London terror attacks

POSTED BY: citizen
UPDATED: Saturday, July 30, 2005 21:41
VIEWED: 6537
PAGE 7 of 9

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

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Thank you most kindly. It is often extremely difficult to keep one's temper in light of so much confused thinking by those who believe everything they're told by well-dressed TV newspeople, or by some bum in a position of power. But we try.

Did you hear that, Citizen? You better stop watching those news channels with their “well-dressed TV newspeople.” Ruxton might get mad.

Part of the responsibility rests with the victim. Running from the police is a dangerous activity regardless of the threat of terrorism. I seriously doubt this is the first guy who has ever been killed by the police because he ran. Running from the police is generally a stupid thing to do.

Given the information that I’ve heard so far (exiting a suspected terrorist location, wearing a heavy coat, running from the police towards the subway) I might have shot the guy too. I certainly would have shot the guy before I would have allowed him to blow up the train with me and who knows how many innocent people, if that’s what I believed he was going to do.

It is unfortunate that he was killed, and the police certainly share some responsibility. But if your going to tell me that this guy might have been shoplifting or some other illegal activity and then decided to run from the police to imply that he’s somehow innocent, spare me your moral relativism. He shouldn’t have been shoplifting (if that what he was doing; I’ve seen no evidence that he had or was committing any crime) and he shouldn’t have run from the police. The police were not after him to kill him. If he had not run, they would have stopped him, questioned him and probably let him go, but he would probably be alive right now, if he had not run.

It’s tragic, but this guy may not be without a good deal of responsibility in his own death.

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

CHRISISALL

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
I don't know, theres more to life than simple survival.

Okay, we're talkin' about two different things, now.
I'm sayin' that you need to do what you have to, to survive in a bad situation - THEN you address how to solve the problem.
All the perceptions of right and wrong, and all the ideas on how to fix the problem of living in fear of terrorists and their effect on the landscape go out the window if you act like you should be able to behave like others are not extremely able and/or likely to shoot you should your behaviour be misconstrued as that of a potential target.
Live first (the decisions that can be made in seconds).
Live well second (the decisions that you can take time with).

Whew...Chrisisall

CITIZEN

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:40 PM

Quote:
original post by Finn mac Cumhal:
Did you hear that, Citizen? You better stop watching those news channels with their “well-dressed TV newspeople.” Ruxton might get mad.

Eh? Well with the American news channels i've seen I'm not surprised at this estimation. ITN and the BBC, even skynews in this country report the news, CNN, as a for instance, seems to be a contest for which presenter can say 'oh my god!' the loudest...
...Tho I don't watch it very often so maybe I'm missing the good parts.

Quote:
original post by Finn mac Cumhal:
It is unfortunate that he was killed, and the police certainly share some responsibility. But if your going to tell me that this guy might have been shoplifting or some other illegal activity and then decided to run from the police to imply that he’s somehow innocent, spare me your moral relativism. He shouldn’t have been shoplifting (if that what he was doing; I’ve seen no evidence that he had or was committing any crime) and he shouldn’t have run from the police. The police were not after him to kill him. If he had not run, they would have stopped him, questioned him and probably let him go, but he would probably be alive right now, if he had not run.

As far as we know he was innocent. True if he hadn't run he'd probably still be alive. The tone of the previous post was that his death was all his fault and that he almost deserved to die. My reply was meant as a rebuttle to that, not as an accusation, or to imply he's totally innocent because he got shot.

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

HKCAVALIER

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Part of the responsibility rests with the victim. Running from the police is a dangerous activity regardless of the threat of terrorism. I seriously doubt this is the first guy who has ever been killed by the police because he ran. Running from the police is generally a stupid thing to do.

Given the information that I’ve heard so far (exiting a suspected terrorist location, wearing a heavy coat, running from the police towards the subway) I might have shot the guy too. I certainly would have shot the guy before I would have allowed him to blow up the train with me and who knows how many innocent people, if that’s what I believed he was going to do.

It is unfortunate that he was killed, and the police certainly share some responsibility. But if your going to tell me that this guy might have been shoplifting or some other illegal activity and then decided to run from the police to imply that he’s somehow innocent, spare me your moral relativism. He shouldn’t have been shoplifting (if that what he was doing; I’ve seen no evidence that he had or was committing any crime) and he shouldn’t have run from the police. The police were not after him to kill him. If he had not run, they would have stopped him, questioned him and probably let him go, but he would probably be alive right now, if he had not run.

It’s tragic, but this guy may not be without a good deal of responsibility in his own death.

I'm guessing you're white, Finn. Saves you from having to take the kind of responsibility a lot of people will be having to take for the next while. Maybe, for their safety, we should put them all in camps for a few years where they won't get into trouble and they won't be mistaken for terrorists. Just to be safe.

If things do get worse, where will you draw the line? These lines are getting easier and easier to cross, these days. Where does it end?

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

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:43 PM

I understand chrisisall. I just also see where that sort of thinking can lead.

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

CITIZEN

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:49 PM

Quote:
original post by HKCavalier:
Maybe, for their safety, we should put them all in camps for a few years where they won't get into trouble and they won't be mistaken for terrorists.

I happen to agree, the Nazi movement in Germany showed how quickly and easily these things can get out of control.

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

CHRISISALL

Monday, July 25, 2005 11:59 PM

As long as you understand that I'm not in any way sayin' it should be acceptable to shoot suspects on a whim.
This discussion got a mite more complicated than I generally like.

I fold Chrisisall

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I'm guessing you're white, Finn. Saves you from having to take the kind of responsibility a lot of people will be having to take for the next while. Maybe, for their safety, we should put them all in camps for a few years where they won't get into trouble and they won't be mistaken for terrorists. Just to be safe.

If things do get worse, where will you draw the line? These lines are getting easier and easier to cross, these days. Where does it end?

Playing the race card, huh? Well it doesn’t matter, because regardless of what color his skin was or his nationality, he would still probably be alive today if he hadn’t run, and that, far more then your histrionic implications, is the tragic truth.

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

HKCAVALIER

Tuesday, July 26, 2005 12:22 AM

(Edited for clarity and to remove a level of sarcasm I'm a little embarrassed by. A little smart-ass goes a long way.)

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
I don't know, theres more to life than simple survival.
Okay, we're talkin' about two different things, now.
I'm sayin' that you need to do what you have to, to survive in a bad situation - THEN you address how to solve the problem.
All the perceptions of right and wrong, and all the ideas on how to fix the problem of living in fear of terrorists and their effect on the landscape go out the window if you act like you should be able to behave like others are not extremely able and/or likely to shoot you should your behaviour be misconstrued as that of a potential target.
Live first (the decisions that can be made in seconds).
Live well second (the decisions that you can take time with).

Whew...Chrisisall

But Chris, it's all distorted. Do you "live in fear of terrorists?" I don't. That fear is a distortion. Death may come for me in the midst of writing this post, but I don't worry about that. With your martial arts background, isn't it clear that the "living in fear" part is the problem? A whole society driven by fear is far more dangerous than one man getting spooked by the cops. Shouldn't we as a society do something about our fear before we rush about needlessly destroying innocent people?

And you're talking with hindsight. What were the circumstances from Jean Charles de Menezes' point of view? Did the police state who they were? Is that what you do when confronting a man you're convinced is a terrorist bomber about to push the botton? A group of men start toward you, you're not necessarily going to check their i.d. badges up close, you get the feeling that they mean you harm, perhaps they've shown their weapons by now. I don't think it's natural to expect a man to think, "Hm, the police just got the instructions to shoot to kill suspected terrorists this week, and these might be police, so if I run, they will naturally shoot me in the head." I'm sure that if he had any inkling that his running would mean his death, he'd have stood still as a stone in swift water. Seems to me, he did the sensible thing and ran where there were the most people.

Somehow I doubt the cops anounced that he was a suspected terrorist bomber and informed him that if he didn't surrender immediately, they would shoot him in the head. I could be wrong. Did they even announce that they were police? did they flash badges? Is that even how this is done? Anybody know what the procedure is? I wonder when they made the decision to execute him? Did he really have a chance?

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.

RUXTON

Tuesday, July 26, 2005 6:21 AM

HKCavalier, your point,
"Hm, the police just got the instructions to shoot to kill suspected terrorists this week, and these might be police, so if I run, they will naturally shoot me in the head."

brings to mind this question: Do the people of Britain know about shoot-to-kill orders? Was this common knowledge prior to this shooting? Even if so, can foreign citizens living in London be expected to know this?

My understanding is, like yours, that the "police" were in fact not in uniform, so how can this guy be expected to stop, especially when he was recently mugged, when someone hollers at him. In fact, at least one witness was emphatic that the police did not identify themselves prior to the murder.

It seems increasingly clear the police were at fault, but without the total picture of what happened, we end up guessing a lot. Still, it seems to me there is precious little justification for such piss-poor training and apparent overreacting by the police.

Now, then...What if this had happened in the U.S., to a legally armed U.S. citizen? Some goons holler for him to stop, and one of them waves a gun. Unless they clearly and repeatedly identified themselves as police, the armed citizen's response could well have resulted in at least one dead goon and a still-healthy, still free citizen.

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