| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Poreuomai
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
   |
Posted - 2008.12.12 14:43:00 -
[1]
BBC NEWS
They were only given two options by the judge: Lawful killing or open verdict, and chose open verdict.
Let My People Go |
Gaiam
Gallente
Supernova Security Systems
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 14:54:00 -
[2]
police are the real terrorists
|
kor anon
Amarr
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 14:58:00 -
[3]
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
|
Kalam Orlong
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:10:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
so it is OK to kill the innocent in the off chance that you may stop someone who might kill again?
|
Xen Gin
Universal Mining Inc
Forged Dominion
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:13:00 -
[5]
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
I'd rather they had not killed an innocent man through proper training, than let a real murderer escape by poor commanding decisions, bad planning and training.
It's been proven that the Met and the officers involved lied in order to make things look more favourable for them after they shot a wholly innocent man dead, who did nothing to cast suspicion upon him.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:14:00 -
[6]
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
Why not end yourself now and spare yourself a possibly agonizing death? 
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:16:00 -
[7]
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
You wouldn't be saying that if it was your son that had been needlessly gunned down by the police
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Xen Gin
Universal Mining Inc
Forged Dominion
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:17:00 -
[8]
I have more faith in knowing the terrorists will fail to make a working bomb, than armed Met officers trying to stop someone going about his daily business.
|
Madius
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:26:00 -
[9]
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
And I'd rather live in a country founded on the principles of truth and justice.
Killing an innocent man isn't vigilance, it's murder.
|
mamolian
Cruoris Seraphim
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:32:00 -
[10]
Edited by: mamolian on 12/12/2008 15:31:49
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
I'm at a loss for words.. Oh wai.. I found them. Your a ****ing moron.
-----------
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:38:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Danton Marcellus
Why not end yourself now and spare yourself a possibly agonizing death?
Grow up for christ's sake, its only his opinion.
Originally by: Madius
And I'd rather live in a country founded on the principles of truth and justice.
Haha, What world are you living in?
The human mind makes terrible snap decisions as it is, and when you're proposed with "IF" and quite simply "IF" this man is a terrorist, are you going to let him continue on his way and POSSIBLY kill tens or hundreds of people, or are you going to stop him there and then?
Hundreds of people die a day, the only reason this is such a big deal because it happened in the limp-wristed, gun-scared UK where people just don't have the balls to accept that accidents happen if you give authority the ability to use force.
They're treating this like it was the death of an entire station full of people. It was one guy.
If our police force can't back up their armed officers decisions in the field, then they should revoke their ability to carry weapons in the first place.
|
ReaperOfSly
Gallente
Zetsubou Corp
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:42:00 -
[12]
Why did the judge only give them those two options? He old the jury specifically that they weren't allowed to return a verdict of unlawful killing. But what else is it? A guy was killed, it was unlawful to do so, thus unlawful killing? Any armchair lawyers here who can explain that to me? 
____________________
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:51:00 -
[13]
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
Why did the judge only give them those two options? He old the jury specifically that they weren't allowed to return a verdict of unlawful killing. But what else is it?
It was police action, so it was "lawful" - but a mistake. Something like that.
At the end of the day, it hasn't been until now that our police has really had an active armed unit. Their instructions are to shoot to kill on an identified target, and they obviously thought they'd identified a target.
This decision to shoot was made by a human being. Therefore it was bound to contain a substantially high factor of error.
In their training they are told NOT to give a warning to an identified target as this would give him a chance to detonate his bomb. (In the instance that he WAS a terrorist anyway).
Safe to say, the method is flawed. But if you don't want to get shot in the head with a hollowpoint round whilst travelling on a subway after a series of bombings, my advice would be;
Don't use public transport straight after a series of bombings. Especially if you're not of 100% british descent.
|
Dr Slaughter
Minmatar
Rabies Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 15:55:00 -
[14]
Of course, if the guy had gone home when his visa ran out rather than staying here to work illegally he wouldn't have been here to be shot.
I wonder if he had any legal certifications for his profession, I wonder if he had professional insurance, or life -sic- insurance. It's unforunate this illegal worker has postumously has cost the UK millions.
Or has my attempts at avoiding this entire story made me miss some key facts?
I'm unsuprised it was not 'lawful killing' as, after all, he wasn't a terrorist.
~~~~
There is no parody in this thread. Honest. |
kor anon
Amarr
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:06:00 -
[15]
Half the people who have posted are living in a magical pixie land. Where the police are expected to be robots and be right all the time. It is a shame the man died no doubt about it. What would have happened if he was a terrorist and the police didn't shoot because 'they wern't sure'? then you may have another dozen deaths on your hands. The Police followed procedure and used deadly force as they should have, it was just poor intel, but they couldn't take the chance.
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:12:00 -
[16]
Originally by: kor anon
Half the people who have posted are living in a magical pixie land. Where the police are expected to be robots and be right all the time. It is a shame the man died no doubt about it. What would have happened if he was a terrorist and the police didn't shoot because 'they wern't sure'? then you may have another dozen deaths on your hands. The Police followed procedure and used deadly force as they should have, it was just poor intel, but they couldn't take the chance.
This.
Unfortunately most of EVE are actually bleeding heart liberals, despite the nature of this game.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:14:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/12/2008 16:15:46
Originally by: kor anon
Half the people who have posted are living in a magical pixie land. Where the police are expected to be robots and be right all the time. It is a shame the man died no doubt about it. What would have happened if he was a terrorist and the police didn't shoot because 'they wern't sure'? then you may have another dozen deaths on your hands. The Police followed procedure and used deadly force as they should have, it was just poor intel, but they couldn't take the chance.
The problem is that they didn't follow procedure
* They didn't have the required number of officers watching the block of flats
* They didn't take the opportunity to apprehend him non-violently when they had the chance
* They didn't shout appropriate warnings
If the police had poor intel, it was their own fault.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Dr Slaughter
Minmatar
Rabies Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:14:00 -
[18]
Originally by: kor anon
Half the people who have posted are living in a magical pixie land. Where the police are expected to be robots and be right all the time. It is a shame the man died no doubt about it. What would have happened if he was a terrorist and the police didn't shoot because 'they wern't sure'? then you may have another dozen deaths on your hands. The Police followed procedure and used deadly force as they should have, it was just poor intel, but they couldn't take the chance.
^^^ this ^^^
~~~~
There is no parody in this thread. Honest. |
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:18:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
The problem is that they didn't follow procedure
* They didn't have the required number of officers watching the block of flats
* They didn't take the opportunity to apprehend him non-violently when they had the chance
* They didn't shout appropriate warnings
They DID follow procedure.
This is the procedure our Police follow, concerning potential terrorist threats.
If someone has a bomb strapped to them, you do not yell at them, you do not jump on them, you do not make it known that you know they may have a bomb on them.
You shoot them.
In a world full of uncertainty, accidents happen.
To coin a phrase - Better safe than sorry.
In this case they were sorry... but they would have been a whole lot more sorry if they ended up causing the death of hundreds of people because they didn't act.
|
kor anon
Amarr
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:20:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Edited by: Rodj Blake on 12/12/2008 16:15:46
Originally by: kor anon
Half the people who have posted are living in a magical pixie land. Where the police are expected to be robots and be right all the time. It is a shame the man died no doubt about it. What would have happened if he was a terrorist and the police didn't shoot because 'they wern't sure'? then you may have another dozen deaths on your hands. The Police followed procedure and used deadly force as they should have, it was just poor intel, but they couldn't take the chance.
The problem is that they didn't follow procedure
* They didn't have the required number of officers watching the block of flats
* They didn't take the opportunity to apprehend him non-violently when they had the chance
* They didn't shout appropriate warnings
If the police had poor intel, it was their own fault.
1. Shortage of police, have you heard of it? (stupid government budget cuts)
2. Maybe, but thats a snap decision to be made on the spot, neither of us can know what circumstances forced that decision
3. Lol lets warn someone that may be carryin a bomb, give him a running chance . No you take him out cleanly and quickly before he has a chance to react
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:22:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Reven Cordelle
Originally by: Rodj Blake
The problem is that they didn't follow procedure
* They didn't have the required number of officers watching the block of flats
* They didn't take the opportunity to apprehend him non-violently when they had the chance
* They didn't shout appropriate warnings
They DID follow procedure.
This is the procedure our Police follow, concerning potential terrorist threats.
If someone has a bomb strapped to them, you do not yell at them, you do not jump on them, you do not make it known that you know they may have a bomb on them.
You shoot them.
In a world full of uncertainty, accidents happen.
To coin a phrase - Better safe than sorry.
In this case they were sorry... but they would have been a whole lot more sorry if they ended up causing the death of hundreds of people because they didn't act.
Except that he didn't have a bomb strapped to him, did he?
In fact, rather than wearing a bulky overcoat as was claimed at the time he was wearing an open denim jacket. Hardly a lot of room to conceal a bomb capable of killing hundreds there.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:24:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Except that he didn't have a bomb strapped to him, did he?
In fact, rather than wearing a bulky overcoat as was claimed at the time he was wearing an open denim jacket. Hardly a lot of room to conceal a bomb capable of killing hundreds there.
And you know that for certain don't you.
You were there at the exact time they shot him weren't you.
Backpack perhaps?
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:28:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Reven Cordelle
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Except that he didn't have a bomb strapped to him, did he?
In fact, rather than wearing a bulky overcoat as was claimed at the time he was wearing an open denim jacket. Hardly a lot of room to conceal a bomb capable of killing hundreds there.
And you know that for certain don't you.
You were there at the exact time they shot him weren't you.
Backpack perhaps?
He didn't have a backpack either.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:30:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
He didn't have a backpack either.
Sources kthx.
Something made the Police doubt him in the first place. Strangely enough, the UK police aren't just trigger happy idiots.
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:31:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Reven Cordelle
Originally by: Rodj Blake
He didn't have a backpack either.
Sources kthx.
Something made the Police doubt him in the first place. Strangely enough, the UK police aren't just trigger happy idiots.
Source
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Jacob Mei
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:31:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Jacob Mei on 12/12/2008 16:32:10
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
Be sure to say that again when its someone you know or someone in your family, im sure their families will take great comfort in the idea that the police killed their loved one on the assumption that he was a suicide bomber.
--------------------------------
To borrow a phrase:
Players who post are like stars, there are bright ones and those who are dim.
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:34:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Reven Cordelle on 12/12/2008 16:34:14
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Source
Recent bombing + Sketchy looking dude + Mobile phones which are used to detonate bombs = Reason to suspect.
Safe to say.
Normally, no. But in the proximity to recent events that shook England, yes - reason to suspect.
Edit - Removed Pyramid.
|
Reven Cordelle
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:35:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Jacob Mei
Be sure to say that again when its someone you know or someone in your family, im sure their families will take great comfort in the idea that the police killed their loved one on the assumption that he was a suicide bomber.
How about this one.
"We regret to inform you of the death of your loved one and 240 additional innocent people as our Police force failed to act on a suspected terrorist threat."
|
Eomar
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:37:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Originally by: Reven Cordelle
Originally by: Rodj Blake
The problem is that they didn't follow procedure
* They didn't have the required number of officers watching the block of flats
* They didn't take the opportunity to apprehend him non-violently when they had the chance
* They didn't shout appropriate warnings
They DID follow procedure.
This is the procedure our Police follow, concerning potential terrorist threats.
If someone has a bomb strapped to them, you do not yell at them, you do not jump on them, you do not make it known that you know they may have a bomb on them.
You shoot them.
In a world full of uncertainty, accidents happen.
To coin a phrase - Better safe than sorry.
In this case they were sorry... but they would have been a whole lot more sorry if they ended up causing the death of hundreds of people because they didn't act.
Except that he didn't have a bomb strapped to him, did he?
In fact, rather than wearing a bulky overcoat as was claimed at the time he was wearing an open denim jacket. Hardly a lot of room to conceal a bomb capable of killing hundreds there.
I could make and conceal a bomb capable of killing an awful lot of people in something the size of a cigarette packet.
There were a lot of mistakes made, and theres been a massive amount of fallout because of it, however those firearms officers did nothing wrong.
They were acting on the most current intelligence theyd been given, they believed they were engaging a suicide bomber.
The ONLY way you deal with that is to fire a killing shot.
At no stage do you call a warning (you certainly dont fire warning shots)
Awful lot of people calling for the suspension of the "shoot to kill policy" too. They fail to grasp the basics of firearms operations.
You only open fire with the intention of killing someone. ever. no warning shots, no wounding shots. If there is room for a wounding shot then there are other ways of dealing with the situation and thus no need to open fire at all.
There are a fair few eve players whove had training spotting and dealing with suicide bombers, quite a few will also have had to deal with it for real too.
Its not easy, a suicide bomber could be ANYONE, theyre often fanatical/indoctrinated enough to believe what theyre doing is absolutely right, and thus look no more worried about it than you do when youre going to work, as i said before i can make explosives systems you wouldnt notice, including triggers, anyone with the most basic training can, and these guys go way beyond basic. Its not like the movies (not always anyway) with some guy wearing a turban and robes, sweating a lot, and running at you screaming god is great. Could be the normal suit wearing guy with his briefcase and expensive watch sat next to you on the bus.
Get a grip people, this aint a ****ing daycare centre. mistakes happened, they shouldnt have, and changes need to be made (have already in fact) but this whole witchhunt *******s needs to stop. it helps NOONE and wont bring him back.
...in accordance with the prophecy |
kor anon
Amarr
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 16:39:00 -
[30]
Edited by: kor anon on 12/12/2008 16:39:05
Originally by: Jacob Mei
Edited by: Jacob Mei on 12/12/2008 16:32:10
Originally by: kor anon
a shame that an innocent man was shot, but these things happen. Id rather they had killed an innocent man through vigilance, then let a real murderer escape by hesitation.
Be sure to say that again when its someone you know or someone in your family, im sure their families will take great comfort in the idea that the police killed their loved one on the assumption that he was a suicide bomber.
I would snap out just like this poor man's family. It part of the mourning process to want someone to blame, the family wants closure i understand that. But I am thinking from an outside perspective, and i am thinking of the big picture.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |