London shooting
-
Then we have both been there and I mean no disrespect. I was genuinely asking. Your cavalier attitude towards innocent people being gunned down by the police is all the more puzzling to me then.
Look, lets put aside the insults and crap and get serious for a moment. I have always had a somewhat pragmatic view of life and however much I desire peace and good will to all people (and I really do) reality has a mean and nasty way of popping up at the most innoportune moments. Nobody wants the police to ever have to use guns. And everyone is horrified (or should be) by what happened to that poor young man. The reality is that there are some people out in the world who have a desire, for whatever reason, to harm other people. And the first and last line of defence is the police. Now I'm willing to bet that not every copper is bent or full of rage or a complete nutter with a homicidal desire to kill men who look asian. And I'm also willing to bet that this won't be the last mistake. And of course I don't want it to be me or anyone I know. But it might be. And I just have to accept, sadly, the reality of the utterly random, cold nature of life. I don't take it perosnally and I certainly don't spend any time (other than now) thinking about it. I just see that as being pragmatic: there is simply no point in getting angry at the police as a group when it may have been a simple (but deadly) mistake by one person. Yes, they should probably face some action but we should not allow emotion to dictate that action. And we must not allow ourselves to be led by the press. Their motives are to sell papers, not to disseminate reality, so they'll print whatever sells papers to their target audience. If I'm wrong, so be it. But at least I'm never under any illusions as to what life is and what it holds. Oh and just in case you're wondering I'm actually a pretty happy chappie... most of the time!
Stoopid signatures...
-
I did not. I said quite clearly (I thought) that police officers should not be above the law. If they do something like this they should face the consequences like anyone else. In reply to the post saying "Then all the armed officers would hand in their guns" I said "Then maybe they should". Does that answer your question now?
Didn't see that, but yes, it does. Thank you.
Stoopid signatures...
-
Do you think that because of 1 mistake (by whatever degree) we should stop any policeman from carrying a gun with which to defend the realm from not just the threat but the actions of bomb-laden islamic terrorists?
Stoopid signatures...
-
Oh come on mr alien? Not all arguments are dualistic! Just because I dont agree with Ian Paisley and the UDA doesnt mean I agree with the IRA. There can be a third point of view. Perhaps you should read a little bhudism, it has a lot to say on dualism. Nunc est bibendum!
Morning. Good point. Damn it. However, most arguments do tend to revolve around single points which are opposite. Reality is a little different and depends if someone brings in that third or nth perspective. Can I swear now?
Stoopid signatures...
-
fakefur wrote: Have you ever had someone close to you die? Yes, actually, I have, several times. In particular, my partner died of breast cancer ten years ago and I was at her bedside, in the hospice, for the last 6 weeks of her life having nursed and looked after her for some considerable time prior to that and had to sit and watch as she just faded, painfully, away as the cancer had gone to her brain and bones and, by the end, she didn't even know her own son. She was 38 years old and the morphine just dulled the pain, it didn't take it away. And so I sat and swore I wouldn't cry or break down in front of her. And I didn't, until the end. And one day, near the end, she said to me: I know you know how long I've got but please don't tell me. So, whatever you think you know you know nothing. Until you have seen death up close and personal you know nothing. Until it has ripped your life apart you know nothing. So don't you dare presume to question me about life and death and how brave and selfless people can be and what the meaning of life or death is or the value you can put on anyone's life.
Stoopid signatures...
-
Morning. Good point. Damn it. However, most arguments do tend to revolve around single points which are opposite. Reality is a little different and depends if someone brings in that third or nth perspective. Can I swear now?
Stoopid signatures...
-
Cops need to be given stun-bullets that don't kill but just stun the targets. That way, such tragedies can be avoided.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: Cops need to be given stun-bullets that don't kill but just stun the targets. That way, such tragedies can be avoided. A close friend of mine used to be involved with 'special operations', and this sort of suggestion makes him (i) laugh and (ii) get worked up, because an injured / stunned man can still fire a gun or set off a bomb. If you are being threatened by someone with a gun or bomb, you take them out to the point where they are no longer a threat. Someone once suggested to him that if the police are confronted with an armed robber, they should "shoot the gun from his hand"! Been watching too much John Wayne...
-
fat_boy wrote: I'm sorry for you man. Appreciated.
Stoopid signatures...
-
One mistake? Dont forget the scots guy shot for carrying a table leg. How many others are there? In fact, lets conduct an investigation. How many police shootings got the right guy vs the wrong guy. Nunc est bibendum!
fat_boy wrote: Dont forget the scots guy shot for carrying a table leg. He raised it to his shoulder and pointed it towards the police like a rifle. They may ultimately have been wrong to shoot him, but when under apparent mortal danger they can't take chances.
-
fat_boy wrote: Dont forget the scots guy shot for carrying a table leg. He raised it to his shoulder and pointed it towards the police like a rifle. They may ultimately have been wrong to shoot him, but when under apparent mortal danger they can't take chances.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711619.stm[^] 'They claimed they shouted: "Stop, armed police" and fired when Mr Stanley turned around while carrying a bag which they believed contained a gun. In fact it only contained a table leg' 'Harry Stanley was walking home with a table leg in a plastic bag' So, the question arises, how many times have the UK police fucked up and how often have they shot the right guy? Nunc est bibendum!
-
Actually according to the police: 1. He was wearing a padded heavy jacket - wrong 2. He didn't comply with orders to stop - wrong. None were given. 3. He jumped the ticket barrier and ran away - wrong. 4. He tripped and fell into the train whilst running away from the police - wrong. He was seated and restrained by a security guard. In addition: The police officer doing surveillance was pee-ing at the time the guy left the apartment building (bolded there to make people realise this wasn't a small house or something). He was allowed to go several miles by foot and bus without being challenged. He was not positively identified as anything. In fact the officer said "Check identity". It wasn't done. All in all I'd say pretty damning evidence. Then add a few grains of smelly cover-up and you have a huge stinking mess that makes everyone look bad and dishonest. People should be forced to resign and face criminal charges. [edit] Like I said - I think the price is too high if innocent people can be killed like this. Clearly the UK police force isn't up to the job and they maybe should all lay down their guns. [/edit] [editedit] Answer me this honestly: If it was your brother / mother / father / sister / son / daughter would you be saying the same things? Honestly remember. [/editedit]
fakefur wrote: Actually according to the police: 1. No, the police did not say that. 2. Yes, and this 'leaked evidence' confirms that. 3. No, the police did not say that. 4. No, the police did not say that. Like I said mate, get your facts straight. All of the police conferences are in the public domain, video archives of them are available on the BBC News web site.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
Actually according to the police: 1. He was wearing a padded heavy jacket - wrong 2. He didn't comply with orders to stop - wrong. None were given. 3. He jumped the ticket barrier and ran away - wrong. 4. He tripped and fell into the train whilst running away from the police - wrong. He was seated and restrained by a security guard. In addition: The police officer doing surveillance was pee-ing at the time the guy left the apartment building (bolded there to make people realise this wasn't a small house or something). He was allowed to go several miles by foot and bus without being challenged. He was not positively identified as anything. In fact the officer said "Check identity". It wasn't done. All in all I'd say pretty damning evidence. Then add a few grains of smelly cover-up and you have a huge stinking mess that makes everyone look bad and dishonest. People should be forced to resign and face criminal charges. [edit] Like I said - I think the price is too high if innocent people can be killed like this. Clearly the UK police force isn't up to the job and they maybe should all lay down their guns. [/edit] [editedit] Answer me this honestly: If it was your brother / mother / father / sister / son / daughter would you be saying the same things? Honestly remember. [/editedit]
fakefur wrote: Answer me this honestly: If it was your brother / mother / father / sister / son / daughter would you be saying the same things? Honestly remember. Honestly, yes. And that's closer to home than you may have thought. :| I do not appreciate, or see the point of, trying to turn this into a pesonal emotive discussion.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
fakefur wrote: [editedit] Answer me this honestly: If it was your brother / mother / father / sister / son / daughter would you be saying the same things? Honestly remember. [/editedit] I think it weas an atypical Wulff post - normally he's one of the most neutral guys here in the Soapbox. Maybe he got affected by the tone/language used by your original post.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: an atypical Wulff post Wow, I have benchmarks?! :~ But as John said, although I feel he probably mentioned it for the wrong reasons, I am completely for trusting the police to handle the situations we require them to until any investigations have proven that that trust would be misplaced. The investigation into this shooting has not concoluded yet, and as of yesterday has been set back because the media can't waste a good controversy. We, as members of our respective societies, have to accept the responsibility of the people we employ to protect us, because we are every bit as responsable as they are for what they do. Whether it is a soldier fighting in Iraq, a politician sitting in Westminster, or a policeman trying to protect his community at home, we asked those people to stand forward and take on the responsibilities of all of us, and we should not blindly run away from that whenever something we don't like has happened. Do you think I am happy or pleased that Mr. Menezes is dead? Or that my countries defensive forces are currently involved in overthrowing foreign governments? I'm not, at all, but is not the fault of the policemen or the soldiers. We employ people to stand at the top, whether they are the heads of police forces or members of parliament, and we pay them vast sums of money to unload our responsibilities on them. When something goes wrong, we learn from those mistakes, we trust those people to apply that learning, and if they don't or can't or were negligent in any way we take their heads and we display them on the walls of the London Tower for the ravens to pick at.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
Oh, that explains why he spazed out about my views on the police. Perhaps he is an ex copper or married to one? Nunc est bibendum!
I spazed out about your views on the police because you were being a wanker, period.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
I spazed out about your views on the police because you were being a wanker, period.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
Cops need to be given stun-bullets that don't kill but just stun the targets. That way, such tragedies can be avoided.
Two, sad, things to raise: 1. When you are hunting a dangerous animal, you don't injure it, you kill it. A cornered animal has nothing to lose and an injured cornered animal knows he is about to lose everything. 2. Stun rounds are not very effective, and give the non-lethality of them they tend to be used with less due consideration - resulting in more people being injured, and in some cases very painful fatalities. Normal armed police units do not shoot to kill, even when faced with a direct threat (i.e. someone shooting at them). The police in this case used a shoot-to-kill policy because the people they were hunting had no desire to live. That is a very important difference, that needs consideration.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: an atypical Wulff post Wow, I have benchmarks?! :~ But as John said, although I feel he probably mentioned it for the wrong reasons, I am completely for trusting the police to handle the situations we require them to until any investigations have proven that that trust would be misplaced. The investigation into this shooting has not concoluded yet, and as of yesterday has been set back because the media can't waste a good controversy. We, as members of our respective societies, have to accept the responsibility of the people we employ to protect us, because we are every bit as responsable as they are for what they do. Whether it is a soldier fighting in Iraq, a politician sitting in Westminster, or a policeman trying to protect his community at home, we asked those people to stand forward and take on the responsibilities of all of us, and we should not blindly run away from that whenever something we don't like has happened. Do you think I am happy or pleased that Mr. Menezes is dead? Or that my countries defensive forces are currently involved in overthrowing foreign governments? I'm not, at all, but is not the fault of the policemen or the soldiers. We employ people to stand at the top, whether they are the heads of police forces or members of parliament, and we pay them vast sums of money to unload our responsibilities on them. When something goes wrong, we learn from those mistakes, we trust those people to apply that learning, and if they don't or can't or were negligent in any way we take their heads and we display them on the walls of the London Tower for the ravens to pick at.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
How about the bolloxed up investigations into all the other police shootings? When do you start to feel your trust is misplaced? 'we asked those people to stand forward and take on the responsibilities of all of us' Bollocks, an ex-squaddie or other person of limited inteligence wants a steady job with a pension. He isnt capable of much so he joins the force. Either that or he is a power hungry sadist, and yes, I've met a few coppers like that in my youth too, and wants the job for emotional reasons, like he enjoys shitting on people. I'll tell you what, go down to torquay nick and ask them why they joined. I'll give you a handfull of names too. Dont forget, I know these poeple socially! Ha! we asked them to take on our responsibilites! what a crock of shit. How did you get to be so naive? Nunc est bibendum!
-
Are you really only 22? That explains why you know jack shit. Wait around sonny, you'll see what I mean. Nunc est bibendum!
22? No, I'm 21. If you double click on that clock in the bottom right of your screen you will bring up a calendar which helps with working out complicated things like dates, or years. fat_boy wrote: Wait around sonny, you'll see what I mean. I've got some bad news for you grandpa, I've been involved in the policing of my local community for many years now, so I am well aware of the issues, the schemes, the offenders, and how it all works. Thanks for your concern though - it means a lot. :rose:
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
-
Two, sad, things to raise: 1. When you are hunting a dangerous animal, you don't injure it, you kill it. A cornered animal has nothing to lose and an injured cornered animal knows he is about to lose everything. 2. Stun rounds are not very effective, and give the non-lethality of them they tend to be used with less due consideration - resulting in more people being injured, and in some cases very painful fatalities. Normal armed police units do not shoot to kill, even when faced with a direct threat (i.e. someone shooting at them). The police in this case used a shoot-to-kill policy because the people they were hunting had no desire to live. That is a very important difference, that needs consideration.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
'cornered animal has nothing to lose and an injured cornered animal knows he is about to lose everything' So you are an expert on deer or rabbit psychology are you? Just how much hunting have you done, and with what kind of weapon and amunition? 308, 22LR? 'Stun rounds are not very effective' The paras used to put A batteries in their SLRs in stead of the ruber bullets. They found them nore effective. 'Normal armed police units do not shoot to kill' Cock, they use semi jacketed, or hollow nose bullets. They very much mean to kill. It is not like the army, who mean to injure. Nunc est bibendum!
-
David Wulff wrote: Like you, a big part of me wants the police officers involved in this case to be sent to prison for carrying out their sworn duties to protect us. That way, when every armed police unit in the country goes on strike and lays down their weapons, leading to a surge in violent and gun crime, I can take glee in The Sun publishing a full written appology for helping to bring our country into exactly what the terrorists want it to become. Look, if your police are that big a bunch of wankers that they would quit because the public doesn't exactly like the idea of police officers gunning down innocent people then you got bigger problems than terrorism to worry about. "Art doesn't want to be familiar. It wants to astonish us. Or, in some cases, to enrage us. It wants to move us. To touch us. Not accommodate us, make us comfortable." -- Jamake Highwater Toasty0.com My Grandkids
Would you take a job where the guaranteed reaction to you carrying out your role would be jail time? I wouldn't. Don't compare the UK armed police units with other countries' police forces. We don't arm our cops on the streets, we only have the equivalent of S.W.A.T., and we set our benchmarks very high to keep wankers out of them.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (video)
