Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Hella May
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 10:31:00 -
[1]
shot 5 times! Pwn'd!
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1189920,00.html
Let's get this straight, if a girl has to be "rescued" 10 times a week from a brothel shes not a damsel but a prostitute.
|
Ikvar
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 11:30:00 -
[2]
Best way to deal with 'em. __________________
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 11:36:00 -
[3]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 11:36:19
Originally by: Ikvar Best way to deal with 'em.
Isreal used to sew up the bodies of suicide bombers in pigs so they couldnt go to allah heaven or whatever they call it, and when they stopped doing that because of the liberal whiners the amount of bombers went up.
Course it would never happen here though, might offend someone
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Tasty Burger
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 11:52:00 -
[4]
Originally by: 0seeker0 Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 11:36:19
Originally by: Ikvar Best way to deal with 'em.
Isreal used to sew up the bodies of suicide bombers in pigs so they couldnt go to allah heaven or whatever they call it, and when they stopped doing that because of the liberal whiners the amount of bombers went up.
Course it would never happen here though, might offend someone
**** u
kthxdie
|
Degarion Soth
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 11:56:00 -
[5]
Sewed up in pigs carcasses? Thats a pretty good idea!
The arrogance of these suicide bombers who believe that killing innocent people is somehow 'godly' beggars belief.
and shot 5 times, pwned indeed. Now hang out the body upside down by his entrails and let passers by spit on his corpse and kick him in the face.
|
Ikvar
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 11:59:00 -
[6]
Omg it's a suicide bomber alt
Originally by: Tasty Burger
Originally by: 0seeker0 Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 11:36:19
Originally by: Ikvar Best way to deal with 'em.
Isreal used to sew up the bodies of suicide bombers in pigs so they couldnt go to allah heaven or whatever they call it, and when they stopped doing that because of the liberal whiners the amount of bombers went up.
Course it would never happen here though, might offend someone
**** u
kthxdie
__________________
|
Jernau Gurgeh
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:00:00 -
[7]
All of this assumes that the bloke killed was actually a suicide bomber, and not some poor sap who ran because he had some drugs on him, or was an illegal immigrant.
There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not. |
Tania Silk
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:05:00 -
[8]
Guess this thread also gonna be omfgpwned.
|
FireFoxx80
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:12:00 -
[9]
Still, chasing someone onto the tube, bundling them, and unloading 5 in the chest.
*x-files music*
ex: P-TMC | USAC |
Hella May
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:25:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh All of this assumes that the bloke killed was actually a suicide bomber, and not some poor sap who ran because he had some drugs on him, or was an illegal immigrant.
Yes I had thought of that.... I guess 5 bullets to the back means he is kinda dead guilty or not. Still if they didnt shoot him and he then blew lots of people up, we would all be a bit ****ed off!
As for the pig thing.... tis a bit sick imo.
I do wonder why we as tax payers have to pay for for murderers to live in 5* jails with TV and room service. A bullet is a lot cheaper (although 5 is pushing it a bit).
Let's get this straight, if a girl has to be "rescued" 10 times a week from a brothel shes not a damsel but a prostitute.
|
|
Degarion Soth
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:28:00 -
[11]
I do wonder why we as tax payers have to pay for for murderers to live in 5* jails with TV and room service. A bullet is a lot cheaper (although 5 is pushing it a bit).
Better safe than sorry - the git could have had explosives on him and if your stood 2 feet away you wanna make sure he's dead.
Oh - death penalty? Definately bring it back for these bombers and their associates.
|
Jernau Gurgeh
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:32:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Jernau Gurgeh on 22/07/2005 12:38:20
Originally by: Degarion Soth Better safe than sorry - the git could have had explosives on him and if your stood 2 feet away you wanna make sure he's dead.
* Eyewitness reports state that he did not have a bag on him.
* If he did have a bomb and was connected to the previous attacks, it's very likely that it wouldn't have gone off as acetone peroxide has a limited shelf life (as happened yesterday).
* If he were a suicide bomber with a working bomb, he would have detonated the bomb before police got to within three feet of him.
Originally by: Degarion Soth Oh - death penalty? Definately bring it back for these bombers and their associates.
I'm sure that the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six would agree with you there.
There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not. |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:36:00 -
[13]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 12:36:21 A security expert explained the 5 bullets like so;
You know air marshals (american air police) use 9mm low velocity rounds, so they dont puncture the skin of the plane if it passes through the terrorists body, well, he recons there are similar weapons in use with some armed police.
As we know they use modified H&k's as thier main weapons with a pistol as backup, and the shot's were supposed to be delivered at very close range by a (black) pistol, so it could be that it want so much overkill as you might think, they just didnt want bullets bouncing around the station.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Degarion Soth
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:46:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh
Originally by: Degarion Soth
Oh - death penalty? Definately bring it back for these bombers and their associates.
I'm sure that the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six would agree with you there.
Well you need to have some belief in your criminal courts to determine if they are guilty or not. Obviously in some occasions they make mistakes, but on the whole if you work on the premise that you cannot trust the courts then you may as well not bother locking up anyone at all...
|
Jernau Gurgeh
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:48:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Degarion Soth
Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh
Originally by: Degarion Soth
Oh - death penalty? Definately bring it back for these bombers and their associates.
I'm sure that the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six would agree with you there.
Well you need to have some belief in your criminal courts to determine if they are guilty or not. Obviously in some occasions they make mistakes, but on the whole if you work on the premise that you cannot trust the courts then you may as well not bother locking up anyone at all...
But at least if you lock up someone who's innocent, you can release them.
There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not. |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:51:00 -
[16]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 12:51:35 We have a saying in this country, that it "is better that 12 guilty people go free than 1 innocent person is convicted"
Does that translate to it being better that 12 innocent people are killed than one suspected suicide bomber who resists arrest in a crowded place is killed?
Not in my book.
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Jernau Gurgeh
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 12:55:00 -
[17]
If you kill an innocent person by mistake, you've failed to protect the public.
If you kill a guilty person, you've both created a martyr and lost vital evidence as dead men tell no tales.
Either way, you've lost.
There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not. |
Weeman
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:01:00 -
[18]
Right lets get one thing straight. When armed police say...
"Stop! Armed Police!"
..You dont then turn around and run away and expect not to get tangoed down with a 9mm in the back of your head, simple as.
Also this talk of 5 shots is more than likely to be very wrong, witness reports are incredibly and notoriously unreliable. People who are not used to hearing gunshots will almost certainly panic uncontrollably (as demonstrated by everyone pegging it out of the station) and wont be in a position to say "the police jumped on him and slotted him with 5 bullets in the back of his noggin".
Just wait for the police report on the 10pm news tonight eh.. :)
Nerf Resistance/Rank 5/SP: 1240731 of 1280000 |
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:05:00 -
[19]
Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 13:06:28 http://www.lookatentertainment.com/v/v-309.htm
Is the hilarious result of combining a pistol, an american cop, a pot head and a dungeons and dragons.
Ok, so its off topic, but if our cops were always as forcefull as this, id sleep easier, and laugh louder
Now, tell me that aint funny
(im wearing boots of escaping!, wearing boots of escaping!, PMSLMAO)
Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Tania Silk
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:07:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Weeman
Just wait for the police report on the 10pm news tonight eh.. :)
And we know we can trust police. Secret services too.
|
|
Degarion Soth
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:09:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh If you kill an innocent person by mistake, you've failed to protect the public.
If you kill a guilty person, you've both created a martyr and lost vital evidence as dead men tell no tales.
Either way, you've lost.
Although you ahve valid points, in this instance your wrong. Although nothing has beed released yet, the police probably didnt know if he had any explosives on his body that he could set off - so the safest way to protect the public would be to shoot him dead. I am sure if they could they would have not killed him and took him in for questioning, but i doubt they had the chance.
If we are speaking in a more general terms your logic is false again. These people are suicide bombers, if we dont kill them then they will kill themselves (and take out innocents with them) - either way being a matyr. But which option is preferable to the public?
If we incarcerate them, then chances are they will get out in 20 or so years (maybe using some sort of human rights or persecustion law crap) and go on to spread hatred again like some of these radical islamic militant clerics we here about all the time. In this age it is an unfortunate fact that to keep the majority of the public safe them some individual freedoms are sometimes taken away. Its a trade-off most law abiding people are happy with.
|
Degarion Soth
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:10:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Tania Silk
Originally by: Weeman
Just wait for the police report on the 10pm news tonight eh.. :)
And we know we can trust police. Secret services too.
Well generally i think you can - but you can be too paranoid you know
|
Jernau Gurgeh
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:20:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Jernau Gurgeh on 22/07/2005 13:24:10
Originally by: Degarion Soth
Although nothing has beed released yet, the police probably didnt know if he had any explosives on his body that he could set off - so the safest way to protect the public would be to shoot him dead. I am sure if they could they would have not killed him and took him in for questioning, but i doubt they had the chance.
If you're being held down by three police officers, you're not going to be able to detonate a bomb.
And I doubt very much if he did have a bomb on him anyway.
There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not. |
Saladin
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:24:00 -
[24]
That pig comment was just awful, and likely only an urban legend. While muslims do have burial rites, there is no method that would stop someone from receiving what they deserve (good or bad), be they sown up in a pig or otherwise. If it did happen, makes me regret we afforded Israeli prisoners the protection of the geneva convention. |
FireFoxx80
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:25:00 -
[25]
Originally by: 0seeker0 Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 12:44:23
A security expert explained the 5 bullets like so;
You know air marshals (american air police) use 9mm low velocity rounds, so they dont puncture the skin of the plane if it passes through the terrorists body, well, he recons there are similar weapons in use with some armed police.
As we know they use modified H&k's as thier main weapons with a pistol as backup, and the shot's were supposed to be delivered at very close range by a pistol, so it could be that it wasnt so much overkill as you might think, they just didnt want bullets bouncing around the station.
Yeah, but rounds that go through the body are more humane. The low-velocity rounds have a habit of getting lodged in organs, which are a tad tricky to get out again.
Though saying that, NATO rounds are 5.56mm, since 7.62mm rounds (fired by an AK47 for example are quite dangerous.
ex: P-TMC | USAC |
Degarion Soth
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:28:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Degarion Soth on 22/07/2005 13:29:08
Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh Edited by: Jernau Gurgeh on 22/07/2005 13:24:10
Originally by: Degarion Soth
Although nothing has beed released yet, the police probably didnt know if he had any explosives on his body that he could set off - so the safest way to protect the public would be to shoot him dead. I am sure if they could they would have not killed him and took him in for questioning, but i doubt they had the chance.
If you're being held down by three police officers, you're not going to be able to detonate a bomb.
And I doubt very much if he did have a bomb on him anyway.
It does sound like you are trying to defend this idiot. As another chap said, lets wait till we hear an official statement from the police before you start judging their procedures to be too harsh. At the moment we have no idea what sort of danger he posed, but it doesnt stop armchair liberals like yourself defending them.
|
0seeker0
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:31:00 -
[27]
Originally by: FireFoxx80
Though saying that, NATO rounds are 5.56mm, since 7.62mm rounds (fired by an AK47 for example are quite dangerous.
Thats the point! Character "Widescreen" is a scammer; beware.
Check my bio for a list of known scammers.
|
Jernau Gurgeh
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:34:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Jernau Gurgeh on 22/07/2005 13:35:38
Originally by: Degarion Soth Edited by: Degarion Soth on 22/07/2005 13:29:08
Originally by: Jernau Gurgeh Edited by: Jernau Gurgeh on 22/07/2005 13:24:10
Originally by: Degarion Soth
Although nothing has beed released yet, the police probably didnt know if he had any explosives on his body that he could set off - so the safest way to protect the public would be to shoot him dead. I am sure if they could they would have not killed him and took him in for questioning, but i doubt they had the chance.
If you're being held down by three police officers, you're not going to be able to detonate a bomb.
And I doubt very much if he did have a bomb on him anyway.
It does sound like you are trying to defend this idiot. As another chap said, lets wait till we hear an official statement from the police before you start judging their procedures to be too harsh. At the moment we have no idea what sort of danger he posed, but it doesnt stop armchair liberals like yourself defending them.
I'm a liberal so my comments aren't valid, eh?
Actually, I'm not trying to defend him (although with our legal system he is entitled to a defence) if he was involved in bombing. Shooting people needlessly and blowing people up needlessly are both wrong, OK?
And I hear that there's a press conference at 2:45 BST.
There are 10 sorts of people in the world - those who understand binary, and those who do not. |
Ikvar
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:35:00 -
[29]
Originally by: FireFoxx80
Originally by: 0seeker0 Edited by: 0seeker0 on 22/07/2005 12:44:23
A security expert explained the 5 bullets like so;
You know air marshals (american air police) use 9mm low velocity rounds, so they dont puncture the skin of the plane if it passes through the terrorists body, well, he recons there are similar weapons in use with some armed police.
As we know they use modified H&k's as thier main weapons with a pistol as backup, and the shot's were supposed to be delivered at very close range by a pistol, so it could be that it wasnt so much overkill as you might think, they just didnt want bullets bouncing around the station.
Yeah, but rounds that go through the body are more humane. The low-velocity rounds have a habit of getting lodged in organs, which are a tad tricky to get out again.
Though saying that, NATO rounds are 5.56mm, since 7.62mm rounds (fired by an AK47 for example are quite dangerous.
They switched to 5.56 'cos it's a less dangerous round?
Recoil mate, recoil. (Also, the ammunition the original AK47 is chambered for are 7.62x39, where as 7.62 NATO is 7.62x51) __________________
|
Stogee
|
Posted - 2005.07.22 13:39:00 -
[30]
Just because he didnt have a rucksack or a bag doesnt mean he didnt have a bomb.
Article says he was wearing a long coat, therefore it is feasible that he could of have conealed some sort of bomb strapped to his chest. Which, when you think about it, wouldnt be surprising since all 8 attacks thus far have involved the bombs being in rucksacks. Carrying a rucksack would attract suspicion.
Firstly he shouldnt of run, period, I dont care what anyone else says on this forum on that matter. I think the police were right to open fire. The officer that took action had to think quick, the guy was almost on the train, if he had gotten on he could of detenated a bomb if he had one.
Would you rather kill one man or potentially have the lives of many on your concious?
However, if the police were that close it sounds like they could of possibly gotten away with shooting him once to stop him and then restrained him. There were multiple officers in pursuit after all. But of course that would of been risky.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |