Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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.


15 posted on 07/25/2005 5:23:45 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Brilliant

He was running onto a train. The officers were utilising procedures imported from Israel and I trust the Israeli experience on this.

Regards, Ivan


16 posted on 07/25/2005 5:24:44 AM PDT by MadIvan (You underestimate the power of the Dark Side - http://www.sithorder.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

The armed police here are all fully trained in the use of firearms, and the situations in which to use them. Shooting at people running away would not have been done if suicide bombers hadn't started rearing their ugly heads.

The difference to the US is that it's the public that aren't generally expecting to encounter armed police.


24 posted on 07/25/2005 5:28:23 AM PDT by FostersExport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

These were just regular cops. They WERE experienced with guns. But they thought they were probably dealing with a suicide bomber. What would you have done? Asked to see his ID before he blew himself and everyone else up, assuming he had been a terrorist instead of someone in the country illegally?


34 posted on 07/25/2005 5:34:19 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

You,re not looking at things in perspective...American police (of which I was one) have not had to deal with terrorist bombers. I've had people point guns at me and there is always a second or two to make a decision...not so with a terrorist who is concealing the detonator in his hand. Under the circumstances, I feel for those bobbies. They will live with this for the rest of their lives. But they face dangers we only read about. I think they did a superb job on this one and I hope someone in authority tells them they did.


37 posted on 07/25/2005 5:35:58 AM PDT by offduty (spending WAY too much time here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

If someone had blown up a NY subway the week before, damn straight we'd shoot to kill under the same circumstances.


38 posted on 07/25/2005 5:36:56 AM PDT by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant; MadIvan
The rules of engagement preclude shooting someone just because he's running away.

What are the ROE respecting when the suspect had refused police orders to stop, had jumped a subway turnstile and exhibits behaviour that gives every reason to suspect that he is about to set off a bomb in a crowded subway car?

I suspect that in similar circumstances the NYPD would have shot him in the head, and probably before he got to the car.

Consider the number of shots fired by NY coppers at a suspect who was reaching for his wallet in a dark stairwell and compare the downside risk in that situation to what was confronting the London coppers, especially the downside risk to civilian bystanders.

A dog smells his own arse first.

The retrospectroscope is a marvellous instrument. It enables much clearer thinking about what you would have done had you had all that after-the-fact knowledge and several days instead of mere seconds to comtemplate the appropriate response.

43 posted on 07/25/2005 5:38:20 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

You saw the response to the tour bus in Manhattan?

Had one of those people been in a heavy coat, fled toward the subway, and jumped on a crowded train, I can envision the same outcome being a distinct possibility here in the good ole U.S.A.


50 posted on 07/25/2005 5:42:24 AM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

Yeah, it also wouldn't have happened here because illegals can't be touched anyway...profiling, no matter where they're from.

I go to Penn Station, G. Central and Union Square; The cops I know would have done the same thing in those circumstances...some of them have been waiting since 9-11 to cap a terrorist.


52 posted on 07/25/2005 5:46:36 AM PDT by AliVeritas (Ignorance is a condition. Stupidity is a strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant
The rules of engagement preclude shooting someone just because he's running away.

Not when you suspect he is trying to detonate a suicide bomb, they don't.

It was a good, clean kill and there is nothing they should have done differently.

All the deceased needed to do was cooperate. Don't blame the police because he was a suicidal moron.

70 posted on 07/25/2005 5:55:39 AM PDT by wideawake (God bless our brave troops and their Commander in Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

I get your point, about right to bear arms, but rules of engagement no longer apply when "suicide" bomber scenario exists. The fleeing suspect could have been a weapon getting ready to be discharged. Shoot to kill, shoot at the head, ask questions later.


82 posted on 07/25/2005 6:07:14 AM PDT by photodawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant
"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."


This is incorrect. If US police had reason to believe that he was wired with explosives and was an imminent danger to everyone around him, they would have shot to kill aiming for the head just as the British police did.

The shoot to kill orders for bombers that British authorities issued specified that suspected bombers be shot in the head, running away or not. It was not a procedural mistake. It was quite intentional that he was shot dead in the head.
159 posted on 07/25/2005 8:33:27 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant
This would not have happened in the US. American cops have a lot more experience dealing with guns.

The British police are probably as well-versed in the use of firearms as their American counterparts.

If we had just had a terrorist bombing in a subway system, this incident could well have happened in a city like NY or DC.

172 posted on 07/25/2005 8:59:42 AM PDT by Modernman ("Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." -Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant
Under the circumstances this observation is not only irrelevant, but silly.

When subways are targetted, and mass murder the usual result, it's a whole different scenario, not just a nut who "might have" a gun.

177 posted on 07/25/2005 9:07:39 AM PDT by Publius6961 (Liberal level playing field: If the Islamics win we are their slaves..if we win they are our equals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant; MadIvan
his would not have happened in the US. American cops have a lot more experience dealing with guns.

FBI Mistakenly Shoots Eagle Scout

184 posted on 07/25/2005 9:21:03 AM PDT by AdamSelene235 (Truth has become so rare and precious she is always attended to by a bodyguard of lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Brilliant

Didn't you read about the American cops that shot and killed a baby the other day. There are plenty of American cops that shouldn't be carrying guns either.


196 posted on 07/25/2005 6:26:48 PM PDT by HuronMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson