steve_gus
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 01:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
only trouble is, if he was wearing a bomb belt there would've been a controlled explosion at the scene.
perhaps not.
they didnt try and destroy the dodgy explosives that didnt go off - they wanted them for examination - perhaps the same for a bomb belt.
atb
steve
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 05:37 PM |
|
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stm
bit of a mistake there then - but why did the guy run? perhaps he was involved in some other illegal thing?
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
lewis635
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 07:00 PM |
|
|
ok bit of a mistake, but the guy must have had something to hide. i would have slotted him aswell when he ran onto the tube, better safe than sorry
i hope nothing happens to the firearms officers.
it may sound harse but i dont feel sorry for the guy with the table leg mentioned earlier, he wasn't just "carrying" it, he was
pretending it was a gun.
"you fly with the crows you get shot with the crows"
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 07:08 PM |
|
|
No, not the story thats usually told.
the table leg guy had picked up the leg from being repaired, and was drinking in a pub. someone saw a bag with a long object in it, and though the guy
had an irish accent. (he was scottish). The police were called, and shot him in the street.
If thats 'ok' i would suggest that our scots members never come to the UK with any long thin objects in a bag - certainly dont think of
going fishing, or a bit of pitch and put.
atb
steve
quote:
Originally posted by lewis635
ok bit of a mistake, but the guy must have had something to hide. i would have slotted him aswell when he ran onto the tube, better safe than sorry
i hope nothing happens to the firearms officers.
it may sound harse but i dont feel sorry for the guy with the table leg mentioned earlier, he wasn't just "carrying" it, he was
pretending it was a gun.
"you fly with the crows you get shot with the crows"
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
Mark Allanson
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 07:25 PM |
|
|
The security forces would have done anything to avoid a fatal shot, you cannot interrogate a corpse, and boy, they can interrogate!
If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation
|
|
|
lewis635
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 09:14 PM |
|
|
Sorry steve, i must have got it wrong, i suppose being scottish is reason enough I'm scottish so can get away with saying that.
i understood he was imitating a sawn off.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 10:17 PM |
|
|
a most unfortunate turn of events.
does anyone on the 'smoke his ass' brigade feel bad that he might just have been a window cleaner dropping in for he money, or something
equally innocent? Its a scandilous f$%k up...
[Edited on 23/7/05 by JoelP]
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 10:28 PM |
|
|
i think its just a really bad set of events thats led to it. If the guy was brazillian, as has been reported, he may not have understood the police
shouting for him to stop, and thought he was being chased by 3 muggers. It was compunded by the fact he ran and got onto a tube to escape. He thought
the police were yobs, and they thought he was a dark skinned bomber. At the minimum, it shows perhaps that a shoot to kill policy isnt going to
work....
atb
steve
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
liam.mccaffrey
|
| posted on 23/7/05 at 11:46 PM |
|
|
I read a bbc news flash on their website which i believe was pulled fairly quickly stating that the "police" gave chase takled the guy
held him and then was shot repetedly by another "police" anyone have any comments ?
Build Blog
Build Photo Album
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 24/7/05 at 12:29 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by liam.mccaffrey
I read a bbc news flash on their website which i believe was pulled fairly quickly stating that the "police" gave chase takled the guy
held him and then was shot repetedly by another "police" anyone have any comments ?
exactly what I read too. It was a witness statement
atb
steve
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
JAG
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 08:05 AM |
|
|
I am VERY concerned by the actions of this group of people (Police or SAS or whatever).
This was an execution.
He shouldn't have run - but they should have had more reason to confront him than the current excuse that 'he left a house that was under
surveillance'
A totally innocent man (their own admission) has been deliberately killed on the streets of Britain by our Police/Security forces.
He wasn't even Asian - he was Brazillian 
Justin
Who is this super hero? Sarge? ...No.
Rosemary, the telephone operator? ...No.
Penry, the mild-mannered janitor? ...Could be!
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 08:51 AM |
|
|
when all this is said and done, the real villains of the piece here are the terrorists.
Let's not blame our security services too quickly.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but we never had that benefit when 4 people blew themselves and many others up. The security forces are now trying to
protect us, and their job is not an easy one, and they are understandably jumpy in the face of repeated bombings.
If London had never been attacked, this tragedy would not have happened, so for the "muslim council" to get on their high horse is WELL
out of order!
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 08:57 AM |
|
|
just to add my 2p...
this brazilian guy learned english in 9 months whilst living in the uk and has been in london for 3 years or so, so he would have understood english
completely. he was an electrician so would need to understand things in order to his job. he also would know that you stop and use a ticket at a
ticket barrier to access the tube, not hurdle/jump over it. he would also know of the events of the last 3 weeks and so should use some common sense.
it may be unlucky that he was seen at/in/near an address under surveillence, and reports that because he is from brazil and was wearing the coat
because he feels cold in england, even in the summer wears thin, he'd been here three or so years, so plenty of time to adjust. why did he run?
well, we'll never know but in the current climate it seems very foolish and unfortunate that he did. I was also of the impression that the
police were wearing police marked baseball caps (worn the correct way round  ) and that they challenged/warned him they were police and were armed,
though this does appear to be being questioned by one witness's claims in the papers this morning.
all imvho.
Ned.
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
If London had never been attacked, this tragedy would not have happened, so for the "muslim council" to get on their high horse is WELL
out of order!
I agree, why do they 'demand' an explanation when the sceurity services are just doing their job to try and protect the rest of us. I for
one appreciate their efforts.
[Edited on 25/7/05 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
lewis635
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 12:36 PM |
|
|
Before anyone judges the the security forces, just take time out and put yourselves in their position. Would you have done the same? i know i would
have.
Although his death was unfortunate we shouldnt blame the police.
|
|
|
DaveFJ
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 12:51 PM |
|
|
It is sad that it has (apparently) turned out this man was not armed.
However I cannot agree that the security forces were in any way in the wrong.
to tackle the points raised...
there are strict rules of engagement laid out which will very probably be similiar to those issued in northern ireland for many years. The rules are
very clear and drummed into all soldiers/police. Basically you may only use lethal force if the suspect is beleived to be an immediate threat to life.
To give an example from NI. If a rioter was holding a lit petrol bomb and about to throw it you may open fire, if however he has thrown it and it is
still in mid air he is no longer a threat and you cannot shoot him. A fine line I know !
There is no such thing as 'shooting to injure'. If you have to open fire it is always as a last resort and the ONLY option is lethal
force. shooting people in the leg or whatever is strictly for the movies. The only change in police tactics has been that it is now policy to aim for
the head if possible rather than the heart. the reason for this is that it is actually a lot more difficult to kill someone than you would think and
the only sure way to prevent someone from firing a weapon or setting off a bomb is to destroy the brain as quickly as possible. even then a single
shot to the brain does not always kill instantly - hence multiple shots.
As for the defence of - he may not have known what was being said - well we can only have conjecture, however If he was living in London he knew the
curent situation so why jump the turn stile with a backpack ?
I cannot believe that he did not understand he was being persued by police. they would have issued verbal warnings (at least 3 times) before firing,
surely anyone living in london understands the word 'Police' shouted in your ear ?
In all just a sad outcome that could have been avoided if the suspect had complied with the orders.
what would we be saying now if he had carried a bomb and the police officer had tried to 'talk him round' only to have many killed in
another explosion ? we would be criticising the Police for inaction. Its a difficult job and they are highly trained - they deserve our support not
vilification.
Dave (16 years in the armed sevices)
[Edited on 25/7/05 by DaveFJ]
Dave
"In Support of Help the Heroes" - Always
|
|
|
DaveFJ
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 12:55 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ned
I was also of the impression that the police were wearing police marked baseball caps (worn the correct way round )
Ned.
A believe that it is policy that they MUST wear the caps in this type of situtation - however I could be wrong
Dave
"In Support of Help the Heroes" - Always
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 02:01 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DaveFJ
There is no such thing as 'shooting to injure'. If you have to open fire it is always as a last resort and the ONLY option is lethal
force. shooting people in the leg or whatever is strictly for the movies. The only change in police tactics has been that it is now policy to aim for
the head if possible rather than the heart. the reason for this is that it is actually a lot more difficult to kill someone than you would think and
the only sure way to prevent someone from firing a weapon or setting off a bomb is to destroy the brain as quickly as possible. even then a single
shot to the brain does not always kill instantly - hence multiple shots.
Dave (16 years in the armed sevices)
[Edited on 25/7/05 by DaveFJ]
I think movies have a lot to be responsible for on this one, there have been one or two films I can think of where the effects of being shot are
realistically shown, but most of the time there is the typical, "urrgghh...dead" scene, which is unfortunately not the case, real
situations are never that pleasant.
|
|
|
lewis635
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 02:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
TextTo give an example from NI. If a rioter was holding a lit petrol bomb and about to throw it you may open fire, if however he has thrown it and it
is still in mid air he is no longer a threat and you cannot shoot him. A fine line I know !
I always laughed at that one, from the time he starts to throw it until it leaves his hand. poor tommy has to cock, aim remove safety then fire and
hope the bullet hits before the bomb leaves his hand otherwise it is murder.
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 07:55 PM |
|
|
I wonder why it took seven shots to the head to kill him.... that to me sounds a bit like loss of control and not very professional. He was held down,
and a single shot would have done. But they used EIGHT - seven to the head, and one to the shoulder. Coultnt have been much head left by then I
suspect.
Interesting tack for muggers tho. Just shout out 'halt armed police' and they wont try and run away.
atb
steve
[Edited on 25/7/05 by steve_gus]
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
Volvorsport
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 09:11 PM |
|
|
well , apparently , his visa had expired and could have been kicked out , so thats probably why he ran .
He probably didnt expect them to shoot !!
Its funny how the muslim council want answers to this outrage , when justice and law enforcement are much more brutal in those 'muslim '
countries .
www.dbsmotorsport.co.uk
getting dirty under a bus
|
|
|
Cita
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 09:17 PM |
|
|
If you are sitting on top of that guy Steve and you think he's carrying a bomb
than the last thing you consider is:would one shot be enough cause it looks more proffesional in the newspaper.
The only thing that comes to mind is take the target out as fast and accurate as possible.One shot in the head is no garantuee that the target will be
unable to take any action like push a button.
Even multyple shots destroying the brain completely can sometimes not prevent that nerves can actuate certain muscles.
My English is beyond any doubt much worse than that from the Brazilian man who was shot but if I would be in London at this moment and somebody would
yell "STOP-POLICE" than not a single molecule in my bird brain would think about moving any fraction of an inch!
I rather would take the chance of being conned and stabbed by muggers than take one or more bullets to the head from the police.
Let's not forget that those policemen risk their lives for the people in London and they know that it never will be good,no matter what they
do.They are either too late and the bomb hase gone off,or they are to early and just killed an "innocent" citizen.
The chance that the security forces can catch a bomber a live on the spot are very small,if not impossible.
I think that the security forces are very proffesional and that one victim,considering the circumstances,can be regarded as minimal.
I just heard on the Belgian news that they now say that the Brazilian guy was executed by the police.This kind of bulshit is not going to help anybody
except the bombers.
|
|
|
steve_gus
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 09:54 PM |
|
|
i would have thought on the one hand that the bombers would revel in the police cock up. On the other, they know that the police are out to kill them,
no questions asked. I would expect it to be a totally different feeling from a 'glorious way to go' - cowering somewhere, waiting for the
door to burst open to get their seven bullets.
[Edited on 25/7/05 by steve_gus]
http://www.locostbuilder.co.uk
Just knock off the 's'!
|
|
|
lewis635
|
| posted on 25/7/05 at 09:56 PM |
|
|
Well said cita, it is times like this that we all need to support the police. that includes the press, like you said these comments only help the
bombers and extremists.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 26/7/05 at 08:26 AM |
|
|
Quite right indeed!!!!!!
It makes me so angry that the Muslim community can "demand" answers to why somebody was shot.
I am not a racist person by nature, but I think I am not too far from the truth if I say that we welcome people of all origins into our country, and a
very substantial number of these are asians.
A considerable number of these are muslims.
The logic then seems to utterly break down in my (evidently odd) mind............................they have been welcomed to the country, paid benefits
to assist in daily life, live in some modicum of comfort, and then certain members of that group of people decide the declare hatred of that country
and try and destroy the fabric of it. When law enforcement then try to maintain the fabric of society, that same group of people "demand"
answers.....................................................................If anything is going to drive a racial wedge into society in this country,
this is it. My feelings now are why should "we" tolerate this crap.
We had the issues with Northern Ireland, which were terrible, ugly and damaging to all, but there was a cause, however just or unjust it may be jusged
to have been, there was reason and a cause viewed as attainable by both "sides".
This current terrorism has no attainable goal, what do the terrorists hope to achieve???????
|
|
|
pbura
|
| posted on 26/7/05 at 12:08 PM |
|
|
Arab society is tribal, and the various factions will fight each other unless directed against an outside enemy. Hence the appeal of bin Laden and
his contrived ideology. He and his associates are useful idiots for various authoritarian regimes (Iran, the former Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the
Palestinian Authority) who would prefer that internal political unrest be focused outwards.
If these ****ers can win world domination in the bargain, so much the better. They're still smarting from the decline of the Ottoman Empire,
and I think that's the key to the general unhelpfulness of the 'silent majority'.
So, I think that kicking asses and taking names is definitely in order at this time, up to and including gutting enemy governments.
These comments are directed at terrorism generally, and not the shooting. Wrong place and time, not dressed for success, and disobeyed police
warnings. Accidents are freaks by nature.
Pete
|
|
|
