Several explosions on London Underground

[Touring Mars]

Still doesn't say anything about what, if anything, they know about this guy... I believe that they thought he was wearing a bomb-belt, and when he didn't stop when they ordered him to, he paid the price... still, the policy of 'shoot-to-kill' has alot of serious ramifications, especially if that person turns out to be totally innocent... we'll just have to watch this space on that one....

 

[Famine]

I'm not seeing the problem here.

• House in under 24 hour surveillance in connection with London Transport bombings two weeks ago.
• Man leaves house, carrying backpack. Men carrying backpacks were, of course, responsible for the London Transport bombings two weeks ago.
• Man makes way to London Transport station.
• Police attempt to detain him.
• Man flees police.
• Man ignores 3 audible warnings to stop, or risk being fired upon.
• Man is brought down by marksmen, shooting to kill, because in a public place they cannot risk hitting bystanders.

Remind me why this is bad again?

 

[TVRKing]

I'm not seeing the problem here.

• House in under 24 hour surveillance in connection with London Transport bombings two weeks ago.
• Man leaves house, carrying backpack. Men carrying backpacks were, of course, responsible for the London Transport bombings two weeks ago.
• Man makes way to London Transport station.
• Police attempt to detain him.
• Man flees police.
• Man ignores 3 audible warnings to stop, or risk being fired upon.
• Man is brought down by marksmen, shooting to kill, because in a public place they cannot risk hitting bystanders.

Remind me why this is bad again?

One witness said the guy was shot 5 times at point blank range?

Probably somebody trying to $hit stir and make the Police look bad.

 

[Famine]

By unarmed plain clothes officers. That'd be a nice trick if you can pull it off.

Armed officers must be in uniform.

 

[TVRKing]

By unarmed plain clothes officers. That'd be a nice trick if you can pull it off.

Armed officers must be in uniform.

Well that's what he said anyway.

Obviously **** stirring.

(BTW Famine, did you know that your "Fun Fact of the Week" is about 2 weeks old now? )

 

[Flame-returns]

The Police giving the order to stop were unarmed, they informed an armed member or members of the Terrorist Squad who also ordered the man to stop.

He was taken down by the plain clothes officers and shot by the armed officer. He may have been carrrying drugs, either way you do NOT run from armed police.

 

[Tacet_Blue]

Another medium.

Err...could you highlight the bit that says he did not know they were police and thought he was going to get mugged...

Officers followed him to the Stockwell Underground station. The man's "clothing and suspicious behavior at the station added to their suspicions," a police statement said.

He challenged police and refused to obey orders, before he was shot and killed Friday morning, Blair said Friday.

The fatal shooting happened when armed officers shot a man as he tried to board a train at the underground station.

 

[Flame-returns]

Eyewitness reports state that only one officer fired on him.

 

[ExigeEvan]

One witness said the guy was shot 5 times at point blank range?

Put it like this, if he did have a bomb he could have blown himself up quite easily with officers surrounding him. A simple disabling shot wouldn't have worked and I doubt they wanted to make recognition harder by blowing his face off.

 

[Flame-returns]

They didn't want him to be able to trigger the bomb. Even if an opponent is down they can still be a threat if he managed to move his hand or leg enough to trigger an explosion he would have acheived his goal.

An armed terrorist is only harmless when dead.

If you run from armed police you will get shot, that has allways been the case and it allways will be. In the UK armed police are only used in dangerous or high profile operations so if you have one chasing you it is very wise to stop.

 

[ledhed]

suicide by cop = run from armed officer .

 

[rk]

The police are unarmed in the UK, its quite amazing since a lot of the criminals have guns. Also,the police have only recently started to wear stab vests as standard issue, I think it was made compulsary after an officer was killed serving a warrant in a suspects home.

The reason that Bobby's don't carry guns is twofold. The first and main reason is that England considers itself, as a rule, a civilized society. There are no predators and, until recently, few enemy combatants. Guns are not supposed to be needed for self defense, in what would be hoped to be the rare case where a criminal has a gun, the Bobby's summon and defer to what you have described as "the armed response units." In such a society, gun ownership is strongly discouraged. There are many among my peers who have commented on the strangeness that their European or English friend has never seen a gun, except on TV. The second reason relates to the first and defines Englands progressive solution to a problem addressed by the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, the "right to bear arms."
Being the leaders of a breakaway society during a time in history when the enforcement of a states wishes through the barrel of a gun was being honed to a level of great effectiveness, our founding fathers were acutely aware of the corruption power can breed. The phrase, "he who holds the biggest gun is right" would likely have held poignent meaning for them. I will offer a few historical quotes:

" 'Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispenable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.' -- George Washington, Commanding General of the Continental Army, Father of Our Country and First President of the United States in a speech to Congress, January 7, 1790"

and

"'The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government.'

'Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants, they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.' -- -- Thomas Jefferson, Author of The Declaration of Independence, and Third President of the United States"

The detectives involved were highly trained special ops, this would not have been a rash decision.

That is a highly interpretive decision which one would hope was reserved for a "court of peers."

You say shoot first ask questions later, well I believe the warning was
"Armed police Stop", then "Stop or we will shoot", "Armed police, lie down or we will fire" and finally "Everyone get down, armed police, weapons firing"
...not the exact words but the police had time to warn the public to get out of the way...

And were you to find yourself in a land where your native tongue wan't spoken, the same thing might sound like, "Mukta! Mukta, ali mustafa!"

did you think that they should have asked the man why he wouldn't stop, and maybe his date of birth as well...
If you run from a armed guard anywhere, expect them to shoot!

I might expect an unknown combatant to get closer so he could commit his crime without interference...

I'm guessing it's something to do with that conspiracy thing about all the satellites and stuff recording your data and trying to alter your mind...The foil hat is meant to prevent it

It is intended to shield ELF radio waves which are in increasing use by government installations for communications since they are unimpeded by mass or distance. Conspiracists have linked them to weather and mind control. The poster was attempting to imply that my social activist stance marks me as a believer in conspiracy theory. To better understand, run a Google search for "HAARP."

 

[ExigeEvan]

And were you to find yourself in a land where your native tongue wan't spoken, the same thing might sound like, "Mukta! Mukta, ali mustafa!"

So he kept running because?

He was surrounded by police cars who had guns pointed at him. I think the international thought is,
"Oh s***"

And generally people chuck their hands behind their head and hit the floor no matter. And I'm pretty sure everyone knows they can't out run a bullet.

 

[Mr. Toad]

Personally, I like the 'shoot 'em in the head and ask questions later' approach.
No quarter.

It's a lot easier to clean up one dead A**H**E than 55 innocents just going about their day.

 

[Famine]

And were you to find yourself in a land where your native tongue wan't spoken, the same thing might sound like, "Mukta! Mukta, ali mustafa!"

Shows the importance of learning the language, really. Call me strange, but if I go to a foreign country, for a holiday or to live for any length of time, I do try to learn a little of the language of that country first. Like I know the words "stop" and "police" in 6 different languages, so the phrase "Stop! Police!" shouldn't be too hard.

It turns out that the person in question is of Brazilian origin, which kind of knocks the implied "shoot all the ragheads" theory on the head.

So again, to summarise, we have a man who:

• Leaves a house under surveillance in connection with the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
• Is carrying a rucksack, like the bombers in the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
• Runs from armed police.
• Makes straight for a Tube station.
• Leaps over ticket barriers.
• Makes straight for platform level.
• Leaps onto a Tube train.

And you're blaming the police?

 

[ledhed]

Leaves a house under surveillance in connection with the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
Is carrying a rucksack, like the bombers in the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
Runs from armed police.
Makes straight for a Tube station.
Leaps over ticket barriers.
Makes straight for platform level.
Leaps onto a Tube train

This = suicide by police .

Its tragic that he died for his stupidity . it would be more tragic if a policeman hesitates to shoot the next time it happens .

 

[rk]

So he kept running because?

He was surrounded by police cars who had guns pointed at him. I think the international thought is,
"Oh s***"

And generally people chuck their hands behind their head and hit the floor no matter. And I'm pretty sure everyone knows they can't out run a bullet.

Generalities and motives for action are conditional and of little importance when considering the basic issue. The fact remains that resisting arrest is now a capital crime (that means "punishable by death"). Not only is the penalty severe, but it is done without trial or review, except post mortem. Such a condition evokes images of wartime Nazi Germany or possibly Communist Russia; two regimes we might have thought we'd left in the past.

Personally, I like the 'shoot 'em in the head and ask questions later' approach.
No quarter.

It's a lot easier to clean up one dead A**H**E than 55 innocents just going about their day.

You have of course learned that the dead person had no connection to any crime? May you pray that you never find yourself in similar circumstances because it is likely only your faith would save you.

Shows the importance of learning the language, really. Call me strange, but if I go to a foreign country, for a holiday or to live for any length of time, I do try to learn a little of the language of that country first. Like I know the words "stop" and "police" in 6 different languages, so the phrase "Stop! Police!" shouldn't be too hard.

It turns out that the person in question is of Brazilian origin, which kind of knocks the implied "shoot all the ragheads" theory on the head.

So again, to summarise, we have a man who:

• Leaves a house under surveillance in connection with the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
• Is carrying a rucksack, like the bombers in the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
• Runs from armed police.
• Makes straight for a Tube station.
• Leaps over ticket barriers.
• Makes straight for platform level.
• Leaps onto a Tube train.

And you're blaming the police?

It might be that "shoot all ragheads" is superceeded by "shoot anything not familiar."
I am blaming the blind populace who are allowing their basic civil rights to be eroded out from under themselves through a series of extreme circumstances. My personal talent lies in observing current conditions and advancing them to the extreme. As events unfold and develop, it may well be that the current system begins to resemble one that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson espoused against. Are you sure you want to throw due process out the window so willingly?

Leaves a house under surveillance in connection with the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
Is carrying a rucksack, like the bombers in the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
Runs from armed police.
Makes straight for a Tube station.
Leaps over ticket barriers.
Makes straight for platform level.
Leaps onto a Tube train

This = suicide by police .

Its tragic that he died for his stupidity . it would be more tragic if a policeman hesitates to shoot the next time it happens .

The next time an unarmed man finds himself in similar circumstances? Or the next time a person fits their profile. Bottom line is that you are making a police officer hold three positions, those of "judge, jury and executioner." Isn't that one of the reasons we deposed Saddam Hussein? I refer you also to the writings of Washington and Jefferson, since you are apparently willing to consign the power of your own personal fate to the hands of one or several policemen.

 

[Solid Fro]

Its tragic that he died for his stupidity . it would be more tragic if a policeman hesitates to shoot the next time it happens .

Right.

The people who complain about this will complain about how the British government is not doing enough to protect against terrorists ("bombers" by the BBC) when the police officer does not shoot.

 

[rk]

Right.

The people who complain about this will complain about how the British government is not doing enough to protect against terrorists ("bombers" by the BBC) when the police officer does not shoot.

People complain about the price of eggs, and gas. The innocent man that was held down and shot has nothing to say.

 

[Solid Fro]

Held down?

You mean disobeying uniformed officers.

 

[rk]

Held down?

You mean disobeying uniformed officers.

Riight. The officers are now judge, jury and executioner and disobedience is a capital offense. Does "Tienimen Square" ring a bell?

 

[smellysocks12]

In the press conference it was said that he was not involved in the previous attacks AT ALL... him getting shot was tragic, a miscalculation and a mistake.... mistakes happen, but some of you are still seeing this case as if he deserved it. That makes me sick, like you people are desperately looking for a scapegoat. To my knowledge running away from police isn't a price to be paid with your life.

I'm not even blaming the police for acting the way they did, they were following the procedures.... but for god's sake, acknowledge that this was a mistake. If it would have been someone you knew you wouldn't say he had it coming.

Especially in the UK, where the police aren't known to be gun slinging trigger happy rednecks like the ones in certain American states, a person wouldn't expect getting shot five times.


He was down already, eyewitnesses saw he was already pulled to the ground and then five shots followed. If you're already on the ground with someone and he didn't blow himself up already, chances pretty much are that he didn't have a bomb with him... so this was practically a public execution.

 

[rk]

In the press conference it was said that he was not involved in the previous attacks AT ALL... him getting shot was tragic, a miscalculation and a mistake.... mistakes happen, but some of you are still seeing this case as if he deserved it. That makes me sick, like you people are desperately looking for a scapegoat. To my knowledge running away from police isn't a price to be paid with your life.

I'm not even blaming the police for acting the way they did, they were following the procedures.... but for god's sake, acknowledge that this was a mistake. If it would have been someone you knew you wouldn't say he had it coming.

Especially in the UK, where the police aren't known to be gun slinging trigger happy rednecks like the ones in certain American states, a person wouldn't expect getting shot five times.


He was down already, eyewitnesses saw he was already pulled to the ground and then five shots followed. If you're already on the ground with someone and he didn't blow himself up already, chances pretty much are that he didn't have a bomb with him... so this was practically a public execution.

Hear.

 

[Solid Fro]

Especially in the UK, where the police aren't known to be gun slinging trigger happy rednecks like the ones in certain American states, a person wouldn't expect getting shot five times.

Which states? The red ones?

The officer who shot the guy probably had his weapon on burst mode. Shooting 3-5 rounds per shot, depending on what type of weapon is was.

I wonder what you would do in this situation?

A man begins running away from police in a trench coat into a subway station. He does not respond to police commands to stop. There has been eight terrorist bombings in the past two weeks. The suspect runs into the subway train, loaded with people. You have the suspect in your sight.

Do you shoot?

This is the exact scenario that happend to communist journalist, Giuliana Sgrena. Her driver failed to stop, disobeying commands to stop at an American checkpoint along the Baghdad airport highway. The car ran through the checkpoint at 60 MPH and the Amercan soliders opend fire.

Two weeks before, American soliders were killed at a checkpoint by a terrorist car bomb along the same highway.

 

[Joey D]

Meh like I said in the other thread, its fine that someone in the UK did is but if it was America that did it the world would be all over it. Its a double standard for whatever reason.

Especially in the UK, where the police aren't known to be gun slinging trigger happy rednecks like the ones in certain American states, a person wouldn't expect getting shot five times.

Wow you are the most sterotypical bastard I think I've seen in a long time, congrats 👍. Comments like that won't win you any friends, in fact its going to piss people off.

Cops in the United States do there job and they are everyday heros that protect my ass. I might not enjoy getting pulled over and ticketed but they are doing their job just as I would. I have every respect for a cop even if they have to shoot someone.

 

[rk]

Which states? The red ones?

The officer who shot the guy probably had his weapon on burst mode. Shooting 3-5 rounds per shot, depending on what type of weapon is was.

I wonder what you would do in this situation?

A man begins running away from police in a trench coat into a subway station. He does not respond to police commands to stop. There has been eight terrorist bombings in the past two weeks. The suspect runs into the subway train, loaded with people. You have the suspect in your sight.

Do you shoot?

If you are referring to the recent assasination, this isn't the exact situation. Lets re-roll the tape, but include a little more of the lead in, shall we?

So again, to summarise, we have a man who:

• Leaves a house under surveillance in connection with the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
• Is carrying a rucksack, like the bombers in the terrorist bombings on London Transport two weeks ago.
• Runs from armed police.
• Makes straight for a Tube station.
• Leaps over ticket barriers.
• Makes straight for platform level.
• Leaps onto a Tube train.

So lets see, the house was under 24 hour survellience, by what, satellite? How did the police allow a supposed "prime suspect" to get from this house, all the way into a crowded train before they finally sat on him, are they understaffed?
I have had the personal experience of "leaving a 24hr surveillance house;" I didn't get 5 blocks before they had a black & white pull me over (I'd spotted my tail in the third block) and turn me over to the entire MINT (Mid columbia INteragency Task force) team who insisted I admit I knew my friend had been growing pot. Maybe gun slinging, redneck drug cops are more efficent than the terrorist cops in the UK, eh? Doubt it.

This is the exact scenario that happend to communist journalist, Giuliana Sgrena. Her driver failed to stop, disobeying commands to stop at an American checkpoint along the Baghdad airport highway. The car ran through the checkpoint at 60 MPH and the Amercan soliders opend fire.

Two weeks before, American soliders were killed at a checkpoint by a terrorist car bomb along the same highway.

CBS News, possibly a communist sympathizer publication, ran this interview with Guiliana:


"(CBS) Sgrena says that as the car rounded a turn, driving no faster than 30 miles an hour, it was hit by gunfire and at the same time, a bright light. She and Calipari were in the back seat. "He [Calipari] pushed me down and with this, the body, covered me," says Sgrena. "He pushed me down in the car. And I was asking, 'Why?' Nicola doesn’t say, he doesn’t speak it, doesn’t say nothing."

She says she heard Calipari's last breath: "I realized that Nicola was dead, without saying anything, nothing, no word, nothing at all."

What did happen? It appears the Italians had come across a checkpoint set up by the 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry Regiment of the New York National Guard. The guardsmen had been in Iraq eight months, and one of their specialties was roadblock security. But it was a rainy night and two battalion soldiers had been killed by a bomb in the same area two days before.

The Italian government says the Americans should’ve been prepared for Sgrena’s approach, because they say U.S. commanders were informed about the rescue mission in advance. Sgrena told 60 Minutes Wednesday that at one point, her driver was on the phone updating their progress to Italian and American officers at the airport."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/12/60II/main687555_page2.shtml

Not exactly as simple as blindly speeding through a checkpoint, kinda leaves room to speculate that there was more to the story than either account tells...

I have even read that the Bush administration was angry with the Italians for encouraging the kidnappers by paying ransom, but why bother quoting extremists and conspiracists?

 

[McLaren]

Especially in the UK, where the police aren't known to be gun slinging trigger happy rednecks like the ones in certain American states, a person wouldn't expect getting shot five times.

I'd really like to see you do a better job than the cops in the US today then.

 

[Solid Fro]

If you are referring to the recent assasination, this isn't the exact situation. Lets re-roll the tape, but include a little more of the lead in, shall we?

ZzZz...

The situation is that this guy disobeyed police officers during a time where officers have orders to shoot to kill. This guy was an idiot for his stunt and IMO, deserved what he got.

One less idiot on planet Earth.

CBS News, possibly a communist sympathizer publication, ran this interview with Guiliana:...

Been there, done that.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61790

 

[rk]

ZzZz...

The situation is that this guy disobeyed police officers during a time where officers have orders to shoot to kill. This guy was an idiot for his stunt and IMO, deserved what he got.
One less idiot on planet Earth.
Been there, done that.

The idea of killing someone extra-judicially for his relative intelligence is repugnant and revolting. You share a mindset with a famous world leader. Jews were not the only ones The Furher turned into soap, they shared the chambers with homosexuals and the feeble minded. "Sig Heil! Colinel Klink" you may return your head to it's hole in the sand and go back to sleep. We'll wake you when we need something blasted to smithereens.

 

[Famine]

He was down already, eyewitnesses saw he was already pulled to the ground and then five shots followed.

From where?

Plain clothes officers do not carry weapons. Uniformed officers do not carry handguns. The officers "holding him down" cannot have shot him. Only a police marksman with a rifle or semi-automatic weapon (no, not burst mode. Armed response officers are allowed to fire only one shot at a time) could have shot him and they would not have shot him with their own men lying on top of him.

The eyewitness report is a crock because it details events which cannot possibly have happened. You know, like the plane which didn't hit the Pentagon.


I say again the man left a house which was under surveillance following the terrorist attacks on the London Underground, carrying a rucksack such as the ones used in the terrorist attacks on the London Underground. He wasn't randomly selected because he looked funny, or foreign, or was carrying a rucksack. He was followed because he left a house which was under surveillance following the terrorist attacks on the London Underground, carrying a rucksack such as the ones used in the terrorist attacks on the London Underground.

The reason he was shot? Police suspected him of being involved in the attacks - or future ones - due to the above. When they tried to detain him, he resisted arrest, ran from officers, ignored audible warnings and headed straight onto a Tube train. You know - a Tube train, like the ones blown up by people carrying rucksacks a fortnight ago. Given this, he had to be stopped before the officers faced a repeat and, unfortunately due to his actions, shooting him was the only way to do it.

Police aren't blessed with the ability to remote view, and so based upon the reasons I have given decided to use lethal force - note how their lethal force was lethal only to the target too. I have no problem with this, and don't feel my civil liberties being eroded by it (unlike compulsory ID cards). I'd much rather they took this decision than not take it when it actually is necessary - but they could not foresee that he wasn't involved and given the available evidence they had every reason to suspect him of being involved.

If they were guilty of being trigger-happy, the Police Complaints Authority investigation (whenever there's live rounds used by police, there is automatically an investigation) will say so.



And rk - I invoke Godwin's Law. Please leave this thread.

However, your nice story draws a parallel. You left a house under 24hr surveillance and were detained five blocks away by police. Mr. Menendez left a house under 24hr surveillance and was detained ONE block away. He ran. You didn't. He died. You didn't.