posted
Well it may have been eight shooters or four shooters double-tapping or Roland of Geliad could have been there...
Or they just shot him a bunch of extra times.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
If you mean to kill someone, then you had better make sure you've done the job. I presume in this particular instance the goal was to kill the man before he could set off his bomb, in such a way that wouldn't leave him even the few moments required to squeeze a trigger.
I don't mean to come off sounding like Ender here; it's just that it seems to me that the problem here is gunning down innocents, the acceptability of which doesn't grow the more politely its done.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: They were pretty precise though- their shots found their target and I've not heard of any stray shots or unintended casualties.
Considering that they had the guy restrained and were sitting on top of him, then I'd have been even more appalled if they'd actually missed him.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
That's something I've only heard recently- some of the news reports said the victim was shot standing up and one said he was running.
That was a week ago though- I'm lowtech just now and am getting my news from local papers (your most shocking headlines page 13 over here- if at all)
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: If you mean to kill someone, then you had better make sure you've done the job. I presume in this particular instance the goal was to kill the man before he could set off his bomb, in such a way that wouldn't leave him even the few moments required to squeeze a trigger.
But if he was being restrained, would that not have placed the officers in imminent danger of being blown up? Why restrain the suspect at all if your intent is to kill them?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
"Why restrain the suspect at all if your intent is to kill them?"
Well, I don't have even an interested amateur's knowledge of the specifics, but perhaps to prevent the activation of a dead man's switch?
Regardless of how these tactics are designed to work, I think it's clear that they were horribly misapplied, and perhaps need to be reconsidered. On the other hand, as you say, there's still no consensus about what actually happened.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
So it turns out that, rightness or wrongness of shooting people who may be about to blow up other people aside, this guy wasn't actually doing any of the things originally reported.
quote:and after the 7 July attacks tube boses could have been expected to make extra efforts to see that all their cameras were in action
Why, is that a media scapegoat I see on the horizon?
I think we may be seeing the name of mr. "Tube Boss" (a gayer title is tough to imagine, BTW) in a old-fashioned government witchhunt.
...er...I meant "inquiry", of course.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, we only have the police's word for it that none of the cameras were working. If the cameras show (as they probably do) members of the Army's Special Reconnaisance Regiment (the uber-SAS they've set up) gleefully 'slotting' someone who doesn't even look of potentially-Muslim ethnicity, then you can be damned sure the official line is those cameras weren't working.
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
The inquiry comes as the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, announced an expansion of his firearms unit to cope with the new terrorist threat.
(...)
Blair believes there will be no shortage of volunteers for firearms duty, insisting the officers feel 'very well supported' by the force.
Hiring more gung-ho officers to quell unrest and FIHGT TEH TEROSITS in a city that's practically an armed timebomb at this point. For great strategy.
He insists the shoot-to-kill policy is the 'least worst' way of tackling suicide bombers and refuses to rule out other innocent people being shot in similar circumstances. 'I am not certain the tactic we have is the right tactic, but it is the best we have found so far.'
"So far". Two innocent people were brutally killed because of a policy that's been in place for less than two months, but still it's the best "so far". I don't think Jean Charles would quite see the logic in that.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, mabye Blair is the "least worst" person to be making such decisions.
Could be worse though- you could have Bush in charge.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
