shot,officers acting to defend the lives of passengers and themselves.Its very sad and the officers will be probably hung out to dry.....
                          If they were wrong in killing an innocent person, then they should be hung out to dry.
                          Retired

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by retired
                            Don't you think that we as the police should have more information when we shoot someone than we "thought" they were involved in a bombing? Should we shoot anyone we "think" may have committed a murder? .
                            I have to agree with this. From some of the accounts, they police were in plain clothes carrying rifles. If I saw a bunch of guys chasing me with plain clothes with guns I'm running too.
                            What hurts them is that they said at first that he was involved, now are back tracking syaing that he wasn't.
                            I hate to second guess them because I wasn't there but on the surface it looks bad.

                            TGY
                            Disclaimer: The writer does not represent any organization, employer, entity or other individual. The views expressed are those only of the writer. In the case of a sarcastic, facetious, nonsensical, stirring-the-pot, controversial or devil's advocate-type post, the views expressed may not even reflect those of the writer [This sig stolen from Brickcop who stole it from Frank Booth].

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by retired
                              Don't you think that we as the police should have more information when we shoot someone than we "thought" they were involved in a bombing? Should we shoot anyone we "think" may have committed a murder?
                              First, comparing someone who may be in the act of trying to detonate a bomb, to someone who committed <-(past tense) a murder is ridiculous. And obviously we have read different accounts of the story, because what I read stated that he diregarded all of the officers orders. The LEO's had "reasonable suspicion" (what a average person would conclude to be the facts) at the time to believe that he was a bomber and could be possibly attempting to set off a bomb at the time.

                              And on to the million dollar question, yes I think we as LEO's should have more information before we act; however, I get calls all the time where I have very little information and I make scenes almost blind to the facts. I dont know how long you have been retired but it seems you have forgotten what police work was about. This is not a perfect world and we as LEO's fly blind all the time.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Doesn't look bad to me. Subway got bombed only weeks prior, so when a bunch of cops (plain clothed or otherwise) are pistol pointing you in a subway and you run, don't be shocked if they shoot you.

                                It's called common sense...and if this guy was a bomber and they let him enter the tube and detonate, you bet the media would be up in arms and so would the family of the victims caught in the explosion.

                                I'm fairly certain this shooting scenario had been discussed by the Brit cops prior. I know in my department, we have a specific training bulletin dealing with homicide bombers. If we have reason to believe someone is about to detonate a bomb, thereby committing numerous murders, you can bet we will shoot him/them. And guess what? We're also advised the head is the best place to shoot them, just like the Brits did to their guy.

                                I really see this situation as tragic, but avoidable. Don't run from the cops...
                                Officer, I borrowed these pants!

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 2813 users online. 181 members and 2632 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X