Man running from police shot dead in London

Megatron · 22-07-2005 11:44AM

roberteboot wrote:

Five times.Once.What does it matter.They stopped him from killing people.Im sure the people on the train he was running towards wouldnt mind if they shot him all day long!I cant believe people are talking about it being over the top!

shotting him once in the head won't do much other than it might cause a nervous responce and se tthe bomb off , it's better to do multi shots ,hence letting the attacker die slowly, alowing you to have more control over the body

county · 22-07-2005 11:45AM

a shoot to kill policy on terrorists,as long as they kill the right people i have no problem!

Megatron · 22-07-2005 11:46AM

Nuttzz wrote:

British police dont go around shooting people for jollies you know....

well the used to

Dinner · 22-07-2005 11:46AM

Kingsize wrote:

For all we know this guy in the tube station couldve been taking his IPOD out of his bag.
surely if you can restrain someone thers no need to shoot them especially if they (potentially) have explosives strapped to their back.

You dont have 10 armed undercover police officers chasing after you through a tube station for taking an ipod out of a bag. If it was, why would he run?

horseflesh · 22-07-2005 11:47AM

roberteboot wrote:

Five times.Once.What does it matter.They stopped him from killing people.Im sure the people on the train he was running towards wouldnt mind if they shot him all day long!I cant believe people are talking about it being over the top!

Exactly.
People who want to get all touchy-feely with these suicide bombers should cop on to themselves.
In cases like this a shoot-to-kill policy is definitely justified.

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 11:47AM

Macros42 wrote:

You've obviously heard something the rest of us haven't. He was shot under suspicion of being a bomber while under restraint.

yes it seems i do-

Armed officers opened fire up to six times on the suspect as he hurdled a ticket barrier and raced along a platform at Stockwell station.
Police screamed at passengers to evacuate and are thought to have shot the suspect as he stumbled on to a train. It is believed the man was killed.

From the Sky site.
I did love the condescending tone of your post though.

BizzyC · 22-07-2005 11:48AM

Kingsize wrote:

For all we know this guy in the tube station couldve been taking his IPOD out of his bag.
surely if you can restrain someone thers no need to shoot them especially if they (potentially) have explosives strapped to their back.

people removing an IPOD from their bags don't usually run from the police to the tube, do they?

seamus · 22-07-2005 11:49AM

spannerhead wrote:

Really!

They did that to Irishmen all through the 70's and 80's.

Would this be in the North? I wouldn't exactly call the NI police force or Army a shining jewel in the entire British Police force.

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 11:50AM

The Gnome wrote:

Restraint is sometimes neccessary. Especially if, as Megatron suggested, the suspect is connected to a dead mans switch. If the police force can't show restraint and keep calm then hysteria in the general public will most likely ensue.

If they were chasing him and he hurdled the ticket barriers(as the news reports say) then they could clearly see he wasnt armed with a "dead mans switch".
It seems like he was running for the train to detonate it so they had very little choice.

seamus · 22-07-2005 11:50AM

Arabel wrote:

You dont have 10 armed undercover police officers chasing after you through a tube station for taking an ipod out of a bag. If it was, why would he run?

Personally, if someone pulled a gun on me, and told me to freeze, I think my first reaction would be to, em...freeze, whether I knew they were police officers or not.

The very fact that he ran says something.

BloodBath · 22-07-2005 11:52AM

TBH England deserves everything it gets for joining Bushes so called war on terror. What they have done over in Iraq is a thousand times worse than anything the so called terrorists have done in England. Now i'm not saying killing innocent people is right but they have brought it upon themselves. I feel sorry for the millions of asians living in England. They are racist enough as it is without thiese bombings giving them more excuses to firebomb asian shops and abuse asian people living there.

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 11:52AM

seamus wrote:

Personally, if someone pulled a gun on me, and told me to freeze, I think my first reaction would be to, em...freeze, whether I knew they were police officers or not.

The very fact that he ran says something.

The news articles were saying something about his involvement in yesterdays attempted bombings so id say they had some intelligence on him.Maybe they were keeping an eye out for him.

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 11:56AM

BloodBath wrote:

TBH England deserves everything it gets for joining Bushes so called war on terror. What they have done over in Iraq is a thousand times worse than anything the so called terrorists have done in England. Now i'm not saying killing innocent people is right but they have brought it upon themselves. I feel sorry for the millions of asians living in England. They are racist enough as it is without thiese bombings giving them more excuses to firebomb asian shops and abuse asian people living there.

Theres some great articles on here which explain the situation.Stating that the bombings are a direct response to the war in Iraq is ridiculous.That completely oversimplifies the situation.You should read up about it.I actually had the same sort of view until i started reading up and not just listening to the anti war protestors view.Its a complicated situation.Its not just War related.
Not that i agree with the war at all.

Spiked

shellby · 22-07-2005 11:58AM

it's all very skattered i think i'll wait a while to see what really happened

seamus · 22-07-2005 11:59AM

roberteboot wrote:

The news articles were saying something about his involvement in yesterdays attempted bombings so id say they had some intelligence on him.Maybe they were keeping an eye out for him.

Well, gangs of armed police officers don't just roam the streets of London. It's more than reasonable to assume they were acting on some kind of intelligence.

Big Ears · 22-07-2005 12:01PM

BloodBath wrote:

Now i'm not saying killing innocent people is right but they have brought it upon themselves.

If they are innocent they have not brought it upon themselves , some people just can't seperate a government with its people .

Kingsize · 22-07-2005 12:01PM

"people removing an IPOD from their bags don't usually run from the police to the tube, do they?"

i know a girl whos dad was shot while painting a roof in belfast cos the cops thought he was a sniper

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 12:02PM

seamus wrote:

Well, gangs of armed police officers don't just roam the streets of London. It's more than reasonable to assume they were acting on some kind of intelligence.

Well yes.That was my point.I was responding to people who had been saying things like "maybe he was just taking his iPod out of his pocket"

Big Ears · 22-07-2005 12:02PM

Kingsize wrote:

"people removing an IPOD from their bags don't usually run from the police to the tube, do they?"

i know a girl whos dad was shot while painting a roof in belfast cos the cops thought he was a sniper

Yes but he didn't go into a prone position and aim his paint-roller/brush at people did he ?

Kingsize · 22-07-2005 12:06PM

still got shot though,
my point-the guy in downing stYesterday was doing nothing what if they'd shot him?
BTW the soldiers in derry on bloody sunday were acting on "some kind of intelligence"
i just dont think shooting someone dead because they are a suspect is the right way to do things especially of you believe the suspect to be carrying a highy volatile explosive capable of being detonated by a stray gunshot.

Nuttzz · 22-07-2005 12:06PM

Megatron wrote:

well the used to

thats was the SAS in most cases (who are a branch of the army)

Dinner · 22-07-2005 12:08PM

Kingsize wrote:

still got shot though,
my point-the guy in downing stYesterday was doing nothing what if they'd shot him?
? ??

But they didnt shoot him because they obviously werent sure of he was a bomber or not, but the guy in the tube station was shot indicating that they felt confident that he had a bomb strapped to his back.

seamus · 22-07-2005 12:08PM

roberteboot wrote:

Well yes.That was my point.I was responding to people who had been saying things like "maybe he was just taking his iPod out of his pocket"

I know, I was supporting you

Orion · 22-07-2005 12:10PM

roberteboot wrote:

Armed officers opened fire up to six times on the suspect as he hurdled a ticket barrier and raced along a platform at Stockwell station.

From the Sky site.

Doesn't say that on BBC - I don't read/watch Sky if I can help it. They usually get things half right mixed up with lots of conjecture to fill dead air.

I did love the condescending tone of your post though.

Wasn't intended to be condescending. Just pointing out that the man was restrained - shooting a restrained suspect 5 times is excessive imo.

Megatron · 22-07-2005 12:10PM

roberteboot wrote:

If they were chasing him and he hurdled the ticket barriers(as the news reports say) then they could clearly see he wasnt armed with a "dead mans switch".

not so , it could be conceled by his clots ( down the arm of a tumper or coat)

but it may turn out that they tought he had it , and they shot him.

either way , i wouldn't of liked to of been in that posistion .. but i prob would of done the same

Kingsize · 22-07-2005 12:11PM

Arabel wrote:

But they didnt shoot him because they obviously werent sure of he was a bomber or not, but the guy in the tube station was shot indicating that they felt confident that he had a bomb strapped to his back.

why did they pin him to the ground at gunpoint then???

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 12:11PM

seamus wrote:

I know, I was supporting you

Oh.Right.Well then i was supporting you too.Always with the support.Planty of support.

BizzyC · 22-07-2005 12:13PM

Kingsize wrote:

why did they pin him to the ground at gunpoint then???

Read the story again, they shot him as he was running, not while pinned down.
The story will probably change several times, before we get the real version.

Orion · 22-07-2005 12:14PM

roberteboot wrote:

That completely oversimplifies the situation. ... Its a complicated situation.Its not just War related.
Spiked

Absolutely. A lot of people make that mistake. The US/UK-led invasions in Afghanistan and Iraq are merely the latest major move in something that has been ongoing for a long time. Some people forget that these invasions happened after Sept. 11th. - you can't blame the wars for that.

roberteboot · 22-07-2005 12:17PM

Macros42 wrote:

Doesn't say that on BBC - I don't read/watch Sky if I can help it. They usually get things half right mixed up with lots of conjecture to fill dead air.

Wasn't intended to be condescending. Just pointing out that the man was restrained - shooting a restrained suspect 5 times is excessive imo.

But he wasnt restrained.Eye witness reports say they shot him as he stumbled onto the train.Earlier on the BBC site eye witness reports said that they stumbled onto him.The site then seemed to take this to mean restrained for some reaon.

Presumably they would have loved to take him alive and question him.But they couldnt.If they shot him once and he still had any ability to he could still detonate the bomb.

Man running from police shot dead in London

Comments