London police station besieged by gang supporters
- Thread starter bengasman
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Yes, in this case he was wanted by the Police.
However, with all their resources available, it is difficult for me to see why they have a policy of shoot to kill.
I know the explanation! I used to go out with a very large and lovely policewoman from Brum who was firearms trained and a Class I driver who took pleasure in driving my BBC company car at 105 mph on the motorway. She would only let me drive it at 95 though. But that was in the 1990s before so many automatic speeding devices.
Of course the local people see him as a father rather than a villain!
However, with all their resources available, it is difficult for me to see why they have a policy of shoot to kill.
I know the explanation! I used to go out with a very large and lovely policewoman from Brum who was firearms trained and a Class I driver who took pleasure in driving my BBC company car at 105 mph on the motorway. She would only let me drive it at 95 though. But that was in the 1990s before so many automatic speeding devices.
Of course the local people see him as a father rather than a villain!
The riots in london make me laght, the fact most of the rioters on the street could not even tell you the name of the man who got shot be the police. The rioters are just on the streets for a laught bacause there mates are out there throwing stones and bricks. And they can get away with it.
The police are too scared to fight back due to upsetting the rioters and harming peoples human rights.
Like when roiting goes on in Northen Ireland the PSNI just stand there and shoot the water cannon at the rioters they are too scared to hit the roiters due to human rights and community relations.
When the people of Northen Ireland riot they get 15 seconds on the news. Now they riot in london and the BBC/SKY hype it up big style.
If I was in the police and someone pointed a pistol at me I would not think twice on shoting this person. I know in the army anyone rases a pistol or rifel at you, you have every right to defend yourself or anyone around you.
Now the ipcc will make the offices who shot the the man in the taxi feel like a criminal.
The police are too scared to fight back due to upsetting the rioters and harming peoples human rights.
Like when roiting goes on in Northen Ireland the PSNI just stand there and shoot the water cannon at the rioters they are too scared to hit the roiters due to human rights and community relations.
When the people of Northen Ireland riot they get 15 seconds on the news. Now they riot in london and the BBC/SKY hype it up big style.
If I was in the police and someone pointed a pistol at me I would not think twice on shoting this person. I know in the army anyone rases a pistol or rifel at you, you have every right to defend yourself or anyone around you.
Now the ipcc will make the offices who shot the the man in the taxi feel like a criminal.
I can't understand all the p u s s y footing, lily livered, liberals slagging of the police over this incident.
This guy was a villain. He shot at the police. What are they supposed to do? Stand there and ask him very nicely if he wouldn't mind putting down his weapon and slipping on a pair of designer hand cuffs.
As for the tossers who rioted they are all just jumping on the band wagon as an excuse to go out and cause havoc. What has looting shops got to do with protesting over the shooting of some low life scum?
This guy was a villain. He shot at the police. What are they supposed to do? Stand there and ask him very nicely if he wouldn't mind putting down his weapon and slipping on a pair of designer hand cuffs.
As for the tossers who rioted they are all just jumping on the band wagon as an excuse to go out and cause havoc. What has looting shops got to do with protesting over the shooting of some low life scum?
Sponsored Links
Thats another useful post Tony.
What the f%*k has a fat bird got to do with London shooting.
I do belive your loosing the plot.
I rather think that you are missing the point that I am making.
The police standing instructions are to shoot to kill if they think they are being threatened by a firearm. They are only trained to shoot at the heart as that is the area which is most likely to incapacitate the target most quickly.
My point is that when the Police have a plan to take someone as in this case they dont have any intention to use stun grenades, tazers, tranquilising darts or other non lethal means but solely a plan to shoot to kill if the target does anything other than put his hands up immediately.
When they do shoot someone like the Brazilian or that drunken lawyer they then come up with reasons for shooting them which are often later shown to have been made up.
In this case the Police initially said the target had shot at them and an officer's life was saved because the bullet lodged in a police radio. Now the newspapers are saying that it was a police bullet !
The police standing instructions are to shoot to kill if they think they are being threatened by a firearm. They are only trained to shoot at the heart as that is the area which is most likely to incapacitate the target most quickly.
My point is that when the Police have a plan to take someone as in this case they dont have any intention to use stun grenades, tazers, tranquilising darts or other non lethal means but solely a plan to shoot to kill if the target does anything other than put his hands up immediately.
When they do shoot someone like the Brazilian or that drunken lawyer they then come up with reasons for shooting them which are often later shown to have been made up.
In this case the Police initially said the target had shot at them and an officer's life was saved because the bullet lodged in a police radio. Now the newspapers are saying that it was a police bullet !
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2006
- Messages
- 31,341
- Reaction score
- 10,823
- Country
Sometimes I wonder what planet your on.
If you issue guns then there will always be a policy of minimum force,it's not shoot to kill but that's the reality of what happens when your hit by a bullet.
At the end of the day re guy fired at the police,what would you be saying if te police hadn't returned fire and used all there resources to just wait for him to give up,but in the mean time he killed a dozen or more people.
Maybe it's that you've never fired a weapon,but you can't shoot to maim,various reasons,but one of them is that if you aim at his leg(shoot to maim) and miss, bu kill the little kid that was 100yards behind him what do you day to that. It's hard enough to hit the body when being shot at let alone take out limbs.
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2006
- Messages
- 31,341
- Reaction score
- 10,823
- Country
Again the rules are not shoot to kill,that's James bond stuff.the rules are minimum force necessary,if that force is address to be use of firearms then so beit.
You are taught to fire at central mass,it's just unfortunate that that area contains the primary organs.
In extreme cases head shots are required,unlike chickens when our brain stops so does our body.
You must read different papers than those I can find; I have not seen anything saying that.
I dont trust the police when it comes down to stuff like this. Jean Charles de Menezes shooting was a classic example of miss info released to hide the fact they made a balls up.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/07/police-attack-london-burns
I dont know the real facts... but I not taking anything the police say on face value.
the damage the riots caused are horrible criminal acts but maybe they know the truth better then I do?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/07/police-attack-london-burns
I dont know the real facts... but I not taking anything the police say on face value.
the damage the riots caused are horrible criminal acts but maybe they know the truth better then I do?
It does not matter at all what the actual facts of the shooting are.
I don't care if it turns out that Duggan was a canonised pacifist who spent his life administering to the poor and needy, and was shot whilst standing still with his hands in the air and for no other reason than pure racism.
NOTHING justifies looting or rioting or setting light to houses and shops; anyone caught for that should be tried for attempted murder, or actual murder if anyone died in those fires.
The shooting was just an excuse for thugs to start another round of crimes.
Have you ever heard of white people starting to riot after a fellow caucasian was killed by an ethnic?
I just don't understand how pinching a TV is getting justice for the family.
I don't understand how a community leader 'suggests' that the dead mans gun was in a sock (whether ready to fire or not) is a news story that can be cross checked and reported to be taken as fact yet (by one newspaper).
You're a whole different person when you're scared whether you have a gun or not so there are a lot of nerves at play in that situation.
You can't trust what anyone says in this type of scenario, but until I learn otherwise I personally err on the side of someone doing a difficult job for money rather than someone walking out a shop with stolen goods or hoping to be voted into a council or parliament. (I have not always been served well by the police but it's simply maths; what are the odds).
When the guns are out minimum force becomes rather a redundant term. I was taught go for centre mass because that's precisely where the major organs are and unless your hoping to kill what you're shooting at you shouldn't be shooting at it; two body one head.
Better to be judged by twelve than carried by four.
White people riot just the same as others and I understand did so last night.
On a slightly different note I get fed up with politicians apologizing on my behalf for the UK robbing countries or the slave trade before I was born. Has anyone heard anyone from the area apologizing for the actions of their family, ethnic group, friends or neighbours? You are simply what your actions reveal you to be, not what you say you or others will do or have done. Generalities are meaningless.
I don't understand how a community leader 'suggests' that the dead mans gun was in a sock (whether ready to fire or not) is a news story that can be cross checked and reported to be taken as fact yet (by one newspaper).
You're a whole different person when you're scared whether you have a gun or not so there are a lot of nerves at play in that situation.
You can't trust what anyone says in this type of scenario, but until I learn otherwise I personally err on the side of someone doing a difficult job for money rather than someone walking out a shop with stolen goods or hoping to be voted into a council or parliament. (I have not always been served well by the police but it's simply maths; what are the odds).
When the guns are out minimum force becomes rather a redundant term. I was taught go for centre mass because that's precisely where the major organs are and unless your hoping to kill what you're shooting at you shouldn't be shooting at it; two body one head.
Better to be judged by twelve than carried by four.
White people riot just the same as others and I understand did so last night.
On a slightly different note I get fed up with politicians apologizing on my behalf for the UK robbing countries or the slave trade before I was born. Has anyone heard anyone from the area apologizing for the actions of their family, ethnic group, friends or neighbours? You are simply what your actions reveal you to be, not what you say you or others will do or have done. Generalities are meaningless.
Indeed; what they are actually saying is: whites owe blacks a great debt. It's kind of ok if you don't want to work but in stead sell drugs, kill people, rape people, rob people and generally be a menace to society because your great-great-great-great-great grandfather had a friend who had a cousin who knew somebody that was the slave of a white man.
Well, that rich white man that owned a slave many generations ago wasn't me, nor one of my ancestors, so I don't owe them shit.
Anybody who's great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather was not born on English soil, here in the UK should be deported. Period.
May be a bit extreme and generalising, but would eliminate 80% of crime IMHO.
Seriously though, what do we have, Russian gangs, Chinese gangs, Jamaican gangs, Islamic radicals etc etc.
This country is the laughing stock of the world. The sooner our politicians realise it and act accordingly the better. But we all know they won't, because that is not PC.
This country is the pits and we are becoming the minority in our own place of birth.
May be a bit extreme and generalising, but would eliminate 80% of crime IMHO.
Seriously though, what do we have, Russian gangs, Chinese gangs, Jamaican gangs, Islamic radicals etc etc.
This country is the laughing stock of the world. The sooner our politicians realise it and act accordingly the better. But we all know they won't, because that is not PC.
This country is the pits and we are becoming the minority in our own place of birth.
I'd better start packing then.
Sponsored Links