Errr...
No, he wasn't.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39359158
+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Errr...
No, he wasn't.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39359158
It might have been useful to question this (supposed lone-wolf) apparent 'terrorist'. It might not have been that useful. Or it might just have been possible to glean something that saves other lives in other potential incidents further down the line.
TBH, I'm not convinced on this occasion - but we will never know now.
Some Police need to be armed, in some locations / situations.
More generally, perhaps some investment / research / training in way more efficient instant stun weapons might be better than creating a mini USA (no thanks).
was he shot by " BAD Lowly paid civil servant meathead bobby's with superiority-complex who chose a career in policing in order to assert their authority over others " ( in C.C words )
or
shot by Officers who made mistakes at a time of heightened security worries after the July London bombings and being mistaken for one of the Failed bombers from the day before
I am of the belief it was the 2nd statement
The second, but I'm not sure how it helps your argument. If officers who were, presumably, selected to be armed because of their strong abilities can make fatal errors in stressful and difficult situations - doesn't it seem logical that weaker officers would make similar mistakes more often?
I can't tell you the exact figure because I haven't been counting and I can't be arsed explaining the bad encounters to some boob on the internet who has trouble reading complete sentences and gets the hump when you point out how he's an idiot.
So you're welcome to carry on believing that everybody trusts the police 100%, there are no bad apples in the force and nobody has ever had a bad experience with them, including me.
This may not be the thread for humour, but there is no way this cop doesnt shoot himself in the foot at least twice a day if he was armed..
Hot Fuzz 2.
the mistakes were made from the top down, not just the guys who took the shots, i am sure you must have read the report
since that fatal day the procedure's for taking the shot have changed ( surprised you have read about it )
you mention weaker officers, the rules of combat could be set fairly easy, a guy is coming towards you with a knife, take the shot, a guy with a knife is stabbing someone, give the warning and then if they do not stop, take the shot
the more technical stuff, as in the case of Jean de Menzies would still be carried out by specialist teams, you appear ( i guess on purpose ) be confusing the two, a specialist FA officers and a armed Police Officer just using his gun for protection and to stop terrorist activities, once again, body cams will tell us the story and the police will learn from that
I am in agreement with you as in I wouldn't want all our police to be armed, but your barbed comments toward them seem to be a bit ott. You've obviously had a bad/some bad experiences with plod, which is your business, but they do a thankless job.
Can you imagine what it's like to be a copper involved in social riots, or having to control hundreds of Neanderthals at football grounds up and down the country, or finding dead bodies, dead babies, smashed up teenagers in RTA's, etc.?
We all know that corruption and bullying takes place in all walks of life, but no amount of cash would persuade me to join the fuzz in this day and age. Just be thankful that there are youngsters out there who still want to join.
I guess when you make a mistake, you post a picture of a lorry getting stuck under a bridge on a haulage companies FB page, yet these Police officers in the case of Jean de Menzies made a mistake the day after a failed bombing attempt and shot the wrong guy, mistakes were made, the whole procedure has been tightened up, yet we know they will make a mistake again, people do
so thats another bad mark against the " BAD Lowly paid civil servant meathead bobby's with superiority-complex who chose a career in policing in order to assert their authority over others " Eh
I think you're missing the point (perhaps on purpose) that arming all police officers is a turning point, there's no going back once it's done. So the gun is just there for protection and to stop terrorists - how many times will an average officer come across a terrorist? None of the police officers I know have ever been in a situation where they have needed a gun for protection.
You talk about someone being stabbed with a knife - I'm sure you remember (perhaps you forgot on purpose) the 'you ain't no muslim bruv' incident. The police successfully tasered him. Didn't need a gun. Otherwise, yesterday's terrorist attacked with a car. Arming officers isn't going to stop that exceedingly rare occurence.
If anything, the fact that the guy resorted to using a car and a knife rather than a bomb and an automatic is a testament to the good work done by our intelligence services. That's our best weapon, prevention, not chasing after them with a gun after the event.