Police shoot suspect....................er why? (page 5)

greendawn

I also have the impression that they shot him because he disobeyed orders to stop and they also feared he was planning to detonate a bomb in public, but perhaps they overeacted or were just trigger happy. It's hard to believe they shot him without any good reason at all. They most likely shot him in the head to avoid the risk of detonating a bomb.

These are not ordinary policemen but special forces.

ISP

Police shot to death a man wearing a thick coat at a subway station and cordoned off a mosque on Friday, a day after the city was hit by a second wave of terror attacks in two weeks.
Metropolitan Police said the man died after being shot by officers at the Stockwell subway station in south London.
Passengers said they saw police pursuing a man who appeared to be of Pakistani or Indian descent. Some said police pursued him into a subway car and shot him when he tripped.
But one witness said police "pushed him onto the floor and unloaded five shots into him."
"He looked like a cornered fox. He looked petrified," Mark Whitby told the British Broadcasting Corp.
Police had no immediate details on the situation

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/ap/article.html?mi=D8BGD8JG0&apc=9002

ISP - you tell him to stop because you want to arrest him there and then before he gets near a train. ; But he leaps the barrier and makes a run for it. ; You run after him shouting for him to stop.
Isnt that what they were trying to do? ; Arrest him?

Nope.......if they wanted to arrest him....they would have done just that.... as he exited his house they could have overpowered him etc. Is he of more value dead or alive? If you sincerely thought he had a bomb...why would you let him get anywhere near the tubestation? Would you let him get close to the public where you know he can detonate an explosive device? I think the whole circumstance shows the police knew he had no bomb ie they let him get on a tube...they get very close to him..put 5 shots in him from close range.

ISP

stevenyc

I think the whole circumstance shows the police knew he had no bomb ie they let him get on a tube...they get very close to him..put 5 shots in him from close range

ISP,

its interesting how two people can look at the report and come to two completely different views.

My personnal take on the infomation is:

He was suspected as having involvement with the terrorists and so was being followed. When he approached the tube station the police decided he needed to be stopped. He refused, did actions that anyone who is going out shopping would not do. And, got himself shot.

Yep, he could have been an ordinary 'care in the community' type, we'll find out soon.

steve

ISP

These are not ordinary policemen but special forces.

I would say they were pretty ordinary........on this showing.

ISP

Check_Your_Premises

ISP,

Sorry, but I have found from experience that pretty much everything you read in the paper is half baked horses**t.

So I don't think there is any way that anybody here could possibly have a sufficient grasp on all the facts. Not some of the facts, not the facts we only know about from the paper, ALL of the facts.

And unless you were there through the whole course of action, unless you know all the choices that the cops had to make, from the moment this person came under surveillance, until the time the decision was made to shoot him, you really do seem to be making your assesment from other assumptions.

If I had to venture a guess, you appear to be a person who is predisposed to assume that police are racists(?) and thugs? Sure some are I suppose, no group is ever ideal, but I would say that the vast majority are fine chaps who would never dream of doing the things you are presuming.

So why do you have such a dim view of your local law enforcement? Bad experiences?

If you have a problem, what are you going to do then? Call a hippie?

ISP

He was suspected as having involvement with the terrorists and so was being followed. When he approached the tube station the police decided he needed to be stopped. He refused, did actions that anyone who is going out shopping would not do. And, got himself shot.

What you may have overlooked is that they followed the guy from home and basically executed him. Seemingly had no where to go and was cornered. It wasn't that they saw him at the station. If you had come accross a terrorist and you kindly invited him to stop - do you think he would? How many maniacial persons would respond compliantly? So basically you know you are going to kill him...you just got to justify it.

ISP

Sorry, but I have found from experience that pretty much everything you read in the paper is half baked horses**t.

I don't....what paper/comics do you read?

ISP

Check_Your_Premises

I am saying that is an initial report, and by definition highly speculative (aka half baked horses**t).

I bet we get a very different version of events after a few days. Maybe not though. Maybe the cop did act inappropriately.

I also have every confidence that if this cop acted inappropriately, he will be held accountable.

I don't like cops overstepping their authority any more than anybody else. I guess some folks lean one way and some lean another. I always try to give cops the benefit of the doubt.

Help me out though, is this a "cops are thugs" thing, or more of a "cops are racist" thing. Both?

Check_Your_Premises

I don't....what paper/comics do you read?

Cute.

I am just speaking from personal experience. I watch a news story and how it is described. In some cases I have had inside knowledge or been in the milieu being reported on, and the story just didn't really match up with what really happened. One you probably heard of was the O.J trial. Well when the verdict was read, I was at a bar. The newsman went on to talk about how this showed that race relations in America were at an all time low. I saw a group of multiracial folks getting along just fine. Then I walked out the door, and saw the same thing. As I kept walking home I counted at least 5 such groups. Not one seemed to be getting along any worse. The news story didn't fit the facts. I am surprised you have never had the same experience.

Now initial reports are particularly sketchy. For instance when the first plane hit the WTC, for 15 minutes we were told it was a small, single prop bug smasher. For hours we heard how as many as 7 planes were still in the air.

Then there is always the reliable paradigm verification bit. We all have a paradigm. When we see a story that we think validates our paradigm, we immediately and quite naturally want to draw attention to it. That is not to say the story doesn't have any truth to it. It just means the facts that most support the paradigm, will be the ones highlighted, when the entire truth of the matter is the story probably doesn't validate the paradigm as much as someone might hope.

For instance, let's say my paradigm included the idea that cops are racist and thugs. If I a saw a story about a guy being shot, and I didn't see a darn good explanation in the story for why the guy got shot, I would probably post a thread highlighting the story to show yet again what rotten bastards those cops are.

Just an example.

ISP

Help me out though, is this a "cops are thugs" thing, or more of a "cops are racist" thing. Both?

Neither its a bad police-ing thing.

ISP

Police shoot suspect....................er why?

Share this