Printable View
Ok, I dont feel like what happened was merit for the "ultimate last resort".
Those are practices and customs that go back before you and I were born, they are irrelevant to the situation.Quote:
And seeing how they treat their women, why would they want 70 virgins THERE ?I believe that they believe that the people they kill will serve them in 'paradise' too ??
no one is saying Brazil doesn't have problems.
and killing innocents IS a tradegy.
BUT:
WE are at war
YOUR war is drugs, you just don't call it war.
OUR war is going to turn into a crusade [the dreaded C word]
and will probably last just as long as the war on drugs will
And war demands its sacrifices :(
you / we cannot ask our defenders NOT to defend themselves?
[edit]
Too late for that.Quote:
Ok, I dont feel like what happened was merit for the "ultimate last resort".
but, for the record, I do .......
There is two diferent situations form me:Quote:
Originally posted here by Kthln01
[B]Ok, I dont feel like what happened was merit for the "ultimate last resort".
a) of course, on a clear and present danger to civilians, police should shoot to kill. If a guy has a revolver, they MAY shoot for incapacitate; but i will never complain about if they shoot to kill. If the guy HAS a bomb, they MUST shoot to kill.
b) on that situation, they "suspected" that he has a bomb. So, we went into the shadows....i
It is the same situation that i put for voting:
a) if you kill the guy and he was running to kill 100 children, you are a hero
b) if you dont kill the guy and he kill 100 children, you are a @#$## bastard.
c) if you dont kill the guy and he is inocent, you did our job.
c) if you kill the guy and he was running (because he was late) to get 3 son, your are a murder.
Hi cacosapo,
a) yes
b) you will be perceived so
c) you got lucky
d) you will be perceived so
Unfortunately we can sit back in our favorite chairs and play monday night quarterback all day...but these guys didn't have days or even hours to reflect on the moment...they had to make a decision and carry it out...based upon the evidence and circumstances before them...at that moment...
there is no evidence these were corrupt cops with bad records...these guys aren't LAPD...they shot him in the head...that alone tells me they thought the guy had a bomb and was going to use it...
they were wrong...what if next time they aren't and this ruckus causes the next cops to think twice and in that moments lapse of action a 1000 people are killed...because some people decided to persecute cops for doing what they thought was right at the time?
You want us to look at the downside of police corruption...how this extra authority can cause abuses...
How about the other downside...how many people are you willing to sacrifice by handcuffing the police and causing them to ' hesitate ' when immediate action must be taken?
sometimes immediate action must be taken at the moment and they do not have the luxury of playing Monday night quarterback.
' Where's the dead guy? ' ' Over there! ' ' And why didn't you call 911, sir? ' ' because when he started to crawl through my window, I grabbed the first thing I could find, I couldn't call 911 because I had the phone cord wrapped around his neck while I was beating him with the phone ' ( just an example of ' immediate action ' :D )
Eg ;)
Can we just clarify something here, there is all this talk of, "shoot to kill". I'm sorry but there is absolutly know way to shoot any other way. You simply can not shoot, "to hurt a little bit"
The standard doctrine is to aim at the largest body mass, this is where all the internal organs are. It also increases the likelyhood of a hit. Most people that die of gunshot wounds do so of shock and not the damage caused by the round, within reason. Fatal shots are not that common.
There is an ex Irish (If memory serves me correctly Guards Officer who, who was shot in the head, during the Falklands war. He lost a massive % of his brain and lived, not going into shock is what saved his life.
The point i am trying to make is, if there is a threat, perceived of other wise, the only way to deal with it is kill it. Suicide bombers represent what is probably the most dificult challenge that faces security forces any ware in the world. There is know taking them prisoner. They need to be isolated and killed. As has been mentuned before shot to the head to avoid detonation af any charges that may be strapped to a body.
If you say its not war, you do NOT understand....so don't fool yourself. 3000 innocent civilians killed within one hour and you tell me its not war....wtf are you smoking? You do not know how we feel about it, and probably will never know until something like that happens in your country..You will NEVER understand what it feels like until you see the faces of those who had loved ones in the WTC and watching the towers fall on live television...so do us a favor and STFU about it cuz you don't know what the **** you're talking about!Quote:
I do understand that UK & USA people looks this as war. But its not. Again, you cant use war rules against terrorist. If you do so, they win. You will spread so terror on the population that they (the terrorist) wont even do anything else.
IRA is not known for blowing themselves up or for purpously going after innocent civilians. They targeted military structures.Quote:
E.G. When UK was fighting against IRA (is that correct?), police was using that kind of tatic?
First part, somewhat correct, although they did have a nember of accidents, which involved blowing there selves up. They did however target civilians.Quote:
IRA is not known for blowing themselves up or for purpously going after innocent civilians. They targeted military structures.
That is just one example.Quote:
From Here: http://www.newcriminologist.co.uk/ne...?id=-516644988
300 people were injured in the bombing as well as the 29 that were killed making it the single worst terrorist strike in Northern Ireland's often turbulent history. No warning of the attack had been given meaning that there was no chance to evacuate innocent people from the target.
There are plenty of others, IRA, PIRA, INLA never held back from killing, even if it meant civilian casualties. The Droppin Well Pub bomb killed 6 Civilians. Patrick McGinty and his merry men walked into a church and machine gunned the congrigation.
Have a look here: http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/..._killings.html
Well...over 108 posts and 11 pages we have accomplished this:
23 members accounted for...
11 members say...cops acted appropriately under the circumstances
4 members say...cops overstepped their boundaries
4 members sitting on the fence
3 members beliefs unknown
1 member ( cough Negative cough :D ) doing a good impression of Don Rickles
If this is an indication of the norm...then...most people believe they acted appropriately under the circumstances.
Democracy in action :D :p
Oops. Im not saying that. Perhaps due a lack of knowledge of english i may passed that impression.Quote:
4 members say...cops overstepped their boundaries
What i am saying is "Dont think about this a war casuality". The facts should be investigated deeply. Im a saying that we should investigate this episode as a "possible police error".
Some people are saying "yeap, there were right" and some "No, they are murderers". What i am saying is that "we dont know yet, so we cant support this as a correct action. Lets investigate and if the policemen were wrong, they will be prosecuted. "
Annyway, cops didnt overstepped their boudaries. They did what "we" (in that case you) established as boundaries. If they had overstepped, we are not discussing that.
The problem here is "Society" establishing new boundaries for cops actions due the new threat. Only this.
If you establish new boundary to them, they will use it.
WHen some people "talks" here, they present clearly a "Military Background"
Dont mix the subjects, man. OF course it was a tragedy (too). Im not endorssing that acts. i can ask back "wtf are you smoking?". But are you ready for the next 10 years? when cops canQuote:
If you say its not war, you do NOT understand....so don't fool yourself. 3000 innocent civilians killed within one hour and you tell me its not war....wtf are you smoking? You do not know how we feel about it, and probably will never know until something like that happens in your country..You will NEVER understand what it feels like until you see the faces of those who had loved ones in the WTC and watching the towers fall on live television...so do us a favor and STFU about it cuz you don't know what the **** you're talking about!
arrest anyone because of a small suspect?
I can ask you back:
what about it was your son killed by police? Can you come here and say "he was inocent but i still believe that cops can kill inocents on those situations".
I support actions against Terror 100% percent (and my country is not even affected by it - yet). What i cant support (without further investigations) is a innocent murder. If they had enough (not those ones) elements to shot him, i will applaud them. May be he was carrying a bomb. Maybe cops saw a weird device attached to him. Maybe he tried to put his hands on his pockets after police shout "Police stop" and identified themselves. But, NOW, weird jacket and running from 20 guys, civilian clothes, heavy armed, dont ressembles me a "good element" to kill someone. Perhaps there is diferent.
Dont come with that "he was a war casuality".
Just thought i would correct a mistake I made in my last post. It was not Patrick McGinty I should have said, Dominic McGlinchey Old age and alchol abuse is starting to get to me:)
By the way, Cacosapo,
You bring up some very valid points.