Jump to content

Change Mode

Police Shoot Man dead


Rebel=UK=
 Share

Recommended Posts

First off I dont feel that any life is worth less than any other that isnt my point. Nor did I ever say that.

 

To be honest I dont think that the terrorists care where they explode their bombs.. as long as there is a loss of life they are happy. We all know this..

 

And I still believe that if they thought he was such a "target" and that he had a direct link to the bombings that they should have stopped him long before he got anywhere near the tubes.

We are thinking the same thing nessa.... :beer: :beer:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 682
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

certainly no one here is insinuating the cops shot him for the sake of shooting right?

I don't think that is the case Angela atleast not on my part that is for sure...

 

I do believe however that instead of pumping 5 into a man's head who is already laying on the gound is a little overboard...

 

There are other body parts that can disable a human being... other body parts that they could have shot .. and if in fact he was "part" of it ( wich he wasnt they have already said that ) then maybe just maybe they could have gotten some information out of him.

 

I agree to disagree with you Chop... :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

certainly no one here is insinuating the cops shot him for the sake of shooting right?

I am saying the shot him without enough evidence that he was a bomber. Tried to apprehend him at the wrong time (should have been earlier) and once on the ground and restrained should not have fired.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am saying the shot him without enough evidence that he was a bomber. Tried to apprehend him at the wrong time (should have been earlier) and once on the ground and restrained should not have fired.

alrighty then, i agree with that totally.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am saying YOU are indicating this.

 

 

I think ALL life is important and if they thought he had a bomb then they had an ABSOLUTE responsibilty to make sure he did not get on that bus

Oh, sorry. No, I am not saying that.

 

 

No, I don't believe "they had an ABSOLUTE responsibilty to make sure he did not get on that bus", it is a matter of index of suspicion. It is the very fact that he approached the tube that increased the suspicion that he might have a bomb.

 

 

The tubes are the primary tagets, that's all. It is a matter of index of suspicion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off I dont feel that any life is worth less than any other that isnt my point. Nor did I ever say that.

 

To be honest I dont think that the terrorists care where they explode their bombs.. as long as there is a loss of life they are happy. We all know this..

 

And I still believe that if they thought he was such a "target" and that he had a direct link to the bombings that they should have stopped him long before he got anywhere near the tubes.

They have selected targets. They have an operational plan. That is in fact important.

 

 

 

The index of suspicion of a bomb greatly increaes when he approaches the Tube.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am saying the shot him without enough evidence that he was a bomber.

I understand. And I don't think you have enough information for that.

 

 

 

 

Tried to apprehend him at the wrong time (should have been earlier) and once on the ground and restrained should not have fired.

As far as stopping him earlier, the reasoning for not doing so is clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 in the head and 1 in the shoulder. Not that it makes any difference.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4713753.stm

Actually, it is VERY important.

 

It means that we can now question a little more carefully what the witnesses reported.

 

We want to say what they did or didn't hear as far as what might have been said to him, but they cannot even report the number of shots correctly.

 

Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it is VERY important.

 

It means that we can now question a little more carefully what the witnesses reported.

 

We want to say what they did or didn't hear as far as what might have been said to him, but they cannot even report the number of shots correctly.

 

Interesting.

if 2 people were shooting at the same time, it would sound like less

 

 

I would not belittle the witnesses account at all.

 

however I find 8 shots to the head with a man on the ground just a tad extreme....

 

I do not know anybody who could detonate a bomb after 1 or 2 shots to the head. maybe they can. you're the doctor and maybe there have been cases of people who've had 2 or 3 shots to the head and could still function. Maybe 8 was appropriate

Edited by hftmrock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW chop.

 

your insistance that he was confronted outside the station is now in debate according to Sir T's article

 

When he was challenged by police in the Tube station, he fled, reportedly leaping the ticket barrier.

 

'In the tube'

Edited by hftmrock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if 2 people were shooting at the same time, it would sound like less

 

 

 

Now you are stretching it a bit. The often quoted witness has also said that only one officer fired....the witness said he saw it.

 

 

I think we can even question not only what the witness heard now but also what they saw. Which is predictable really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 in the head and 1 in the shoulder. Not that it makes any difference.

 

 

Ty for the clerification...... :beer:

 

Regradless, like I have said in a previous post... there were and are other places to shoot a person in order to stop them...

 

You can't get information from a dead man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW chop.

 

your insistance that he was confronted outside the station is now in dabate according to Sir T's article

 

 

 

'In the tube'

Sorry, no, I read that already and my stance is consistent with it.

 

I did not say he was outside the station. I only know that he was outside the toll gate when they first approached him.

 

If you think I said more then you are assuming. When I say "outside the tube" I mean outside the gate.

 

Clearly when they saw him going in the station, that's when they went after him and approached him.

 

 

If I wasn't clear I am sorry, but my stance is consistent with the report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's getting so I don't even trust the coroner's report;

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/s...1535246,00.html

I agree Moon , there are so many different things going around about how many and exactly where the bullets entered this person...

 

I doubt we will ever know for sure..

They did shoot to kill though....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, no, I read that already and my stance is consistent with it.

 

I did not say he was outside the station. I only know that he was outside the toll gate when they first approached him.

 

If you think I said more then you are assuming. When I say "outside the tube" I mean outside the gate.

 

Clearly when they saw him going in the station, that's when they went after him and approached him.

 

 

If I wasn't clear I am sorry, but my stance is consistent with the report.

I misunderstood... sorry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt we will ever know for sure..

They did shoot to kill though....

Yep, and I hope that the charge is murder.

 

 

 

Indeed, or the words of a "witness". I have been present for a number of such identifications. How did he see the man's back?

We've had plenty of pseudo-sleuths, let's not invite any pseudo-coroners.

Edited by moon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ty for the clerification...... :beer:

 

Regradless, like I have said in a previous post... there were and are other places to shoot a person in order to stop them...

 

You can't get information from a dead man.

Actually, no. Stop shots don't happen like in the movies. Head shots are 100% stop shots. Others are not, even chest shots are not 100% stoppers.

 

 

And you can indeed get information from a dead man. That's what forensics are for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, no. Stop shots don't happen like in the movies. Head shots are 100% stop shots. Others are not, even chest shots are not 100% stoppers.

 

 

And you can indeed get information from a dead man. That's what forensics are for.

I meant verbal.... I highly doubt u can get the kind of info ie: Who are u associated with .. type stuff from a forensic exame of a dead body....

 

And I am sure "stop shots" work.. Otherwise there would be alot more inquests into police shootings...

 

and

 

I never said "like in the movies" :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...