London terror attacks

POSTED BY: citizen
UPDATED: Saturday, July 30, 2005 21:41
VIEWED: 6537
PAGE 2 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

HKCAVALIER

Saturday, July 23, 2005 5:51 PM

Who would have guessed that terrorism would be so effective, such a powerful tool to create chaos and erode an entire culture's moral clarity so quickly? I see so much rage and hysteria used to justify inhumanity and authoritarianism. There's no conspiracy needed when the people are more than willing to see the police execute a man on a train. Well, that's what the witnesses say happened. And that's what Finn is justifying. But they say it's right and necessary under the circumstances. It looked like the guy had a bomb, for crying out loud, what're the cops supposed to do? That's an important question.

We've all been in civics class and learned that you don't want the judge in a murder case to be a relative of the victim. We've all accepted that we're not going to get justice that way. But what happens when an entire culture takes the criminal's actions as personally as we do today? Who in the world is impartial enough to uphold justice, when what's at stake is simple survival?

Well, I'm not up on the absolute latest advances in nonlethal weaponry, but aren't there ways to immobilize a person so they can't push a button on a bomb? (Come to think of it, is it really such a good idea to pump five bullets into a man allegedly strapped with explosives?) The problem I have is the willingness we show to take life on suspicion. Seems to me, if we cared, we'd be looking for other ways to immobilize and control suspects when the situation demands that we suspend due process. But we don't. Because we're furious and terrified, and covering a fellow with goo or shocking him into unconsciousness just doesn't satisfy.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Saturday, July 23, 2005 6:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Well, I'm not up on the absolute latest advances in nonlethal weaponry, but aren't there ways to immobilize a person so they can't push a button on a bomb?

Maybe. There are certainly non-lethal weapons to immobilize criminals and suspects deemed dangerous, which I am completely in favor of. The taser is one that comes to mind, but the truth is that many people are opposed to the use of these weapons because they feel they are too dangerous. This pretty much epitomizes the danger of the whole irrational criticism of the police.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

CITIZEN

Saturday, July 23, 2005 8:01 PM

Quote:
Original post by HKCavalier:
But they say it's right and necessary under the circumstances. It looked like the guy had a bomb, for crying out loud, what're the cops supposed to do? That's an important question.

Shoot to kill is the directive the police are working under. Perhaps they did nothing wrong, but what scares me is the fact they held him down and shot him a close range. The number of shots fired is immaterial.

A woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her.
--W.C. Fields

HKCAVALIER

Saturday, July 23, 2005 8:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Original post by HKCavalier:
But they say it's right and necessary under the circumstances. It looked like the guy had a bomb, for crying out loud, what're the cops supposed to do? That's an important question. {/QUOTE]

Shoot to kill is the directive the police are working under. Perhaps they did nothing wrong, but what scares me is the fact they held him down and shot him a close range. The number of shots fired is immaterial.

A woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her.
--W.C. Fields

Citizen, did I miss something here? I didn't even mention the number of shots, except to say that that's a lot of bullets to shoot at a man allegedly carrying explosives.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

CITIZEN

Saturday, July 23, 2005 8:35 PM

Sorry, yeah your right im getting my wires crossed. (Slaps self with large wet fish).

A woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her.
--W.C. Fields

FARQUAT

Saturday, July 23, 2005 9:43 PM

to interupt this debate, to those that say the police were wrong to push upto 5 bullets into the suspected suicide bomber first consider this... have you ever attempted to restrain somebody who has taken drugs??? the strength they sometimes have is unbelievable, peppergas does nothing, batons do nothing it can take several people to hold them down!! now nobody knows precisely what the mind set of the bomber is, but if you consider that they have been brainwashed into thinking that if they blow themselves up along with as many innocent people as they can then they wll sit at the right hand of their god, then that is very immotive stuff and i for one would not trust one bullet to combat this strong but pitiful mental and physical strength, if you consider that there were several mums dads boy/girlfriends all likely to die if he could just push a button then i believe they did the only thing they could do. they will of course now be suspended,investigated and spend sveral months going over the split second incident but you must ask yourself, if it was your family, friends or loved ones on that train would you have wanted the officers to ask the bomber? to please leave the train while we speak with you or would you want them to have done what they did??? i know what i think.

learn from the three monkeys!!

CITIZEN

Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:15 AM

A little update, the police have now admitted that the man shot on stockwell station WAS innocent and not affilliated with any terror groups:

Quote:
A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was a Brazilian electrician unconnected to the incidents.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stm
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1190065,00.html

A woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her.
--W.C. Fields

RUXTON

Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:20 AM

"...but if you consider that they have been brainwashed into thinking that if they blow themselves up along with as many innocent people as they can then they wll sit at the right hand of their god...."

Musims are PROHIBITED by their belief to commit suicide. That part of your statement is pure horse manure, one of the MSM mantras so many are being conditioned to believe. I have no argument with the rest of what you said. However....

Do I have to be the first to point out the British police now regret having MURDERED an honest Brazilian man, not some "holy" terrorist? We will see a major international event from this, with Brazil currently furious at Britain.

The tragedy is that so many, including some foolish posters on this thread, have bought into the terrorism crapola espoused by Blair and Bush and actually do not understand that if you don't want terrorism, stop screwing with other countries. Even the Brit police are running scared.

RUXTON

Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:24 AM

...Okay, the second.

CITIZEN

Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:29 AM

Quote:
original post by farquat
to those that say the police were wrong to push upto 5 bullets into the suspected suicide bomber first consider this... have you ever attempted to restrain somebody who has taken drugs

What does restraining someone on drugs got anything to do with it?

Quote:
original post by farquat
now nobody knows precisely what the mind set of the bomber is, but if you consider that they have been brainwashed into thinking that if they blow themselves up along with as many innocent people as they can then they wll sit at the right hand of their god, then that is very immotive stuff and i for one would not trust one bullet to combat this strong but pitiful mental and physical strength

Five bullets in the back of the head at point blank range is probably going to be no more effective than one. Its the ferocity of the attack thats important, I posted early that the number of shots was not important, but I suppose I was wrong. These are police officers holding a man down and firing into the back of his head FIVE TIMES.

A woman drove me to drink and I didn't even have the decency to thank her.
--W.C. Fields

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE