So he was genuinely fleeing. Bad decision.
Regards, Ivan
1 posted on
07/25/2005 5:07:53 AM PDT by
MadIvan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
To: Laurita; Semper911; lutz; Deetes; Barset; fanfan; LadyofShalott; Tolik; mtngrl@vrwc; ...
2 posted on
07/25/2005 5:10:13 AM PDT by
MadIvan
(You underestimate the power of the Dark Side - http://www.sithorder.com/)
To: MadIvan
The situation is unfortunate.
It was caused by the terrorists.
To: MadIvan
Exactly. If anyone made a bad decision, it was the victim. Under the circumstances, I think they police were justified. Don't run - simple as that.
4 posted on
07/25/2005 5:13:29 AM PDT by
mlc9852
To: MadIvan
Get legal, don't run. It's pretty simple.
To: MadIvan
He was wearing a heavy padded overcoat in the middle of summer on a day when the temperatures were in the mid to upper 70's. And, when told to halt, he fled and jumped the turnstile.
If I was the police I would have come to the same conclusion.
7 posted on
07/25/2005 5:17:20 AM PDT by
Naomi4
To: MadIvan
Former PM John Majors said it:
"They had to make a decision. Do we take this dreadful decision to shoot, or do we face the risk that conceivably, if our worst fears are right, a bomb could be detonated that could kill people, including them, in the next second or so?"
***
And the guy was wearing a heavy padded coat...he did not stop as ordered...also some news reports here said he was being watched as he left a building that had been under surveillance and headed for the station.
Sorry he was killed accidentally, but then again, he brought this on himself.
To: MadIvan
That reminds me- my visa expires next year.
Note to self:
Call Home Office
Pick up milk at the shop
Bid for that bullet proof vest on Ebay.co.uk...
To: MadIvan
Tough break, but he shouldn't have been there in the first place. I hope this doesn't deter the police from their "shoot to kill" policy. The politically correct MSM don't seem to understand that this is a war, and our cities are the front lines. Brute force is the only thing the islamofascists understand.
"Two in the head, you know they're dead" - Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction
So what is five in the head?
11 posted on
07/25/2005 5:19:41 AM PDT by
The Sons of Liberty
(Thank GOD There's a Cowboy in the White House!)
To: MadIvan
what's the deal? cop says stop, you keep running, you get shot.
if cops had kept this policy, we'd have most likely have less crime. knowing you might get shot is a good deterent to crime.
12 posted on
07/25/2005 5:19:49 AM PDT by
absolootezer0
("My God, why have you forsaken us.. no wait, its the liberals that have forsaken you... my bad")
To: MadIvan
"expired visa"
That answers why he was running away. It didn't make any sense before.
He did make a bad decision at a bad time.
14 posted on
07/25/2005 5:21:31 AM PDT by
nuconvert
(No More Axis of Evil by Christmas ! TLR) [there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
To: MadIvan
This would not have happened in the US. American cops have a lot more experience dealing with guns. The rules of engagement preclude shooting someone just because he's running away.
This is the kind of thing that happens when you have a society that isn't familiar with the use of firearms.
To: MadIvan
People that have nothing to hide don't run from the police. Under the circumstances, the police made the right decision. It still wouldn't surprise me if there was more to this young man than we know right now. He, or the house he was in, was being watched for some reason.
To: MadIvan
Why would an electrician be on a student visa? What is his cousin doing in London? How coincidental is it that an electrician with an inspired visa is living in the same building as the bombers? Why was he wearing a heavy winter coat?
There are definitely some unanswered questions about this guy.
20 posted on
07/25/2005 5:25:54 AM PDT by
Miss Marple
(Karl Rove is Plame-proof.)
To: MadIvan
Five shots to the head for an expired visa? Boy are the Brits strict.
Seriously, from what I have read the suspect looked and acted suspiciously. The police told him to halt and he jumped the turnstile and fled. The police chased him down five of them wrestled him to the ground and one of them shot him.
It is hard to Monday morning quarterback the cop's decision in this case, especially after so many bombings and deaths this last month. If this guy was wearing a heavy coat (that looked like he was wearing something underneath) in July, running from the cops and then jumped on a subway with innocent civilians aboard and I was one of the cops and had to wrestle him down, I would have shot him in the head too to keep him from detonating a bomb.
Another thing, what if this guy was deliberately set up by the extremists to walk into the subway dressed as he was to test the security procedures the Brits put into place?
21 posted on
07/25/2005 5:25:55 AM PDT by
Americanexpat
(A strong democracy through citizen oversight.)
To: MadIvan
Can cops in the UK even check a person's visa on the spot? I know they don't do that here.
The guy would probably have been searched and nothing would have happened to him. Maybe he thought they were in pursuit because of the visa issue?
22 posted on
07/25/2005 5:26:10 AM PDT by
varyouga
To: MadIvan
26 posted on
07/25/2005 5:29:25 AM PDT by
Unicorn
(Too many wimps around.)
To: MadIvan
How does this scenario sound? Terrorists who are in the building become aware that they are being watched by the police. They somehow send this guy out, wearing a heavy coat as a diversion to get the police following HIM while they get away themselves. Perhaps he was a decoy?
To: MadIvan
41 posted on
07/25/2005 5:37:46 AM PDT by
NRA1995
(West Virginia needs neurosurgeons like San Francisco needs gynecologists)
To: MadIvan
In a courtroom situation, the Judge should rule...
1. The man had an expired visa, he was in violation of the law. (1st offense)
2. He did not heed a lawful order by police to stop/halt. (2nd offense)
2. He resisted arrest. (3rd offense)
3. He, by these offenses, distracted police from their work of locating and apprehending mass murderers -- this is obstruction of justice (4th offense)
3. His commission of these offenses ordinarily would not result in a death penalty (of which there is none in the UK anyway).
4. He made himself conspicuous, however, taking flight and resisted the police at a time and in a place where mass killing had been perpetrated and more is being attempted.
5. This court will not remove from the police their ability to aggressively hunt down mass murderers because one scared law-breaker (as petty as his initial offense of visa violation may appear), thought that it was better to risk being shot than allowing his visa violation to yield lesser conseqiences.
6. Family gets NOTHING from the court.
7. Public receives due warning: Whatever your minor violations of the law may be...do not run from the police, especially when you are at the scene of a major crime. 8. Illegal aliens BEWARE: You all may be conspicuously suspect.
To: MadIvan
So what did the family have to say about him being there illegally? Had he been following the law, he wouldn't have been there.
Don't get me wrong, I am not condoning the shooting; It just seems (as here also), that's it's ok to be illegal and somehow that doesn't play into situations.
We need to wake up...
49 posted on
07/25/2005 5:42:06 AM PDT by
AliVeritas
(Ignorance is a condition. Stupidity is a strategy.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson